Re: The Fairness of Hate Crime Laws; Even Nonviolent Crime Needs to Be Fought

The race hustler who wrote this
On Thursday, March 8, 2012, Keith In Tampa <keithintampa@gmail.com> wrote:
> Who's Wade?
>
>  
> On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 2:57 PM, Bruce Majors <majors.bruce@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> We  need them because they give Wade a job
>> On Thursday, March 8, 2012, Keith In Tampa <keithintampa@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Good Afternoon Tom,
>> >  
>> > I have wasted my damn morning responding to you,  and so.....Why quit now?  Even though I have work stacking up on my damn desk,  why earn a living?  Maybe I'll look into applying for food stamps, like the woman who won the lottery in Ohio (or was it Pennsylvania?) did just recently,  but I digress.
>> >  
>> > The first article is thoughtful, and causes one to actually think before responding.
>> >  
>> > The second article, by Haley Gorenberg only makes me wonder and question where the Hell she purportedly received her law degree.  Applying hate crime statues to non-violent transgressions?  Hmmmmmm......Let's think about tha for a moment.   Could we apply "hate crime"  compensatory damages to say,  someone who feels as though they were discriminated against at Denny's?  Should we apply hate crime penalties on anyone who speaks out against what you term,  "Marriage Equality"?   How about those who hold Christian tenets and principals dear, and believe that contraception is wrong;  should they be penalized for professing their Christian beliefs?   How about Rush Limbaugh, should he be "penalized" because he called Sandra Fluke a whore, and a prostitute? 
>> >  
>> > What about Sandra Fluke?  Should she be penalized because she is advocating a position that I consider selfish, and not in the best interest of the United States?   I mean,  she is really thinking only of herself and her sexual escapades, and not in the interest of her fellow American......Isn't that rather, "Hateful"?
>> >  
>> > Where do we draw the line?
>> >  
>> >
>> >  
>> > On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 1:59 PM, Tommy News <tommysnews@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > The Fairness of Hate Crime Laws
>> >
>> > The trial of the Rutgers student Dharun Ravi, who secretly videotaped
>> > his roommate Tyler Clementi with another man before Clementi committed
>> > suicide, has raised questions about whether Ravi's actions were a hate
>> > crime or simple boorishness. But some have even questioned whether
>> > there need to be hate crime laws at all. Do they protect against
>> > intimidation and bigotry, or are they unnecessary and unfair?
>> >
>> > Why We Need Bias Laws
>> >  Wade Henderson is the president and chief executive of the Leadership
>> > Conference on Civil and Human Rights.
>> >
>> > March 7, 2012
>> >
>> > Hate violence is very personal, with an especially emotional and
>> > psychological impact on the victim — and the victim's community.
>> > That's because hate crimes are intentionally and specifically targeted
>> > at individuals because of their personal, immutable characteristics.
>> > Although the tragic case of Tyler Clementi clearly demonstrates the
>> > need for greater awareness of cyberbullying and digital privacy and
>> > safety, it does not present the typical hate crime paradigm.
>> > Reasonable people can disagree about whether it should be prosecuted
>> > as such.
>> >
>> > When these crimes do occur, we must send an unmistakable message that
>> > they matter. Like antidiscrimination laws, hate crime statutes, like
>> > those in 45 states, the District of Columbia, and the recently passed
>> > federal statute, the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes
>> > Prevention Act, are content-neutral, color-blind mechanisms that
>> > appropriately allow society to redress a unique type of wrongful
>> > conduct in a manner befitting that conduct's seriousness.
>> >
>> > When these crimes do occur, we must send an unmistakable message that
>> > they matter.We recognize we cannot outlaw hate. However, laws shape
>> > attitudes. And attitudes influence behavior. Strong enforcement of
>> > these laws can have a deterrent impact and limit the potential for a
>> > hate crime incident to explode into a cycle of violence and widespread
>> > community disturbances.
>> >
>> > Hate crime laws do not punish thoughts. Americans are free to think
>> > and believe whatever they want. It is only when an individual commits
>> > a crime based on those biased beliefs and intentionally targets
>> > another for violence or vandalism that a hate crime statute applies.
>> > That's why the Supreme Court unanimously upheld hate crime laws
>> > against a First Amendment challenge in 1993.
>> >
>> > Hate violence merits priority attention — and hate crime laws help
>> > ensure they receive it.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Even Nonviolent Crime Needs to Be Fought
>> >
>> >  Hayley Gorenberg is th
>> --
>> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
>> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>>  
>> * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
>> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
>> * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>
> --
> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>  
> * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.