by Brett Miller

Created on: August 02, 2007

Criminal acts do not fall under the umbrella of free speech, so the question is spurious. Murder is not expressing one's ideas, more like expressing one's feelings. There is no right to do whatever one "feels" like doing.

However, if the intent of the ill-worded question is to determine if there are nuances of, say first degree murder, such as those committed with intense hatred vs. mild dislike, then the answer is no. The act of intentional killing is being judged, not the impulse or motivation behind it.

If a little old lady is killed for her life insurance, that is, for greed, and another matronly woman murdered because she played her Lawrence Welk too loud and too late, then the one who coveted victim number one's finances owes less of a debt to society than the one who slew victim number two from annoyance? Preposterous!

Can you imagine the juries of America trying to get into the head' of every defendant, instead of concentrating on the facts? Courts would get bogged down worse than they are now.

It was intentional to keep the topic of crime separated from society's hot button topic- homosexuality. That was to exercise mental rationality before allowing the emotions to come roaring in and upset the tea cart. Done with that exercise, let's now introduce the gay card.

Replace killing the little old ladies with killing a gay man. What if the murder was for greed, yet you had killed one of the protected classes? Would it still be tried under the hate crime bill? Does the lady of above not get the same justice? Is her life not as valid as a gay man's?

The concept of equal protection under the law was purposely built into our system, so society wouldn't get into these mind altering quandaries. Giving special consideration to one group, opens a judicial nightmare, as politicians wouldn't be able to resist adding groups to this favored class to win votes. Racial groups would insist they need to be protected, as would those who hold certain political stances, say those that are the hot faction of the moment. This type of judicial tampering could render our whole system of law futile.

Judge by the crime, not the feeling for the crime. Life is complicated enough.

Learn more about this author, Brett Miller.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.