Hate Crime Legislation

cholland · Post by **cholland** » Fri Oct 30, 2009 4:21 pm

Now that President Obama has included sexual orientation within the definition of a hate crime, I wonder what the next revision will include. I don't see 'age' on the list yet.

Is it healthy that the courts have to act like a psychiatrist in order to determine the level of punishment?

At what point do we stop the list? Pres Obama: "Time and again weâ€™ve been reminded of the difficulty of building a nation in which weâ€™re all free to live and love as we see fit."
Is there any end to "love as we see fit?" Why should one be prosecuted for "loving" a 12 year old girl if she is consenting? Why should one be prosecuted for polygamy if all wives involved are consenting?

cholland · Post by **cholland** » Wed Nov 04, 2009 11:05 am

McCulloch wrote:We justify harsher punishments for hate crimes because hate crimes cause greater individual and societal harm. Society suffers when a group of people are disempowered, thus a hate crime is a crime not just against the individual but against society. Furthermore, the chances for retaliatory crimes are greater when a hate crime has been committed.

When the core of a person's identity is attacked, the degradation and dehumanization is especially severe and additional emotional and physiological problems are likely to result.

I would argue the exact opposite occurs because of hate crime legislation. If I attack a white person and the judge finds that I am guilty of assault, I will be punished. However, if I attack a white person and the judge finds that I am guilty of assault and a hate crime, it is now a black person attacked a white person motivated by color. This encourages further segregation and divisions in society.

I agree with all of those dehumanization effects - most clearly seen in the homeless. But is the answer to make the punishment harsher? I would like to explore alternative as vickiinalabama suggests.

vickiinalabama · Post by **vickiinalabama** » Wed Nov 04, 2009 10:08 pm

Is anyone aware of proactive programs to encourage tolerance in schools, churches, public service ads, etc?

Where I'm from, people love everyone except blacks, homosexuals, Mexicans, and anybody that looks funny.

Amazing the justification for hate you can hear on a daily basis, which leads me to believe it needs some type of attention, just don't know what.

Don't think churches in the Bible Belt are helping any. Often hear just the opposite...more a promotion of intolerance.

(I don't go to church, but every one I work with does and I get an earful.)

FinalEnigma · Post by **FinalEnigma** » Thu Nov 05, 2009 8:18 pm

I find myself possibly agreeing with Cholland here. I haven't explored the issue of whether there should be a distinction for hate crimes or not(and therefore my mind could be relatively easily changed), but I don't offhand think there should be. A crime is a crime, and charging it as a hate crime could easily encourage even more societal division.

As far as race issues, I think people ultimately need to forget that there is such a thing as a black person, or a white person, or an Asian person. As far as I'm concerned, they're all just people.

regarding the OP, no, polygamy shouldn't be illegal if all wives(or husbands!) are consenting.

vickiinalabama · Post by **vickiinalabama** » Thu Nov 05, 2009 8:35 pm

Good point. These groups are fighting for equality, not more division. Maybe they would prefer exclusion from any special legislation that again separates them into sub-groups.

Had not thought of that angle. Maybe we'll hear from someone "Hate Crime Legislation" would actually include and get their thoughts.

More legislation to protect those who should already be protected may not be the answer.

micatala · Post by **micatala** » Thu Nov 05, 2009 9:00 pm

vickiinalabama wrote:Is anyone aware of proactive programs to encourage tolerance in schools, churches, public service ads, etc?

The Southern Poverty Law center publishes a Teaching Tolerance magazine and I believe they have curriculum for schools who wish to use it. It is headed up by Morris Dees. The center has specialized in using the courts to try and put the KKK and similar groups out of business, with a good deal of success.

vickiinalabama wrote: Amazing the justification for hate you can hear on a daily basis, which leads me to believe it needs some type of attention, just don't know what.

Don't think churches in the Bible Belt are helping any. Often hear just the opposite...more a promotion of intolerance.

(I don't go to church, but every one I work with does and I get an earful.)

This is unfortunately true, and not just in the south I think.

On hate crimes, I am somewhat ambivalent about whether there should be a special class for these. I think there is a case to be made, in that the reality is that some violent acts are intended to intimidate not just the person abused, but everyone in that "class" of persons. The difficulty in reading the motives of a particular perpetrator does not change the fact that it does happen.

vickiinalabama · Post by **vickiinalabama** » Thu Nov 05, 2009 9:25 pm

We can't deny that special legislation helped insure some level of protection for these groups in the work force, housing, education, etc.

Is another level of crime protection redundant, or is it necessary until they achieve better equality?

vickiinalabama · Post by **vickiinalabama** » Thu Nov 05, 2009 9:30 pm

P.S. Thanks for the heads up on the SPLC. But that liberal SPLC is more despised here than the KKK! Hope that literature is getting into schools but skeptical.
(SPLC is here in Alabama. My husband knows Morris Dees.)

I work at a Teachers Credit Union. I'll be finding out for sure if anyone is taking advantage of this. THANKS.

Debating Christianity and Religion