Hate Crimes

Likely, you have heard about the recent suicide of the Rutgers University student, Tyler Clementi. Apparently, Clementi’s roommate, Dharun Ravi, and Ravi’s friend, Molly Wei, used their technological skills to broadcast to the world on the Internet, Clementi engaging in sex with another man.

Obviously, Ravi and Wei should face the greatest possible punishment by the Law. One does not have to agree with Clementi’s sexual activity to be repulsed by Ravi and Wei’s cruel act. Their work fails to pass any biblical, theological, or religious test.

Because of this case, the past few days, I have been hearing a renewed effort for hate crime prosecution and even stronger hate crime legislation. 

I have a concern about that. How do you determine motive? In Christianity, churches are often visited by people who desire to become a part. When the guest is a complete stranger, the question is sometimes raised–is this person truly a Christian?

Perhaps, one of the reasons the Bible offers as one of the blessings of baptism, entrance into the Church, is because baptism offers an external indication–given by God–that this person is truly committed to serving Jesus Christ as a disciple. After all, in baptism, in front of witnesses, the individual is confessing Jesus as his Lord and Savior. Yet, no one knows for sure what is in the person's heart. Only God truly knows. All we, in churches, have to go on is the external act.

To me, “hate crime” legislation smacks of “playing God.” It is rooted in the fundamental belief that humans are capable of seeing inside another person's heart.

What if people were punished (or rehabilitated) based upon their actions and not upon their motives? I remember years ago, a public official being castigated for not supporting hate crime legislation. As I recall, the case was brought up, in which three Caucasian men cruelly mistreated an African American man—and he died in the midst the brutal acts. And so one question was asked--would not this case be an excellent example of the need for hate crime legislation?

The official answered by saying that the state had prosecuted the three white men for murder. The men were convicted and received the full force of the law. How do you improve upon the justice of a murder conviction?

If everyone is made in the image of God, can we honestly say one crime is more evil than another simply because of the victim’s gender, sexual preference, nation of origin, or race? Is there a hierarchy of intents, each higher rung a motive more evil?

Pondering these things, I could not help but think about what Jesus said in the Sermon on the Mount:

21 “You have heard that our ancestors were told, ‘You must not murder. If you commit murder, you are subject to judgment.’ 22 But I say, if you are even angry with someone, you are subject to judgment! If you call someone an idiot, you are in danger of being brought before the court. And if you curse someone, you are in danger of the fires of hell.

 23 “So if you are presenting a sacrifice at the altar in the Temple and you suddenly remember that someone has something against you (Matt. 5:21-23)  NLT.

One could make the argument that Jesus establishes what is in one's heart before any crime—anger, hostility, and contempt. (Of course, Jesus is addressing the heart problems of all humans—something called sin.) This reduces another human being to an object. There can be no greater fundamental wrong.

Perhaps, by the standards of Jesus, every crime is a hate crime.

Five Things I Think I Think (with a nod to Peter King for this idea)

1. I was surprised to see the third volume of Larry McMurtry’s autobiography on my public library’s shelf last week. It’s called HOLLYWOOD: A THIRD MEMOIR. It is a short book. A person can read it quickly, probably in an afternoon.             

             McMurtry recounts anecdotes about any interaction he had with Hollywood over the past fifty years. In some cases, he opened the curtain and offered me information I had not known. For example, he goes into detail about the numerous scripts he worked that have been filed away by producers—probably to never be made into films. No matter how you cut it, that adds up to a lot of failure. Without being intentional, McMurtry reminds us that even successful writers fail—probably much more often than unsuccessful writers. (Possibly because unsuccessful writers quit too soon and move into something else.)

            I often found eager to hear his behind the scenes story about a famous movie he worked on—only to be disappointed. I probably should not be. He early on bluntly writes, he had limited involvement in most movies he participated in. Furthermore, he rarely went to the set.

            Still, considering the investment of time, it is a worthy read.

2. I wrote off the Texas Longhorns, when Mack Brown announced last spring, UT was abandoning the spread for a more traditional running game. However, I completely agree with his decision.

            Mack is looking at the big picture. In today’s college world, rare is the time that can carry two big-time quarterbacks, who can run the spread. As we saw in January, qb’s sometimes get hurt.

            Alabama shows a team can win a national championship with an incredible defense, great special teams, an incredible offense line committed to running the ball, and a good, but not great, quarterback.

            Garrett Gilbert will be an excellent quarterback. Next year, should he get hurt, the Horns will be fine with his back up. Right now, Texas is in transition.

3. Want to see the Rangers beat the Rays? Watch this. Tampa Bay wins in four games. You’re welcome.

4. Every year I appreciate Columbus Day more. I stay home with the kids, and it provides a nice break.

5. We’re about to try the NETFLIX trial run, thanks to Patrick Leech. With what we pay each month in delayed REDBOX returns, I’m sure we would more than make up the difference going full-time with NETFLIX.