Quote of the Week:

"He is no fool, who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose." (Jim Elliot)

Drop me a line if you want to be notified of new posts to SiTG:

My site was nominated for Best Parenting Blog!
My site was nominated for Hottest Daddy Blogger!

This is a Flickr badge showing public photos from Woodlief. Make your own badge here.

The Best of Sand:

The Blog
Greatest Hits
DVD Reviews
Faith and Life
Judo Chops
The Literate Life
News by Osmosis
The Problem with Libertarians
Snapshots of Life
The Sermons

Creative Commons License
All work on this site and its subdirectories is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Search the Site:

Me Out There:

Free Christmas
Don't Suffer the Little Children
Boys to Men
A Father's Dream
WORLD webzine posts

Not Non-Fiction
The Grace I Know
Coming Apart
My Christmas Story

The Craft:

CCM Magazine
Charis Connection
Faith in Fiction
Grassroots Music

Favorite Journals:

Atlantic Monthly
Doorknobs & Bodypaint
Image Journal
Infuze Magazine
Missouri Review
New Pantagruel
Southern Review

Blogs I Dig:

Education & Edification:

Arts & Letters Daily
Bill of Rights Institute
Junk Science
U.S. Constitution


Home School Legal Defense
Institute for Justice
Local Pregnancy Crisis
Mission Aviation
Prison Ministries
Russian Seminary
Unmet Needs


Cox & Forkum

Donors Hall of Fame

Susanna Cornett
Joe Drbohlav
Anthony Farella
Amanda Frazier
Michael Heaney
Don Howard
Laurence Simon
The Timekeeper
Rob Long
Paul Seyferth

My Amazon.com Wish List

Add to Technorati Favorites

January 17, 2008

Go check out this clip of a Canadian publisher lambasting an investigator from the Human Rights Commission, sent to determine whether he has committed a thought crime. Courtesy of Megan McArdle from, of course, The Atlantic.

Tim Sandefur offers some closing comments from the same hearing. And here's a link to the publisher's website. I suspect he now needs to worry about being a marked man, and not just by the Canadian government.

Posted by Woodlief on January 17, 2008 at 11:19 AM


Yee Haw!

Posted by: Rob at January 17, 2008 11:30 AM

Yay for people defending their rights from Human Rights sheep.

Thought Crime? Please. I'll stop now so I dont bring embarrassment to my husband.

Posted by: Charity at January 18, 2008 1:51 PM

Watched a few of those youtubes. Including his closing remarks. I have to say that I agree with him 100%. He made a very compelling argument.

Posted by: Jim Ratajski at January 18, 2008 2:19 PM

Hi, Tony. A friend just sent me a link to your blog.

Yikes! At the risk of stating the obvious, the intellectual vapidness of the fascist bureaucrat ought to be Exhibit A as to why the State is incompetent to judge "thought crime".

Thanks for linking to this. I hope you're well.

Posted by: Leslie Carbone at January 18, 2008 3:25 PM

The U.S. is already walking down this path. Hate crimes are thought crimes, because their entire justification is the motive behind the criminal action. How is that constitutional?

Posted by: Jeff Brokaw at January 20, 2008 7:41 PM

The "motive behind the crime" has always been important in most crimes - it makes the difference between murder and manslaughter, for just one easy example.

What is different about "hate crimes" is that it is just a new Jim Crow - where it is MORE egregious to harm a member of the "protected class" than someone not in a protected class.

The "thought crime" portion is not (yet) part of the law... but it's getting there. It's already present in many semi-official forms ("political correctness" is enforced through secondary channels, including some that are indeed arms of the state, but not specifically by law, such as the Family Law, where certain views on certain topics are automatically considered bad for the child, etc).

Posted by: Deoxy at January 22, 2008 5:07 PM

Post a comment

Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)