Now we know who decides who gets to have an opinion...

Allan McGarvey’s opinion letter in the Nov. 30 Inter Lake is a perfect illustration of the bigotry inherent in the “Human Rights Advocacy” movement of today. It seems that to be considered a Human Rights Advocate, one must advocate for the rights of a particular group sanctified by the left-wing establishment. 

In my previous letter I raised the question: “Who will be the arbiters of what constitutes hate?” Now we know. Only people who agree with Mr. McGarvey and “Love Lives Here.” In writing this letter, and the one before, I am exercising my right to advocate for free speech for all humans. 

Perhaps Mr. Spencer, or others like him, consider themselves advocates for the rights of a particular group of humans as well? The difference (as stated previously) is that we are not trying to use the force of the state to cudgel differing opinions into silence. 

We all have the right to be advocates for any cause we choose. Shout it from the rooftops, protest on the street corners, form a group to represent your ideas. Be kind to your neighbors, write an opinion letter to the Daily Inter Lake. Enjoy the gift given by our Founding Fathers. 

This is how responsible members of society hold the line. We don’t pervert our country’s laws and slink into the realm of despotism by whipping up people’s emotions in an attempt to gain power over others who may disagree. 

Mr. McGarvey agrees that laws are already in place to prevent the violent fruits of hate. The difficulty with these laws is that their arbiters don’t apply them equally to groups unsanctioned by today’s “Human Rights” movement. When we look to the larger cities of America (Minneapolis or Chicago, for instance), we routinely see the weak and disfavored elderly of European and European Jewish descent targeted by groups of young black people in sadistic attacks like “Polar Bear Hunting” or the “Knockout Game.” These violent hate crimes are rarely prosecuted as such. It seems that these “hate” laws are applied with a bigoted double standard. 

Perhaps “Love” would be more effective living where hate crime is rampant, rather than in a place where brotherhood and tolerance already exist. —Donovan Emerson, Kalispell