Quote:
Originally Posted by dippin
But, again, this is bullshit. Hate crimes doesn't make people unequal. It doesn't give extra protection for anyone. It addresses intent, not the type of the victim.
|
wrong. It IS extra protection by attempting to stop that specific victim from being a victim due to a special status by providing a harsher sentence. That leaves all other non special groups at a huge disadvantage to equal protection under the law. what is so difficult to see about that?
Quote:
Originally Posted by dippin
There is a reason why hate crime legislation was upheld unanimously. As the unanimous decision in that case stated. "this conduct is thought to inflict greater individual and societal harm.... bias-motivated crimes are more likely to provoke retaliatory crimes, inflict distinct emotional harms on their victims, and incite community unrest."
|
crock. of. shit. murder is murder. it doesn't make a murder more tragic because it was a black man or a gay man.
---------- Post added at 12:06 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:04 PM ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Baraka_Guru
Hate laws are an equalizer because they offer harsher punishments for people targeting specific social groups. The social groups protected under law have a history of being widely targeted. Now I don't know if hippies are being targeted and need similar protection (perhaps they are under "religion" or "political affiliation").
|
amazing the amount of obtuseness displayed to completely deny the preferential treatment afforded to groups of higher equality.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Baraka_Guru
Anyway, the answer to your question is that they aren't equal crimes. A crime against someone based on sexual orientation is deemed worse than a crime against someone based on their affiliation with a subculture.
|
please explain why.
---------- Post added at 12:09 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:06 PM ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by roachboy
so conservatives can't say "but we like being racist"---because in general it's not true. they can't say "we take racism to be a form of conservative speech and so using the famous slippery slope argument, we see ourselves as being next" because (a) it equates the two and (b) the argument is itself logically stupid.
|
I thoroughly discount your entire argument. It's completely unacceptable when you equate conservative as being racist. Your statement has zero credibility.