Is it even necessary? Is it anything but disguising a crime as an involuntary physical response to intolerance? Is it merely liberal thought-policing?
A few quotes and links to get things started:
link:
http://www.adl.org/99hatecrime/intro.asp
Quote:
All Americans have a stake in an effective response to violent bigotry. Hate crimes demand a priority response because of their special emotional and psychological impact on the victim and the victim's community. The damage done by hate crimes cannot be measured solely in terms of physical injury or dollars and cents. Hate crimes may effectively intimidate other members of the victim's community, leaving them feeling isolated, vulnerable and unprotected by the law. By making members of minority communities fearful, angry and suspicious of other groups -- and of the power structure that is supposed to protect them -- these incidents can damage the fabric of our society and fragment communities.
ADL has long been in the forefront of national and state efforts to deter and counteract hate-motivated criminal activity. Hate crime statutes are necessary because the failure to recognize and effectively address this unique type of crime could cause an isolated incident to explode into widespread community tension.
|
link:
http://www.vutorch.org/vIi4/hate.htm
Quote:
States are increasingly joining the bandwagon in favor of hate crime legislation. Hate crime legislation works very simply: it increases, often dramatically, the punishments associated with crimes motivated by prejudice and bigotry. It often does so by placing a separate crime on top of any offense committed if that offense was driven by hate.
While this provides an enormous sense of hope for those groups that suffer from continued oppression and barriers within our society, it does not justify the existence of such laws and can isolate such groups further. Hate crimes are the direct legislation of thought by our government. Period. Is this the kind of thing we want our government legislating?
[..]
And is it right to consider one murder worse than another? Is murdering your wife better than killing someone because of their ethnicity or sexual orientation? When supporters of hate crimes are confronted with these questions they often say it is symbolic.
|
Obviously, because I am a member of the vast right-wing conspiracy against all peace-loving minority groups, I am more inclined to agree with the latter quote. It's just another social issue that the government really shouldn't get involved in. There are hundreds of PACs that should -- instead of preaching to legislators and buying them dinner -- buy time in local TV and radio stations to get the word out about their cause. It is up to society to change their bigoted views, not the government. I say this as a homosexual man of "mixed-ethnicity", so put aside the you-only-say-that-because-you-are-a-heterosexual-rich-old-white-male retort.