Matthew Shepard Act is getting closer! - Page 2

Reba · 10-03-2007, 01:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pacman

Bad bill? Oh please, existing regular bill don't over transgenders and homosexual from prevent to get victim of hate crime, hate crime is big difference from regular crime like rape, murder, theft, assault and other, hate crime is include with harassment, verbal abuse, beat up (some are beat to die) and murder (If reason because victim is homosexual or transgenders).

It's against the law to beat up or murder anyone, regardless of the reason.

Quote:

Police isn't care about them because it won't added on bill to tighten them up, same with FBI, they don't care about them, we need bill to pass to tighten up on hate crime, plus it's existing hate crime bill are enforced in some states.

Tell me how this bill would cause the police to "care" any more than they did before.

Quote:

I don't want be victim from beat up by redneck or people in southeast or nowhere of midwest...

Guess what? I don't want to be a victim of a beating by anyone at any time or any place.

Would you feel any better if you were beat up by a cultured person on the West Coast who "loved" you?

Quote:

I don't want homosexual or transgenders to want be victim from hate crime, that breaks my heart.

Guess what? I don't want anyone to be a victim of violent crime.

Quote:

If you said bill is bad, it's your opinion

OK.

Quote:

if passed and enforce then we will be great because it helps federal to get more expands on hate crime, even they cannot ignore to new bill or they can lose job, for police and FBI. This new bill isn't practicing to accept homosexual but rather to protect them from victim of hate crime, that will help the reduce on hate crime, if police in southeast usa and look at argue on between straight and gay people then they started hate crime against gay people and police don't care about them because they thought it's worthless due lacking of bill support, I don't want to be happen like that.

And that's your opinion.

Pacman · 10-03-2007, 02:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reba

It's against the law to beat up or murder anyone, regardless of the reason.

Tell me how this bill would cause the police to "care" any more than they did before.

Guess what? I don't want to be a victim of a beating by anyone at any time or any place.

Would you feel any better if you were beat up by a cultured person on the West Coast who "loved" you?

Guess what? I don't want anyone to be a victim of violent crime.

OK.

And that's your opinion.

It's not included with transgenders and homosexual, this old bill is just applies for regular crime, even no reason to be because of race, sex oriention, religion, gender idenifty and disabilities. YOu had look that hate crime is rise in Seattle, that upeset Metroguy, where he was claimed in other thread, regular law isn't protect us so enough, need to be fixed but after can't work out in federal, more states are flavor to pass the hate crime bill in their state, separate from federal.

Homophobia and gay bashing are common in southeast and some part of midwest, even there's happen in west coast and northeast but not big as other area, I can't stand in stupid homophobia or gay bashing, I want to stop and respect people's personal and keep on our business, not others.

MetroGuy03 · 10-03-2007, 05:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pacman

If Bush does veto it then he have no heart for Matthew Shepard too.

He has no heart for anyone. Over 700,000 people died because of him. Will it make any difference if anyone kidnaps his daughters and threaten him that they would hurt their daughters. I wonder if he would protect his daughters or not? If he does care, I would be in shock for sure.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reba

If Bush vetoes the bill, it has nothing to do with having or not having a heart for anyone. It's just a bad bill.

What's wrong with you? Bad bill? You're gotta to be kidding me! I don't think you really understand what it is happening to GBLT community lately.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reba

If that's what you believe, then how do you think a new law will be enforced any better than the current laws? The law might be new but the people in law enforcement and the courts will be the same people.

You really think that never happened like that before? New law will help reduce hate crimes against GBLT people.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reba

I'm not saying that they didn't experience harrassment or attacks. What I'm saying is, a new law just for one group of people is not the right way to solve it.

All people should be protected equally, and punished equally, by the current laws. We should NOT have separate laws for each group of people.

That's what the government tried to do that in the very beginning. It failed. Why? People separated themselves into minorities and hate each other because they are different. Many people don't realize that they are all same people. That's why the government need to set up more and more laws to keep it under control. People will always be so stubborn and stuck with their own ways. Educated people like the government have to take care of dumb people.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pacman

If my friend gets beaten up by someone, I want that attacker's butt thrown in jail for a long time. Does it matter if my friend is gay, transgender, or straight? Does it matter if the attacker is gay, transgender, or straight? NO! My friend suffered pain, and the attacker needs to be punished. Period.

That is very easy of you to say that. Obvious, you still don't understand it at all.

Pacman · 10-03-2007, 08:26 PM

Metroguy, that's true about alot of people died because of him, is it included with soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan?

Last of post, you need fix the last quote, this quote on last of your post weren't mine, it was Reba's quote, plus it's alright, that's fine with me.

My strongest expected that Bush must sign on this bill, I will be very upset if he don't, plus can't wait til Jan 20, 2009 then he will be gone and I wish that more vote to support then would override the Bush's veto.

Reba · 10-03-2007, 09:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MetroGuy03

What's wrong with you? Bad bill? You're gotta to be kidding me! I don't think you really understand what it is happening to GBLT community lately.

You really think that never happened like that before? New law will help reduce hate crimes against GBLT people.

That's what the government tried to do that in the very beginning. It failed. Why? People separated themselves into minorities and hate each other because they are different. Many people don't realize that they are all same people. That's why the government need to set up more and more laws to keep it under control. People will always be so stubborn and stuck with their own ways. Educated people like the government have to take care of dumb people.

That is very easy of you to say that. Obvious, you still don't understand it at all.

Here's the deal. If this law passes, one year after it goes into effect, let's check back here and see if things really have changed as a result of its passing.

In the meantime, I will continue to support equal enforcement of our current laws against assault and murder for all people.

PuyoPiyo · 10-04-2007, 03:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pacman

Bad bill? Oh please, existing regular bill don't over transgenders and homosexual from prevent to get victim of hate crime, hate crime is big difference from regular crime like rape, murder, theft, assault and other, hate crime is include with harassment, verbal abuse, beat up (some are beat to die) and murder (If reason because victim is homosexual or transgenders). Police isn't care about them because it won't added on bill to tighten them up, same with FBI, they don't care about them, we need bill to pass to tighten up on hate crime, plus it's existing hate crime bill are enforced in some states.

I don't want be victim from beat up by redneck or people in southeast or nowhere of midwest, I don't want homosexual or transgenders to want be victim from hate crime, that breaks my heart. It's not okay for people that who yells against on homosexual, except they must do on their own in private area, not front of homosexual people, I don't want hear about what happen from homophobia, that's not accept in my life.

If you said bill is bad, it's your opinion, if passed and enforce then we will be great because it helps federal to get more expands on hate crime, even they cannot ignore to new bill or they can lose job, for police and FBI. This new bill isn't practicing to accept homosexual but rather to protect them from victim of hate crime, that will help the reduce on hate crime, if police in southeast usa and look at argue on between straight and gay people then they started hate crime against gay people and police don't care about them because they thought it's worthless due lacking of bill support, I don't want to be happen like that.

Good post!

InTheGenes · 10-04-2007, 10:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reba

Here's the deal. If this law passes, one year after it goes into effect, let's check back here and see if things really have changed as a result of its passing.

In the meantime, I will continue to support equal enforcement of our current laws against assault and murder for all people.

I've struggled with this one, I've got to tell you. In theory, I'm actually in agreement with you, Reba. If the laws that we had on the books already were enforced properly, then there might not be a need for this kind of legislation.

That said, we DO already have laws on the books right now that extend "special" protection for certain groups of people; typically people that are vulnerable in some capacity, or not able to adequately fend for themselves. Children are the example that immediately springs to mind. We have laws that protect children in a lot of different ways, whether it's Contributing to the Delinquency of a Minor, child labor laws, truancy laws, curfew laws, etc. Yes, I know it's not QUITE the same thing, but the point I'm trying to make is that in our society, we've established a precedent that some groups are deserving of additional laws and protection... so this wouldn't QUITE be breaking the mold.

If society decides that we are well served by protecting those that are habitually victimized (and trust me, Reba... while it might not be something that you've ever had exposure to, but for a lot of folks out there - gays, blacks, jews, etc. - it's an all-too-real phenomenon, and for many, an ever-present threat), how can that be a bad thing?

I'll tell you what DOES bother me about it (and is part of the reason that I'm conflicted about it): it basically amounts to legislating thought, which is abhorrant to most democratic ideals. These laws, if enacted, are not going to keep people from being homophobic, they're not going to keep people from being bigots, racists, anti-semites, etc. It just might, however, serve as a deterrent against acting on those homophobic/racist/bigoted/anti-semitic thoughts, however. (I know, we disagree on this, you and I.)

It's not an easy thing to wrap one's brain around... and like I said, I've wrestled with the idea of hate crimes legislation, because I see both sides of the argument.

Attempting to draw a simple analogy: if someone spraypaints an image of a rabbit on my garage at Easter-time, it might piss me off, because it's damaged my property... and there are laws that could be used to prosecute the offender, even though the offense (to some) might seem relatively minor. If, however, that same person spraypainted "Get out of our town, you fucking FAGGOT!", or "All N****rs Must Die", or "Jews killed Christ, it's time for Payback!"... technically, the same physical act has taken place (the spraypainting and damage of property), but an entirely different element has entered into the picture: Hate. How is being hateful towards one another productive to society?

One last comment... just because you don't think that the law will make much difference (and again, Im know we disagree), doesn't necessarily make the best argument for why a law shouldn't be enacted. That's like a parent never setting boundaries with their recalcitrant teenagers, because they "know" that they'll be ignored. That, to me, is irresponsible thinking.

Reba · 10-04-2007, 01:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by InTheGenes

That said, we DO already have laws on the books right now that extend "special" protection for certain groups of people; typically people that are vulnerable in some capacity, or not able to adequately fend for themselves. Children are the example that immediately springs to mind. We have laws that protect children in a lot of different ways, whether it's Contributing to the Delinquency of a Minor, child labor laws, truancy laws, curfew laws, etc. Yes, I know it's not QUITE the same thing, but the point I'm trying to make is that in our society, we've established a precedent that some groups are deserving of additional laws and protection... so this wouldn't QUITE be breaking the mold.

That's true that there are laws protecting the vulnerable members of our society. Like you stated, the reason is usually because they are unable either to physically defend themselves, or they are unable to make decisions for themselves. I don't think the sexual orientation category (as a whole) fits into those situations.

Quote:

If society decides that we are well served by protecting those that are habitually victimized (and trust me, Reba... while it might not be something that you've ever had exposure to, but for a lot of folks out there - gays, blacks, jews, etc. - it's an all-too-real phenomenon, and for many, an ever-present threat), how can that be a bad thing?

I'm not against protecting victims. I just don't support this legislation as the way to do it.

Quote:

I'll tell you what DOES bother me about it (and is part of the reason that I'm conflicted about it): it basically amounts to legislating thought, which is abhorrant to most democratic ideals.

Not just legislating thought, but judging it. A very mirky mire indeed.

Quote:

Attempting to draw a simple analogy: if someone spraypaints an image of a rabbit on my garage at Easter-time, it might piss me off, because it's damaged my property... and there are laws that could be used to prosecute the offender, even though the offense (to some) might seem relatively minor. If, however, that same person spraypainted "Get out of our town, you fucking FAGGOT!", or "All N****rs Must Die", or "Jews killed Christ, it's time for Payback!"... technically, the same physical act has taken place (the spraypainting and damage of property), but an entirely different element has entered into the picture: Hate. How is being hateful towards one another productive to society?

Except for the rabbit example, all your other examples didn't just express the feeling of hate, they also threatened violent action. It's the threat of violence that should be prosecuted, not the name calling per se.

If someone just spray painted "Get out of town!" or "You must die" or "It's time for payback!" on your garage door, those phrases don't specify hate against any group but they are still threatening. It's the threat that needs to be prosecuted, not the "thoughts" or "emotions" behind them.

To me, here's the difference:

1. Spraying paint on my garage door with a nasty word or picture, or just a bunch of squiggles is vandalism.

2. Spraying paint on my garage door with a phrase "I hate Christian women!" That is a "hate" phrase but it's still just vandalism, under current laws. Why? Because it just expresses a thought and a feeling.

3. Spraying paint on my garage door that says "I love you--I will kill you, and release you from this awful world." Hmm. That phrase isn't hateful but it's a threat of murder. That's not just vandalism, that's a threat of physical harm. As a threat it might be prosecutable; as a potential "hate" crime it doesn't meet the criteria. Hate crime laws would NOT apply. Yet, the threat is there.

Quote:

One last comment... just because you don't think that the law will make much difference (and again, Im know we disagree), doesn't necessarily make the best argument for why a law shouldn't be enacted. That's like a parent never setting boundaries with their recalcitrant teenagers, because they "know" that they'll be ignored. That, to me, is irresponsible thinking.

I think the law is redundant (we have laws against violent attacks), and too hazy (judging hearts and minds instead of actions).

MetroGuy03 · 10-04-2007, 05:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pacman

Metroguy, that's true about alot of people died because of him, is it included with soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan?

Last time I read that said Iraq alone. It didn't count Afghanistan. That is really good question. If that included that, I would estimate nearby one million people died by George W. Bush. I don't like this.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pacman

Last of post, you need fix the last quote, this quote on last of your post weren't mine, it was Reba's quote, plus it's alright, that's fine with me.

Oops! My mistake! Sorry about that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pacman

My strongest expected that Bush must sign on this bill, I will be very upset if he don't, plus can't wait til Jan 20, 2009 then he will be gone and I wish that more vote to support then would override the Bush's veto.

I completely agree with you!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reba

Here's the deal. If this law passes, one year after it goes into effect, let's check back here and see if things really have changed as a result of its passing.

In the meantime, I will continue to support equal enforcement of our current laws against assault and murder for all people.

Deal. We will see how it will turn out.

PuyoPiyo · 10-04-2007, 08:19 PM

While I research around the Human Rights Campaign, it appears that they are planning even more.

Quote:

Mission Statement

The Human Rights Campaign is America’s largest civil rights organization working to achieve gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender equality. By inspiring and engaging all Americans, HRC strives to end discrimination against GLBT citizens and realize a nation that achieves fundamental fairness and equality for all.

HRC seeks to improve the lives of GLBT Americans by advocating for equal rights and benefits in the workplace, ensuring families are treated equally under the law and increasing public support among all Americans through innovative advocacy, education and outreach programs. HRC works to secure equal rights for GLBT individuals and families at the federal and state levels by lobbying elected officials, mobilizing grassroots supporters, educating Americans, investing strategically to elect fair-minded officials and partnering with other GLBT organizations.

HRC | Mission Statement

So yes, it include the discrimination in workplaces. Also the education part really excited me because that could reduce the hate crime for the students before they graduated, just like they educated about the race. There are very few people that are victim of racist because of the school education, that can happen to the GLBT too.

Quote:

Educational Outreach

Through research, educational efforts and outreach, the Human Rights Campaign Foundation encourages gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender Americans to live their lives openly and seeks to change the hearts and minds of Americans to the side of equality.

The HRC Foundation is a nonprofit, tax-exempt 501(c)(3) organization. Programs funded in part or in full through the HRC Foundation include:

The HRC Coming Out Project, which encourages GLBT and straight-supportive Americans to come out and live openly by providing resources that empower them to talk about their lives and advocate for GLBT equality.
The HRC Family Project, which empowers members of the GLBT community to take action to protect their families, improves the practices within key institutions that serve GLBT families and promotes visibility of GLBT families.
The HRC Historically Black Colleges and Universities Outreach Program, which trains student activists to sustain dialogue, build viable student-led GLBT organizations and open campus-wide debate on the issues that affect the GLBT community, often for the first time.
The HRC Religion and Faith Program, which amplifies the voices of clergy who support GLBT equality while also equipping and empowering people of faith to talk about GLBT issues from a religious perspective.
The HRC Research Center, which serves as a comprehensive and authoritative source of research on GLBT issues for members of the media, lawmakers, pro-equality advocates and other thought leaders.
The HRC Workplace Project, which promotes equality in the workplace by advocating for policies that prohibit discrimination against GLBT workers, provide employees with equal benefits and diversity training and encourage appropriate marketing.

HRC | Educational Outreach

And some of their lastest news.

Quote:

HRC Launches Full-Scale Nationwide Call to Action in Support of Inclusive ENDA

10/3/2007

WASHINGTON – Today, the Human Rights Campaign launched a nationwide call to action to the organization’s 700,000 members and supporters to begin an immediate campaign to urge their Members of Congress to support ENDA legislation the protects the entire GLBT organization. To view the Call to Action from Human Rights Campaign President Joe Solmonese and to take immediate action online, please go to: Take Action: Equal Opportunity...unless you're GLBT

In addition to the written Call to Action, HRC President Joe Solmonese taped the following video message personally asking each of our members and supporters to have their voices heard on Capitol Hill in support of a fully inclusive ENDA bill. To view the video, go to: HRC | Home

Solmonese’s Call to Action is below:

"Late last week, House leaders announced their decision to change the language of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) so that it only includes sexual orientation and not gender identity. These House leaders have said that they do not have enough votes to move forward with the original fully-inclusive bill.

We are profoundly disappointed by this move, and I want to explain our position and ask you to write your congress member today.

Tell your representative we need an employment discrimination law that includes the entire GLBT community.

Since 2004, the Human Rights Campaign’s policy has been to only support civil rights legislation that is inclusive of gender identity - a policy that was reaffirmed by our Board of Directors in a vote on Monday night.

That’s why we fought tirelessly for - and won - Congressional approval for a hate crimes bill that includes gender identity, and have been working for years to pass an inclusive employment discrimination bill.

This year we ramped up our lobby presence on the Hill, helped coordinate broad coalition efforts, and deployed our field team to more than 40 key congressional districts to mobilize unprecedented support for an inclusive ENDA. We secured the active support of corporate America, with more than 50 major companies joining our Business Coalition for Workplace Fairness. Our Religion and Faith Program was instrumental as well, giving voice to thousands of faith leaders across the country. We secured supportive editorials from a record number of newspapers, and with your help we generated hundreds of thousands of constituent contacts to members of Congress, through emails, phone calls, postcards, and thousands of hand-written letters.

However, we’re facing a stark reality. The House leadership and bill sponsors are moving forward with a non-inclusive ENDA - even without the full support of our community. They view this as the best opportunity this year to get a successful vote on legislation extending protections to the largest number of people.

I want you to know we made every possible effort to avoid having a non-inclusive bill introduced and we did succeed in helping convince Congressional leaders to delay action on the new bill until later this month.

We now have a window of opportunity to try and line up the votes we need to pass a fully-inclusive ENDA.

We’ve delivered HRC’s message to Congress, but I’m asking you today to send your own message. Your Representative must understand that supporters of equality will not rest until rights are extended to everyone in the GLBT community.

Tell your Representative you stand behind legislation that will provide the same protections to all GLBT people.

This has been a long battle. HRC first started the quest for ENDA in 1994. We’ve been pushing for an inclusive bill since 2004. This month, ENDA could pass the U.S. House of Representatives for the first time in history.

I implore you to take action today and to forward this message to your family and friends. Working together, I am confident we can pass historic civil rights legislation."

The Human Rights Campaign is America’s largest civil rights organization working to achieve gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender equality. By inspiring and engaging all Americans, HRC strives to end discrimination against GLBT citizens and realize a nation that achieves fundamental fairness and equality for all.

HRC | HRC Launches Full-Scale Nationwide Call to Action in Support of Inclusive ENDA

Quote:

Human Rights Campaign Board of Directors Vote to Reaffirm 2004 Policy on ENDA

10/2/2007

WASHINGTON - Last night, the Human Rights Campaign’s Board of Directors voted to reaffirm the 2004 policy supporting a fully inclusive version of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act. Therefore, HRC will not support the newly introduced sexual orientation only bill. The board’s position articulates a process for continued dialogue with House leaders about strategies that have been put forth to, in the end, achieve passage of a fully inclusive ENDA.

"We are now faced with definitive Congressional action to move forward a version of the bill stripping gender identity. Though we support a fully inclusive ENDA, we acknowledge the legislative strategy put forth by Congressman Frank and the Democratic leadership to obtain a clear path towards an inclusive bill in the future," said Human Rights Campaign President Joe Solmonese. "We look forward to working with them to accomplish the goal all of us share - ending workplace discrimination against the entire GLBT community."

"Since 2004, HRC has had in place a policy that supports only a fully inclusive version of ENDA and the Board of Directors voted to reaffirm that position," Solmonese continued. "Therefore, we are not able to support, nor will we encourage Members of Congress to vote against, the newly introduced sexual orientation only bill. And will continue working with our allies in Congress to support a comprehensive, legislative strategy to achieve passage of a fully inclusive ENDA as quickly as possible."

The Human Rights Campaign has been and continues to be on the front lines actively and exhaustively advocating for an inclusive piece of legislation that protects all members of our community. HRC has led the charge on Capitol Hill for an inclusive bill and has focused grassroots organizing in 40 congressional districts across the country targeting moderate Members of Congress to educate them on the need for a bill protecting the entire GLBT community.

"For more than a decade HRC has been aggressively working to secure employment protections for the entire gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender community. Even in the dark days of anti-gay leadership in Congress, we moved Corporate America forward because we refused to accept that progress wasn’t possible. And today, we again reject the notion that progress isn’t possible by rededicating our efforts to specifically educate members of Congress on the need for gender identity protections in the workplace," said Solmonese.

"Some may say we should have joined the growing chorus of public dissenters earlier. We believed, and still do, that the correct course of action was to continue dialogue with our allies on the Hill and work to the last minute to effect change," said Solmonese. "That decision, in addition to yesterday’s letter signed by GLBT and civil rights organizations, paid off when we were able to engage in direct conversations that resulted in a guarantee from House leadership to postpone the mark-up until later this month."

The Human Rights Campaign is America’s largest civil rights organization working to achieve gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender equality. By inspiring and engaging all Americans, HRC strives to end discrimination against GLBT citizens and realize a nation that achieves fundamental fairness and equality for all.

-30-

HRC | Human Rights Campaign Board of Directors Vote to Reaffirm 2004 Policy on ENDA

nozobo · 10-04-2007, 10:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pacman

Oh cool, one of co-worker said Sam's Club is good workplace, plus seems better than wal-mart, both of them are same company, you know that but different background and retail type.

You work at Sam's Club as well or? I'm bit confusing... But yeah I already like my job alot better at Sam's Club than Wal-Mart... it's funny I got a raise even though I'm in the same position from Walmart to Sam's Club.. I did ask why, they say Sam's Club is in better reputation than Walmart but exactly why I dunno.

walmart

Pacman · 10-05-2007, 05:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nozobo

You work at Sam's Club as well or? I'm bit confusing... But yeah I already like my job alot better at Sam's Club than Wal-Mart... it's funny I got a raise even though I'm in the same position from Walmart to Sam's Club.. I did ask why, they say Sam's Club is in better reputation than Walmart but exactly why I dunno.

walmart

I don't work at Sam's Club, I just got info from co-worker and still work at wal-mart.

Pacman · 10-05-2007, 05:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PuyoPiyo

While I research around the Human Rights Campaign, it appears that they are planning even more.

So yes, it include the discrimination in workplaces. Also the education part really excited me because that could reduce the hate crime for the students before they graduated, just like they educated about the race. There are very few people that are victim of racist because of the school education, that can happen to the GLBT too.

And some of their lastest news.

Well, there's still race relation issue in some part like between blacks and latino (mostly mexicans) and between blacks and korean (it went worse after 1992 LA riot).

InTheGenes · 10-05-2007, 06:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reba

That's true that there are laws protecting the vulnerable members of our society. Like you stated, the reason is usually because they are unable either to physically defend themselves, or they are unable to make decisions for themselves. I don't think the sexual orientation category (as a whole) fits into those situations.

Yes, and no. Yes, gays and lesbians are able to make decisions for themselves (even when many of those decisions - gay marriage, adoption, etc. - are stymied, but that's a whole different topic) and can physically defend themselves (although 1-2 defenseless gay guys getting beat on by groups of teenagers with baseball bats isn't quite what I'd call a fair fight)... but isn't this also about members of our society being systematically TARGETED and VICTIMIZED on a regular basis? If hate crime legislation is basically one of the few ways lawmakers can say, "Hey, we recognize that these groups of people are being regularly targeted and abused, and this is the measure we're going to take to serve as an extra deterrent for it, to say enough is enough"... is that a bad thing?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reba

Except for the rabbit example, all your other examples didn't just express the feeling of hate, they also threatened violent action. It's the threat of violence that should be prosecuted, not the name calling per se.

If someone just spray painted "Get out of town!" or "You must die" or "It's time for payback!" on your garage door, those phrases don't specify hate against any group but they are still threatening. It's the threat that needs to be prosecuted, not the "thoughts" or "emotions" behind them.

I understand what you're saying, I do. But... there is ALSO an implied threat of violence associated with hate speech. Try walking down a hall, or an alley, etc. and have someone sneer, "Fucking faggot!" in your direction, and tell me that you don't instantly feel menaced/threatened. Why? Because typically, those lovely words are the prelude to violence. By your own definition, "it's the threat of violence that needs to be prosecuted". Perhaps the difference between our opinions is that you don't see a threat where gays do. Hyper-sensitivity? Perhaps in some instances... but on the whole, I don't believe so.

PuyoPiyo · 10-05-2007, 08:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pacman

Well, there's still race relation issue in some part like between blacks and latino (mostly mexicans) and between blacks and korean (it went worse after 1992 LA riot).

Yeah it can be very racist depends on the location. In Washington, I haven't see much of racist crime.

Reba · 10-05-2007, 08:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by InTheGenes

Yes, and no. Yes, gays and lesbians are able to make decisions for themselves (even when many of those decisions - gay marriage, adoption, etc. - are stymied, but that's a whole different topic)

I meant the individuals of currently protected groups are mentally or emotionally incapable of making decisions, and usually have family members or guardians who are responsible for their daily care. That's why children, people with mental retardation, senility, Alzheimer's, etc., are in a protected class.

Quote:

...and can physically defend themselves (although 1-2 defenseless gay guys getting beat on by groups of teenagers with baseball bats isn't quite what I'd call a fair fight)...

I meant people who can never defend themselves under any circumstances, not people who are circumstantially overpowered. That means children, frail elderly people, people who are paralyzed or in comas, etc.

Quote:

but isn't this also about members of our society being systematically TARGETED and VICTIMIZED on a regular basis?

Will hate crime legislation truly correct systematic targeting and victimizing?

Just asking.

Quote:

I understand what you're saying, I do. But... there is ALSO an implied threat of violence associated with hate speech. Try walking down a hall, or an alley, etc. and have someone sneer, "Fucking faggot!" in your direction, and tell me that you don't instantly feel menaced/threatened. Why? Because typically, those lovely words are the prelude to violence.

Those words are horrible. I definitely don't condone that kind of language or attitude. But those ugly words don't always preclude violence; it's not a prima facie situation. You can't arrest someone for their nasty, insulting words (remember the First Amendment?) Much as we might not like it, the First Amendment works both ways.

Quote:

By your own definition, "it's the threat of violence that needs to be prosecuted". Perhaps the difference between our opinions is that you don't see a threat where gays do. Hyper-sensitivity? Perhaps in some instances... but on the whole, I don't believe so.

Sometimes the "threat" aspect is in the eyes of the beholder. That's always been a problem in assault and stalking cases. There are some words that are clearly threats ("I will kill, murder, beat you to a pulp, slice you up, feed you to the fishes," etc.). But the law also doesn't accept that every verbal or written insult is a threat of physical violence. That usually has to get sorted out in court.

10-03-2007, 08:26 PM	#34 (permalink)
Pacman o_O Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 12,834	Metroguy, that's true about alot of people died because of him, is it included with soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan? Last of post, you need fix the last quote, this quote on last of your post weren't mine, it was Reba's quote, plus it's alright, that's fine with me. My strongest expected that Bush must sign on this bill, I will be very upset if he don't, plus can't wait til Jan 20, 2009 then he will be gone and I wish that more vote to support then would override the Bush's veto. __________________ Oh damn, don't mess with me

Today
Deafness	Sponsored Links __________________ This advertising will not be shown in this way to registered members. Register your free account today and become a member on AllDeaf.com