what I hear (or see) you saying is that ... there is no right or wrong when it comes to what drives those actions

No. What I'm saying is that the morals that drive the actions are irrelevant in the face of the actions themselves. A moral that drives you to hurt (or help) someone could well be considered wrong (or right). But I don't see that a moral that hurts or helps no one could be considered either right or wrong, and it's pointless to attempt to place any label on it. And labelling a moral in the face of an actual act, while not incorrect, is kind of pointless.

hate-crime legislation is a crock

I agree. To paraphrase Hank Hill ``I don't hate him because he's Laotian. I just hate him and he happens to be Laotian.''