You said that a hate crime law like that makes your life worth less than someone else's, but it doesn't. If you were killed by a homosexual man because you were heterosexual and he hated your sexual orientation, he could be charged with a hate crime. Voila, your life is worth exactly the same as everyone else's, in the sense that you were talking about.
It does not discriminate against straight people, because straight people are "protected" in the same way gay people are, in that if they are the victim of violence based on the hate of sexual orientation, the perpetrator can be charged with a hate crime.
Just because laws like this are created because most of the violence flows one way does not mean they discriminate against the side that initiates most of that violence. Heterosexuality is a sexual orientation, and is thus "protected" in the same way as homosexuality. That goes for all the things that qualify as hate crimes. If a black man attacks a white man because he hates white people, that is a hate crime in the same way as if a white man attacks a black man because he hates black people. It is all the same under a law like this. The law is not discriminating against you, which is what your original post was about. The law is not discriminating against anyone.
It is saying that if a person attacks someone, anyone, just because they hate a generic classification of people that the victim belongs to, that is a hate crime. It is saying that attacking someone because you hate their race, religion, sexual orientation, etc, is different than attacking someone, for example, because you want their money.
Do you not think it's different? Do you not think that distinction is important? Do you not think we should care why people hurt each other?
It does not discriminate against straight people, because straight people are "protected" in the same way gay people are, in that if they are the victim of violence based on the hate of sexual orientation, the perpetrator can be charged with a hate crime.
Just because laws like this are created because most of the violence flows one way does not mean they discriminate against the side that initiates most of that violence. Heterosexuality is a sexual orientation, and is thus "protected" in the same way as homosexuality. That goes for all the things that qualify as hate crimes. If a black man attacks a white man because he hates white people, that is a hate crime in the same way as if a white man attacks a black man because he hates black people. It is all the same under a law like this. The law is not discriminating against you, which is what your original post was about. The law is not discriminating against anyone.
It is saying that if a person attacks someone, anyone, just because they hate a generic classification of people that the victim belongs to, that is a hate crime. It is saying that attacking someone because you hate their race, religion, sexual orientation, etc, is different than attacking someone, for example, because you want their money.
Do you not think it's different? Do you not think that distinction is important? Do you not think we should care why people hurt each other?
Warder to starry_nite
Chapterfish — Nate's Writing Blog
http://chapterfish.wordpress.com
Chapterfish — Nate's Writing Blog
http://chapterfish.wordpress.com
Matthew Shepard act passed
23/10/2009 07:54:07 PM
- 828 Views
Meh
23/10/2009 08:06:22 PM
- 443 Views
I'm sure Orwell would be intrigued by his own prognosticative abilities.
24/10/2009 12:52:24 AM
- 454 Views
Didn't we already slice crimes by degree of intention (e.g., murder vs. manslaughter) pre-Orwell?
24/10/2009 05:23:56 AM
- 434 Views
How about DADT, or employment non discrimination, or federal benefits for civil unions/marriages?
24/10/2009 01:23:06 AM
- 437 Views
See..this is much more important than Hate Crime Legislation, and it actually accomplishes something *NM*
24/10/2009 01:52:31 AM
- 159 Views
Agreed, but
24/10/2009 02:12:11 AM
- 408 Views
I'd be more supportive of hate crime legislation as a whole if it made any real sense to me
24/10/2009 02:22:46 AM
- 416 Views
I'm sure the law is not supposed to deter crime, but rather to ensure justice.
24/10/2009 03:49:58 AM
- 360 Views
Re: I'd be more supportive of hate crime legislation as a whole if it made any real sense to me
24/10/2009 04:07:52 AM
- 462 Views
Re: I'd be more supportive of hate crime legislation as a whole if it made any real sense to me
24/10/2009 04:51:43 AM
- 429 Views
Re: I'd be more supportive of hate crime legislation as a whole if it made any real sense to me
24/10/2009 05:02:27 AM
- 406 Views
Re: I'd be more supportive of hate crime legislation as a whole if it made any real sense to me
24/10/2009 05:27:35 AM
- 397 Views
So it's inherently worse for a gay man to get beaten up than a straight guy?
24/10/2009 03:45:43 AM
- 411 Views
Doesn't there have to be an indication ...
24/10/2009 04:33:49 AM
- 401 Views
Doesn't matter, Same crime, same punishment, with no extra preference given to anyone.
24/10/2009 04:48:22 AM
- 394 Views
It does matter to what you were saying, though.
24/10/2009 06:32:32 AM
- 463 Views
All orientations are protected.
24/10/2009 05:17:55 AM
- 404 Views
yes and how many black men are sentenced for attacking white men?
24/10/2009 02:00:26 PM
- 383 Views
Minor point.
24/10/2009 04:46:25 PM
- 434 Views
well since almost everything he said turned out to be BS why not that too?
25/10/2009 02:36:25 PM
- 418 Views