Although they never met each other and lived more than a thousand miles apart, University of Wyoming student Matthew Shepard and Alabama textile worker Billy Jack Gaither had one ritual in common. On weekends, they would both often drive several hours to find refuge in big-city gay bars to momentarily escape the stifling, anti-gay attitudes in the small towns where they resided. Like many gay and lesbian Americans, Gaither and Shepard took these long treks because they understood the potentially dangerous ramifications of getting identified as gay in places where the label makes one a target for violence. Sadly, their suspicions proved to be correct, as they were both murdered in grisly fashion when they failed to take their true identities out of town.

Across America more gay and lesbian people are refusing to live their lives in the shadows. But the increased honesty and visibility that has lead to more fulfilling and productive lives for millions of people has been accompanied by a backlash. Most striking about hate crimes is the ferocity and ruthlessness involved in the assaults.

In a sense, the victims are not the real targets, but convenient outlets for those who hate and wish to unleash their bigoted rage and fury against an entire group. In a multi-cultural country like America, hate crimes are a form of domestic terrorism and threaten the very fabric of our nation. These crimes are unique in the way they divide society and serve as atomic bombs to national unity. The Hate Crimes Prevention Act (HCPA) is a common sense measure to address these crimes which have a corrosive effect on society. Unfortunately, it is being opposed by an orchestrated campaign of misinformation.

Opponents to hate crimes legislation argue that these laws are not needed because current laws already exist to punish those who commit hate crimes. But Congress has before recognized that crimes motivated by hate have wide social implications and therefore need to be treated differently. In 1996, Congress passed the Church Arson Protection Act in response to a national outbreak of church burnings. Arson laws were already on the books, but legislators recognized a difference between targeting a church to send a message to the parishioners and randomly torching a 7-Eleven. If members of Congress can recognize that the desecration of buildings can be used to intimidate entire communities, they ought to be just as vigilant when the symbol chosen to send a hateful message to a community is a person.

Perhaps the biggest fallacy perpetuated by those on the extreme right is that the Hate Crimes Prevention Act treats some victims more equally than others. The truth is, all people are covered under this inclusive legislation. If passed, the HCPA will add sexual orientation, gender and disability to thecategories already protected which are, race, religion, color, and national origin. Those who misleadingly say that this legislation elevates some victims over others, must somehow be under the impression that they do not belong to a race, have a religion or a sexual orientation. They can rest easy that if they do, they too will be covered.

Opponents of hate crimes legislation like to obfuscate the issue by saying that hate crimes laws punish thought. But the HCPA does not penalize anyone for hateful thoughts, unless they result in violent actions. At the recent Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on hate crimes, Judy Shepard, Matthew's mother, best articulated why this argument is bogus. According to Shepard, "I can assure opponents of this legislation first hand, it was not words or thoughts, but violent actions that killed my son."

Interestingly enough, in the 21 states that have hate crimes laws that include sexual orientation, all the dire predictions of the far right have not come to pass. The world has not ended, and thoughts or free speech have not been limited. The Hate Crimes Prevention Act would actually promote free speech by protecting entire groups from being silenced through fear and threats of violence. The right to free speech belongs to all Americans, not just those who wish to spread hate.

HCPA opponents also like to point to Matthew Shepard's case and ask how hate crimes legislation would be of any benefit. Mrs. Shepard deftly answered this question at the hearing when she said, "opponents of this bill will say that the men who killed Matt will be punished with life in prison or even the death penalty. 'What more could a new law do?' they ask. Maybe nothing in this case. But we will never know, will we? Perhaps these murderers would have gotten the message that this country does not tolerate hate motivated violence. Maybe I would not have to be here today, talking about how my son was savagely beaten, tied to a fence, and left to die in freezing temperatures."

Furthermore, the focus by some critics on penalties intentionally misses the point of this legislation. The HCPA does not increase penalties for hate crimes. Its purpose is to serve as a tool to help law enforcement by allowing federal assistance, when necessary, in the investigation and prosecution of hate crimes. This key aspect of HCPA is why it has broad support from notable law enforcement agencies and state and local leaders including 22 state attorneys general, the National Sheriffs Association, the Police Foundation and the U.S.Conference of Mayors.

Gay and lesbian Americans who live in hostile environments don't need to see the latest statistics to know that hate crimes are an ever-present threat. In news reports, it was estimated that nearly 100 gay people live in Sylacauga, Alabama, the town of 13,000 where Gaither grew up and was killed. Not one of them is openly gay. Like Gaither and Shepard, these people clearly understand the deadly consequences they might have to face if their neighbors know of their sexual orientation. Members of Congress should recognize that this palpable climate of fear may exist in their district. A vote for the Hate Crimes Prevention Act, is a vote to correct this grave injustice and protect all citizens fairly and equally.