New hate crime bill won’t limit free speech

The United States Senate passed HR 2647, legislation that would expand current federal hate crime laws, on Oct. 22 with a 68-29 vote.

Under the new law, which was attached to a military-spending bill as it passed its way through Congress, assaulting a person based on sexual orientation or gender identity would be a federal offense, adding it to existing policies that criminalized racially motivated violence.

The bill was sponsored by Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), who called its passing a testament to the late Sen. Edward Kennedy, who first introduced hate crime legislation in the Senate over a decade ago.

The bill now awaits the signature of President Barack Obama for it to be enacted, who previously said that he would approve the measure.

The bill has been criticized by several conservative political and religious groups who suggest that it may limit conservative speech on controversial issues related to sexuality, particularly subjects like gay marriage and abortion.

Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.), who voted against the bill, agreed that hate crimes were worth condeming, but that the new law was an “Orwellian” movement toward “thought crime” and was unnecessary.

“[Hate crimes] are already illegal,” DeMint said.

While these organizations as well as DeMint are concerned for the safety of Americans’ First Amendment rights, they need not be.

In fact, the bill does just the opposite of what they suggest. The legislation is a move to ensure that all viewpoints remain just that: ideas and opinion, not physical attacks against adversaries. It ensures that controversial issues will remain a matter of dialect rather than violence; of conversation rather than control; of debate rather than brutality.

The First Amendment protects one’s right to any thought—which HR 2647 does not infringe upon—but inhibits the potential violence such thought can bring. Civic discourse is essential for democracy to survive, and its survival is dependent on the trust that barbarity will not arise from disagreement.

HR 2647 guarantees just that, and it is long overdue.