Have you seen the commercial where the mom appears to be able to read the minds of her husband and children? Without even seeing them and without their asking a question, she knows exactly what they’re doing and answers their unasked questions. She’s amazing! She’s a mom! However, we know she, nor any other mother, nor any other person, for that matter, can read another person’s mind! It’s just not possible—unless, apparently, you’re a politician or a law enforcement officer or a judge or juror.

Right now our federal government is trying to read our minds. Currently the U.S. Senate’s Judiciary Committee is discussing two bills that would become a so-called “hate-crime” law. H.R. 1592, the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2007 has already passed in the House. The Senate version of this bill, S. 1105, is in the Senate Judiciary Committee awaiting action.

Both of these bills would make any violence motivated by a prejudice based on race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability a federal offense, resulting in prison time of ten years to life. You might wonder what’s so bad about stopping a person from acting violently on their hate. Well, if stopping a behavior were all that the law sought to do, then it wouldn’t mention “motivation” or “prejudice.” This law seeks to do more than punish bad behavior. It seeks to govern and punish certain thoughts, beliefs, and motives. Here are a few examples of just where hate-crime laws can lead us.

Sweden has some fairly strict “hate-crime” laws, and in 2004 Pastor Ake Green was arrested and sentenced to a month in prison for preaching and compiling Bible verses that dealt with and condemned homosexual behavior. Their Supreme Court later threw out the case, but not without putting fear into Swedish ministers. Canada is another country that has extensive “hate-crime” laws. In 2004 an Internet journalist there had a knock on his door from authorities because someone had taken offense at his pro-family website. And lest you think that it can’t happen in the United States, here are a few results from state and local hate-crime laws.

In 2002, the city of Oakland, California, fired two of its employees for posting a flier on a billboard used for open discussions. The flier stated, “Preserve Our Workplace with Integrity, Good News Employee Association is a forum for people of Faith to express their views on the contemporary issues of the day with respect for the Natural Family, Marriage and Family Values.” A court case ensued, and the Ninth Federal District Court of Appeal upheld the district court’s decision that the words, “Natural Family,” “Marriage,” and “Family Values” were essentially “hate-speech.” Today the two employees who posted the flier wait to see if the U.S. Supreme Court will hear their appeal. In the meantime those three phrases remain banned from city employee discussions.

And, while I hate to break it to you, Wisconsin currently has a hate-crime law of sorts. Check out chapter 939.645 (1)(b) of the state statutes. And, yes, this law has been used to govern thought. In 2001, Dary Byczek of Brooklyn, Wisconsin, after what he and many others would consider provoking behavior by his neighbors, lost his temper and began yelling at and posting messages on his truck about the four homosexual women who were his neighbors. When brought to court, prosecutors argued that Byczek’s behavior should be labeled a hate-crime, which can add at least a year of jail time to a sentence. Now, I am not saying that Byczek was right for losing his temper, but should the state really be increasing punishment if it thinks you might have been acting on a belief it disagrees with?

Do you see the progression? All these examples show how slippery the “hate-crime law” slope can be in leading from punishing violence to punishing beliefs and motives. Since the state can never really know a person’s intentions and beliefs without their input, assuming it can, forces a judge or jury to make a decision based upon not what they know about a person’s beliefs, but what they perceive to be their beliefs through their actions, as well as what they have been told about the beliefs of people who act in a certain way—a dangerous course, to be sure.

Additionally, what the government believes is hate will change with the people in power. One day the government may see racial slurs as hate, but the next it might just be telling someone about your religious beliefs or anything that might make someone uncomfortable, which is how a pastor’s Bible-based sermon arbitrarily becomes a hate crime. Forget about free speech and the First Amendment.

A vote on these bills in the Senate Judiciary Committee is expected any day now. Wisconsin Senators Russ Feingold and Herb Kohl are both on this committee. So unless they can read your mind, and trust me they can’t, Senators Kohl and Feingold need to hear your thoughts regarding this greased slide down a really slippery slope. So speak up while you still can!

For Wisconsin Family Council, I’m Julaine Appling reminding you the Prophet Hosea said, “My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge.”