More Than Medicine
More Than Medicine
Hate Crimes Legislation: Silencing Free Speech in South Carolina
What happens when good intentions pave the road to censorship? Researcher Diane Peterson joins Dr. Robert Jackson to expose the hidden dangers lurking within South Carolina's pending hate crime legislation—Senate Bill 247, the Clementa C. Pinckney Hate Crimes Act.
From the outset, Peterson challenges assumptions about this seemingly noble bill. While named after a victim of the horrific 2015 Mother Emanuel Church shooting, Peterson reveals that federal hate crime laws already addressed that tragedy. So why the push for state legislation? The answer lies at the intersection of politics, globalism, and the gradual erosion of constitutional freedoms.
With remarkable clarity, Peterson breaks down the bill's language, explaining how its vague wording allowing prosecution for crimes motivated "in whole or in part" by bias creates dangerous subjectivity. When prosecutors must determine what someone was thinking during a crime, anything from social media posts to church attendance could become evidence of "hate"—setting the stage for self-censorship and government overreach.
Most startling is Peterson's revelation about who's driving this legislation. The South Carolina Chamber of Commerce, acting as the "spearhead" for international corporate interests, pushes these measures to align the state with European ESG standards. This isn't merely theoretical—Peterson documents how similar laws in Europe and Canada have already led to arrests for prayer and criminalization of religious speech.
Whether you're concerned about free speech, religious liberty, or the influence of foreign corporations on American governance, this conversation offers essential insights into how seemingly compassionate legislation can threaten foundational freedoms. Listen now and discover why standing against hate shouldn't mean surrendering constitutional rights.
https://www.jacksonfamilyministry.com
https://bobslone.com/home/podcast-production/
Welcome to More Than Medicine, where Jesus is more than enough for the ills that plague our culture and our country. Hosted by author and physician, dr Robert Jackson, and his wife Carlotta and daughter Hannah Miller. So listen up, because the doctor is in.
Dr. Robert Jackson:Welcome to More Than Medicine. I'm your host, dr Robert Jackson, bringing to you biblical insights and stories from the country doctors' rusty, dusty scrapbook. Well, I'm pleased and delighted today to have as my guest Diane Peterson. She's a researcher down from the Lowcountry, down in Charleston, south Carolina. Ms Diane, welcome to More Than Medicine.
Diane Peterson :Well, thank you so much for having me. I'm pleased to be here.
Dr. Robert Jackson:Well now I understand, ms Diane, that you are a researcher and that your primary area of interest is Marxism and its impact in the state of South Carolina. Am I correct on that?
Diane Peterson :Well, I'm interested in issues related to globalism and cultural Marxism. Yes, in South Carolina, in the various institutions, wherever there are traces of it.
Dr. Robert Jackson:I got you. Well, now I recently saw an essay that you wrote. It was posted on Palmetto State Watch and I was intrigued and fascinated by your insights about how a pending piece of legislation actually a hate crime bill is impacting free speech in South Carolina. And I'd like to ask you to talk to us a little bit today about that essay. And first off, I guess, just tell us about the bill Back up a little bit today about that essay. And first off, I guess, just tell us about the bill Back up a little bit. Before I even ask you that, tell my listening audience just a little bit about yourself, and then I'm going to ask you to tell us about that bill.
Diane Peterson :Okay, well, I don't specialize in censorship issues, but in looking at globalism and cultural Marxism and how it operates in our institutions, I found that common to both of those topics are efforts to control what we think and our attitudes, and I read a lot so I noticed the hate crimes legislation had come up again. This was in 2023 that I noticed it and I started reading a little bit about it, and the more I read, the more it appeared that hate crimes or hate speech laws criminalize words and create an environment of self-censorship or potentially outright censorship, and both of those are issues that are within globalism and cultural Marxism.
Dr. Robert Jackson:What was the impetus for the hate crimes legislation in South Carolina?
Diane Peterson :Well, that's a deeper question and I was looking at that more recently and I'm not sure when the first law was issued, but I think it might have been 2014, which is significant because the current bill I'll tell you about the current bill, Let me not go there Maybe about 2014. And it came up a lot because of crimes against homeless people, but it very quickly was revealed to be about bias crimes or hate crimes. So that was the source for it that I found. I mean the real source. We don't know.
Dr. Robert Jackson:But that's what the press showed. I got you all right. Well, now what about? What about the current bill?
Diane Peterson :tell us about that okay, so the current bill is senate bill, is Senate Bill 247, and it's the 2025 South Carolina Clementa C Pinckney Hate Crimes Act is its full name.
Diane Peterson :Say that name again the Clementa C Pinckney Hate Crimes Act. Okay, okay, and it's named after one of the nine victims of the 2015 Mother Emanuel church shooting by Dylan Roof. Now, the reason I was stumbling a moment ago about the date 2014, because there was a hate crimes bill submitted before this shooting, but this horrible shooting has become the face of the bill every year that it moves forward.
Dr. Robert Jackson:I got you, I got you.
Diane Peterson :It is most cited as the reason we need one. But before that, like in 2014 or earlier, I saw there were efforts, but not strong efforts, and they did mention things like homeless people who were being victimized and things like that, but now it is very much focused on this shooting.
Dr. Robert Jackson:Okay, I understand and that's kind of what I expected you to say in the beginning. So when you said homelessness, that threw me off.
Diane Peterson :Yes, it threw me off. I was very surprised and it's something. I haven't gone back further into the history Again. I picked this up in 2023. I tie it to my work and move forward from there. But the thing is, dylann Roof was convicted under federal hate crimes laws for that shooting. So that's interesting. He was convicted of hate crimes and there was a federal law that took care of it. But the bill passed the House in both 2021 and 2023 with plenty of GOP support.
Dr. Robert Jackson:But it's stuck in the sentence. If there's a federal law, why do we need a state?
Diane Peterson :law. Well, that's a very good question. I'm going to guess that it gives more flexibility to local prosecutors. They don't have to rely on going through the federal system, which maybe has a higher threshold. That's my guess, my assumption.
Dr. Robert Jackson:Or is it just political posturing on our state legislators' part?
Diane Peterson :It's always political posturing. I think that I don't say that sarcastically. There is a great deal of, you know, positioning oneself to be morally just and supporting our community, which we should, of course, support our community but I think that's the reason behind the bill posturing.
Dr. Robert Jackson:All right. Well now, what does the text of the bill say, and what are some of the issues that this presents?
Diane Peterson :Okay. So the South Carolina law, the proposed law, allows for enhanced penalties for certain violent crimes or assault by mob. That's what the text says violent crimes or assault by mob If it can be proven that the crime was motivated by hate, based on a list of characteristics of the victim. So I'm gonna read to you the text. This is to apply the law. The state must determine and here's the quote what it must determine Beyond a reasonable doubt, that the offense was committed against a victim who was intentionally selected, in whole or in part, because of the person's belief or perception regarding the victim's race, color, religion, sex, gender, national origin, sexual orientation or physical or mental disability". So the law must determine that even a part of the criminal's belief involved something about the victim's physical characteristic or mental disability.
Dr. Robert Jackson:So how do you go into the mind of a person to determine that's what they were thinking?
Diane Peterson :We're going to talk about that and that's where censorship comes in. So the extra penalty would be up to $10,000 and up to five years imprisonment.
Dr. Robert Jackson:So basically, there are already criminal laws against these offenses, but this is actually just tacking on additional fines and additional time in prison for the hate crime. That is correct. Okay, that is absolutely correct.
Diane Peterson :I got you Okay. So to most of us, you know, this bill might sound relatively harmless because we would never, you know, commit such a crime, right. So we think, well, that's for the criminals. But here are some other issues, and the first is what you just brought up, that these crimes are already punishable under the law and there are numerous laws that can be applied to any single crime if a prosecutor wants to pile on the penalties, and those are well thought out laws which prosecutors love to do.
Dr. Robert Jackson:You know they like to charge people as many things as they possibly can up front, and they're using these bargaining chips.
Diane Peterson :They possibly can up front and they're using these bargaining chips To be fair when we're emotionally invested.
Dr. Robert Jackson:It's a heinous crime.
Diane Peterson :We want to see them throw the book at the criminal. But the point is that those are well thought out laws, not based in emotion or vengeance. We like those laws because a sober minded person considered them and created those laws. And another point is one you brought up, that hate crime laws are already pursued at the federal level, so we don't need a state law. So two things. They're already punishable. We have a federal law, and that should handle it.
Diane Peterson :An important point is that no one behind the proposed law can show that it will prevent hate crimes. As a matter of fact, everything I found nationwide people for and against it both acknowledge that hate crime, hate crimes laws do not prevent hate crimes. Of course we know they don't, they can't.
Dr. Robert Jackson:I mean, they're crimes of passion.
Diane Peterson :They're crimes of passion. But even the death penalty does not stop murder murder?
Diane Peterson :no, it doesn't and normal hate crimes laws prevent hate crimes. So we know it doesn't prevent crimes and no one really believes it does, even though the propaganda each time there's some kind of bias event, tells you we need this uh law to stop such crimes. You'll see it every time, but it is not true. So the next point is that, and this is the most important point, it gets to your question how do we know if hate was in the heart of the person? So the wording of hate crimes bills are extremely vague and it mentions hate, but it's really about bias crimes, racism or discrimination or things like that. So, but bias doesn't have to be the primary motivator of the crime. The law just says they have to be motivated in whole or in part.
Dr. Robert Jackson:That's right, I heard you say that in whole or in part.
Diane Peterson :Sure. So let's say a person is just a career criminal, or they're mentally ill, drunk, angry, violent, and they're arrested for a violent crime. Depending on the characteristics of the victim, a prosecutor has the discretion to apply a hate crimes law.
Dr. Robert Jackson:That's right. Okay, so anytime somebody happens to be in one of these named categories, a hate crime can be added on. Just because they're in a ethnic group, or they're homosexual, a lesbian or any of those named categories, it's going to automatically be a hate crime.
Diane Peterson :Well, it will be automatically a hate crime if the prosecutor wants to make it one, that's right.
Diane Peterson :It's really the point on that, and I have a. I don't know if we'll get to it, but I have a lovely example of one that was clearly used as a scalp, and it happened here in South Carolina. But back to the main point. First is that people feel safe from overreach because they say that a prosecutor has to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. And unfortunately, over the past four years, you know, we've seen that the law can and will be used for, you know, and weaponized for political purposes.
Dr. Robert Jackson:We've all seen that in the last four years, haven't we?
Diane Peterson :We have, and it's a sad fact that even in America, no one of either political party should feel safe from government persecution.
Dr. Robert Jackson:That's right.
Diane Peterson :Okay. So say we have a violent crime, the social media of the perpetrator would be examined for remarks or opinions that might be deemed hateful. And this isn't too different from trying to prove motive in other crimes, except for one thing Unless a person declares himself a white supremacist or black supremacist or Marxist BLM supporter and says that the motivation for the crime was something in that, then what proves it is a hate or bias crime. So I have to ask is a person potentially a racist because they follow a very conservative political figure on social media and parrot some of those messages? Is being labeled far right sufficient to be considered potentially racist? Or, you know, have bias against people? What is far right racist?
Dr. Robert Jackson:or, you know, have bias against people. What is far right? What if you just go to a very liberal, progressive church or very conservative?
Diane Peterson :Exactly. Well, I'm going to get to that because you know. But but to this far right thing everyone's labeled far right nowadays and everyone's a Nazi. I mean so everything.
Dr. Robert Jackson:Yeah, those people, those terms are that's right, that's right, I mean so everything, yeah, those terms are.
Diane Peterson :That's right. That's right. So we need to consider how words are used and defined now and what potentially the law could use with such framing of words and identities. Right, oh yeah, so you bring up the church. So is a person homophobic because they quote biblical truth?
Dr. Robert Jackson:Well, absolutely In the day's culture?
Diane Peterson :Absolutely so. Is someone transphobic for stating biological facts about what is a woman? Because in Europe that's hate speech?
Dr. Robert Jackson:Yep, yep, that's exactly right.
Diane Peterson :So taking things even further, we've been assured repeatedly that words are violence and violence is punishable under the law. So equating words with hate begins a mental process of thinking that words are a type of crime of violence.
Dr. Robert Jackson:Whatever happened to free speech, Ms Diane?
Diane Peterson :Well, this is, in fact, what's the basis for university censoring speech that violates safe spaces Words are violence. Diversity censoring speech that violates safe spaces Words are violence. So you see, what I'm trying to do is this bill cannot capture hate because we don't really have a way to define it under the law, as you know what would be speaking or or.
Dr. Robert Jackson:That's a, that's a a gradual slippery slope down to censorship, Because when you cannot say what you believe to be the truth and it becomes labeled as hate speech or dangerous speech, then that's the first step on a gradual slippery slope to censorship.
Diane Peterson :And now you're codified it in the law. That's absolutely right. It is the seed, I believe, for expanded censorship, and we're going to see why that is.
Dr. Robert Jackson:Well, that's my question then how does all this? Lead to censorship let's go there.
Diane Peterson :Before that, I want to point out another weakness of the text of this bill.
Dr. Robert Jackson:All right, go there.
Diane Peterson :Or this type of bill and that is the wording can and will change to cover more things and the protected categories will also grow over time Because these are considered political judgments that are easy to expand and that's already happened in other states. To expand, and that's already happened in other states. So earlier discussion of this bill wanted to include lesser crimes like harassment and symbols like a swastika, but in the process it got massaged out to only more serious crimes.
Dr. Robert Jackson:But I believe you can see how that change over time.
Diane Peterson :Absolutely. They're going to go back to all the things they wanted to put in there before, because that is the nature of legislation. Yep, exactly, it grows and morphs. So Georgia has done the same thing. They passed a law and now they've had several proposals to expand it and refine it. Yep, refine it, I mean.
Dr. Robert Jackson:Yep proposals to expand it and refine it. Refine it, I mean. And then who wants to stand in the way of that? Because if you stand in the way of that, you're labeled as somebody who's not against hate crimes and who wants to be labeled that?
Diane Peterson :That's right. Are you supporting anti-Semitism? You might. You know that you might be asked. Right? It's like no, no. So, yes, political will is very weak in the face of that kind of bad publicity, and the people behind the bill know this. They know they need to get this law in so they can build from there. If they can get the most basic law, they're going to be happy because they will build. So Georgia is even passing laws to define words that will help prosecutors identify hate crimes.
Dr. Robert Jackson:I mean there are more laws Defining away free speech.
Diane Peterson :That's right.
Dr. Robert Jackson:Defining away our constitutional rights under the guise of a hate crime.
Diane Peterson :Exactly.
Dr. Robert Jackson:All right, I hope my listeners are hearing this because your legislators are weak need and when it comes to this legislation, they're not going to. Unless they got strong support from my listeners to stand against this legislation, they're going to pass it. I guarantee you they will.
Diane Peterson :I think it's fair to say that Senator Shane Massey is perhaps the primary reason the law has been stopped so far in the Senate. We should be very grateful to him for standing firm.
Dr. Robert Jackson:Okay, well, we need to let him know that we're grateful and we need to speak to our other senators.
Diane Peterson :Yes, he deserves our support. I don't know who else is you know, standing in the way. I do know which GOP voted for it in the House and I list their names in the 2024 article that I wrote.
Dr. Robert Jackson:Okay, we'll go to my next question. How does this lead to censorship? Let's go there.
Diane Peterson :Okay. So it's a gradual and psychological process of intimidation to change behavior. That's the bottom line. So we've seen perfectly accurate and reasonable words labeled as hateful by political parties. People pick up on that and even subconsciously start avoiding the terms, viewing them as bad, and eventually we aren't shocked when someone labeled with one of those terms for example far right is persecuted either through propaganda or by the Department of Justice.
Diane Peterson :You know, for example, the Tea Party was unfairly tarred as racist and I believe that caused many conservatives to withdraw public support for it In effect propaganda was used to prevent American citizens from organizing.
Diane Peterson :But in the case of hate crimes laws, people begin to fear that their words seemingly innocent words now might be twisted later and used against them when the political winds change. For example, what if we're afraid to say that only women should be allowed into women's spaces? So to many that claim is considered hateful and transphobic and it creates an atmosphere of fear and censorship self-censorship really and it gradually makes the ideas related to words and identity groups off limits to public discourse, and so we become afraid to dissent publicly and eventually many people even start to believe it's okay to criminalize certain words or thoughts. But it doesn't change people's beliefs. It just touches on something you said before.
Dr. Robert Jackson:It just makes them want to be quiet and in the shadows and they don't want to say anything.
Diane Peterson :Worse than that, hate crimes and hate speech laws prevent debate and necessary free expression, even important speech and ideas. But when people are prevented from speaking what is on their minds, those thoughts get bottled up and intensified and it requires more and harsher government control to keep those ideas shut down and contained yep, you're right and the opposite is free speech, which is about good ideas defeating bad ideas, and it's all done with words.
Diane Peterson :But if you don't have free speech, then, which is about good ideas defeating bad ideas, and it's all done with words. But if you don't have free speech, then you have to have government control. You can't. If you take away free speech, the only answer left is government control, and we see that in Europe. So this is not just a hypothetical situation.
Dr. Robert Jackson:Yeah, well, listen, you've seen, even in the United States, pastors who speak out against homosexuality have been harassed and even criminalized, have been harassed and even criminalized. There are pastors who are in prison in the United States and in Canada for speaking against homosexuality. It's been labeled hate speech and they're called homophobic and because of that they're marginalized and then criminalized. And you would never thought that would have ever happened in Canada or the United States, but it has. And so that's only the tip of the iceberg. And if we don't speak out against hate speech and hate crime laws, then again we're on that slippery slope and there will be other types of speech that will be labeled hate speech and then criminalized. And what happens is where words become criminalized, not actions, and then we're in a very dangerous position.
Diane Peterson :Worse than that, because in the UK a woman was arrested for praying in her head behind a tree across the street from an abortion clinic, and the police, recognizing she may have been praying with her head bowed and eyes closed, asked her what she was doing Maybe it was a man, I can't remember and the admission was yes, I'm praying, and that person was arrested oh my goodness so I don't know what happened to the case.
Diane Peterson :I don't think they can make. Who knows if they can make it stick. But in any case, yes, it's not just words, it really is thoughts and attitudes and it is a slippery slope and it comes from censorship that requires government increasingly authoritarian government means to keep a lid on it.
Dr. Robert Jackson:Yeah Well, ms Diane, all this is fascinating to me, and I hope my listeners are alarmed as I am, by the information that you're sharing. Now tell us again the name and number of this bill that's in the South Carolina Senate.
Diane Peterson :Yes, it's Bill S-247. Okay, and the name of the bill again, it's the Clementa C Pinckney Hate Crimes Act.
Dr. Robert Jackson:Okay and we need to call our senators about this and warn them. This is not a bill that we want to see progress in the South Carolina Senate and we need to support Senator Massey because he stood in the way of this and we need to give him our encouragement. And I want to thank Diane Peterson for her research. I thank her for informing us about this bill and really about the whole issue of globalism and Marxism in the state of South Carolina and how it affects, in the end, censorship and abridgment of our free speech, not just in South Carolina but really around the nation. All right, we got a couple of minutes more. Do you have any final comments you'd like to make?
Diane Peterson :Well, I've written now three or four articles, and in each one one I have links to the various groups I talk about involved in in this bill, and so readers can go there and find them. But I want to point to the South Carolina Chamber of Commerce because I believe it is the major pressure on the legislature for passing the bill, and that is also tied to an international effort to to change our culture here in the US. It's it's a complicated subject, but it has to do with European companies that move here and they bring with them DEI and their ESG initiatives environmental, social and governance initiatives and the Chamber of Commerce is very keen on bringing more business here, and so they're willing to suppress our rights, basically in order to entice these companies to a culture that is pleasing to them. And the key there is the DEI and environmental, social and governance issues, and locally there's a group called the Mom and Pop Alliance, I know them.
Diane Peterson :They're the go-to place for information about ESG, but that is I have found in all my research. It's the foreign companies in South Carolina that are defining our policies and educating and shaping efforts to be more progressive in line with European standards.
Dr. Robert Jackson:Yep, and that is key. I've seen it. I see it happening all the time and they have big money and their big money is buying votes in our legislature and influencing their thinking.
Diane Peterson :And their right arm is the South Carolina Chamber of Commerce, which called itself the spearhead for the bill in 2020. But they got a lot of bad publicity publicity and they removed things from their website which are backed up and they are linked in my articles. And a lot of websites and links that are in my articles have been pulled offline now because they've gone quiet. But you can find the archived links in my articles. They have not gone away. You can still access them.
Dr. Robert Jackson:I got you Good, good, good. All right, you probably need not only speak to your legislators, but you probably need to speak to whomever you know at the South Carolina Chamber of Commerce and let them know you're not appreciative of them having that kind of influence on our legislators or allowing these European countries to influence their thinking as well. All right, diane, we're out of time. We'll be back again next week. You're listening to More Than Medicine. I'm your host, dr Robert Jackson. My guest today is Diane Peterson. She's a researcher from Charleston down in the Lowcountry. Diane, I appreciate you being my guest today.
Diane Peterson :Well, thank you very much for having me.
Dr. Robert Jackson:All right, we'll be back again next week. Between now and then, may the Lord bless you real good.
Speaker 1:Thank you for listening to this edition of More Than Medicine. For more information about the Jackson Family Ministry, dr Jackson's books, or to schedule a speaking engagement, go to their Facebook page, instagram or their webpage at jacksonfamilyministrycom. This podcast is produced by Bob Slone Audio Production at bobslone. com.
