Hate Crimes Bill Protecting Sexual Orientation Finally Gonna Pass

[mitchymo]

So why would the minority feel like it is less fair if the law didn't exist?

It allows positions of authority to persecute in accordance with their own beliefs which they can't so easily achieve with protection within the law.

On paper the Bill of Rights might seem all inclusive but in practice without hate crime legislation it fails minority groups.

 

[D_Mansworthy Meatwrench III]

The inclusion of anything I did not personally stamp with my personal approval is useless, and does not improve my general situation, nor represent me.

In other words.....no government I currently pay for has ever represented anyone I know. Including myself.

Instead, like all governments, and the laws they pass, they are considered to only benefit those that....benefit FROM them.

Who would not be me. And only them.

"Social Opinions" do change many things.
It is called "Assassination".
It is called "Revolution".
It is called "Civil War".
(We seem to have had some of those things. Hint: American History)

What these type of "laws" and "rules" help do is simply suppress the population in SPITE of the population, in order to CONTROL the population. These things happen ONLY if the people are NOT in control of the system at hand.

And at the end of the day, remember (Truth and Fact):
The Government acts on behalf of its' ownself.
To preserve and protect....its' ownself.
Always. And in spite of being bettered. Or evolving.

Otherwise, it would have been voted out of existence a long time ago.
Otherwise, this would be a better place, not a more complicated, confusing one.
Otherwise, everything it did would have made a difference for the betterment of the people, and not just a few minority groups.

See a pattern?
"Extremist" indeed. Clean your own house before you chunk out labels.
I am considered "Extremist" because I think you have no right to interfere with my life.
I consider you "Extremist" because you seem intent come hell or high water to interfere with the way I do things. ALWAYS at the cost to ME, NEVER at the cost to YOU.

Same coin, different sides. Flip you for it!

Note-
Just because you want to be "right", and say you are "right", makes you not "right" at all. It only makes you an asshole, who is self-centered enough to become a second runner-up to Stalin. Bothering Gays does not interest me. Beating on one does if he or they INSIST on pissing me off.

If you cannot understand that last sentence, then my happy friends, you will not ever understand why people refuse to accept you. And is why you consistently fail at getting what you want.

One day I fear a "Gay Messiah" will rise up, and come shoot the shit with me like a MAN would.....and not whine on TV about how hard it is being "gay", not being the squeaky butthurt wheel who takes away my rights, and replaces them for their own. I might talk to that man, I might agree with that man......well now, I don't reckon I will ever have to worry about that.

After all, passing laws like this only keeps me pissed off, and do NOT interest me in the slightest to "accept" you. In fact, the opposite is always true: It automatically keeps me teaching you are wrong, and I am right. All because you don't have enough sense to fucking talk to people face to face, and not FORCE them to.

Secret Truth:
Being a loud asshole, Gay or Straight, in public, on TV, in the Government, through "Laws", only means people will like you less than they did before.
Secret Truth #2:
Had you pulled your head OUT of your ass, and bought me a beer, and a steak, and sent me some straight porn, I would have considered reconsidering.
Secret Truth #3:
Had you been "normally quiet" and went on with your lives, you would not have the fight on your hands that you do now. But....you insist on NOT doing that, NOT fitting in, NOT being "absorbed" into society. And NOT rocking the fucking boat. So do NOT whine when you are rejected. After all....it wasn't ME that started THIS shit. It was YOU.

YOU are NOT interested in being equal. You are the exact same as FemiNazi's.
You are forcing the "more than equal" issue. You want to be "special", in spite of everyone else, who is not considered such.

As I said in another thread, you have to pay the fucking piper when the bill you ran up comes due, Gay OR Straight. Don't you dare piss and moan when someone makes you pay. After all, YOU bought what you wanted, don't whine about it being delivered in a way you didn't like. By people YOU pissed off.

One day you will learn. That will be, however, a long time from now, looking at this thread. And to think, I talked to some fairly cool "Gay" dudes on here. Evidently....

THEY are the minority.

 

[D_Ireonsyd_Colonrinse]

kingdongilingus writes:

YOU are NOT interested in being equal. You are the exact same as FemiNazi's.
You are forcing the "more than equal" issue. You want to be "special", in spite of everyone else, who is not considered such.

--------------------


I hope everyone can see the raging bullshit homophobia swarming in this junk post.

As if gay people fighting for marriage equality were demanding SPECIAL rights and privileges that nobody else has.

Or adoption rights.



This deadhead also writes:

Had you been "normally quiet" and went on with your lives, you would not have the fight on your hands that you do now.

--------------------


It's beyond depressing to have to argue at this level, where the commentor seems to have a knowledge of gay issues gleaned from the average housewife in the 1960's.

 

[mitchymo]

Dunno who exactly you were addressing but the laws don't exist to your detriment unless they target you specifically.

If your cool with gays being ok and not interfering with you and what you do then thats great but there are those who seek to interfere simply because they don't like it, why should minority groups have to face such contention.

 

[StormfrontFL]

The inclusion of anything I did not personally stamp with my personal approval is useless, and does not improve my general situation, nor represent me.

In other words.....no government I currently pay for has ever represented anyone I know. Including myself.

Instead, like all governments, and the laws they pass, they are considered to only benefit those that....benefit FROM them.

So you have never received any benefit from this government or country? I find that hard to believe. Military benefits perhaps?


"Social Opinions" do change many things.
It is called "Assassination".
It is called "Revolution".
It is called "Civil War". Dongilingus... your side lost GET OVER IT



Otherwise, everything it did would have made a difference for the betterment of the people, and not just a few minority groups.



Note-
Just because you want to be "right", and say you are "right", makes you not "right" at all. It only makes you an asshole, who is self-centered enough to become a second runner-up to Stalin. Bothering Gays does not interest me. Beating on one does if he or they INSIST on pissing me off.


So in your own words you don't see any problem with people beating up those who refuse to sit silently and be oppressed. Don't try to deny it because you stated that people who stand up and refuse to be second class citizens piss you off and it's okay to beat those who piss you off.
If you cannot understand that last sentence, then my happy friends, you will not ever understand why people refuse to accept you. And is why you consistently fail at getting what you want.

One day I fear a "Gay Messiah" will rise up, and come shoot the shit with me like a MAN would.....and not whine on TV about how hard it is being "gay", not being the squeaky butthurt wheel who takes away my rights, and replaces them for their own. I might talk to that man, I might agree with that man......well now, I don't reckon I will ever have to worry about that.

After all, passing laws like this only keeps me pissed off, and do NOT interest me in the slightest to "accept" you. In fact, the opposite is always true: It automatically keeps me teaching you are wrong, and I am right. All because you don't have enough sense to fucking talk to people face to face, and not FORCE them to.

Secret Truth:
Being a loud asshole, Gay or Straight, in public, on TV, in the Government, through "Laws", only means people will like you less than they did before.
Secret Truth #2:
Had you pulled your head OUT of your ass, and bought me a beer, and a steak, and sent me some straight porn, I would have considered reconsidering.
Secret Truth #3:
Had you been "normally quiet" and went on with your lives, you would not have the fight on your hands that you do now.

As I said in another thread, you have to pay the fucking piper when the bill you ran up comes due, Gay OR Straight. Don't you dare piss and moan when someone makes you pay. After all, YOU bought what you wanted, don't whine about it being delivered in a way you didn't like. By people YOU pissed off.

One day you will learn. That will be, however, a long time from now, looking at this thread. And to think, I talked to some fairly cool "Gay" dudes on here. Evidently....

THEY are the minority.

And you have been revealed as a small minded, racist, homophobic knuckle dragging neanderthal.

 

[3664shaken]

As stated before, if a white man is attacked by a black man or men solely because the perpetrator had the desire to hurt a white person then the hate crime law will affect this case as well.

There is idealism and than there is reality.

Idealism makes you feel good but reality is where we live.

Thought/(hate) crimes have been around since 1969 - 40 years - and although we have admissions from criminals that they attacked a person because they are white there has not been a single hate crime prosecuted against a white crime victim.

When an abortion doctor is slain it is considered a hate crime
When an pro-life advocate is slain it is not.

There are numerous examples in the last 40 years of people who commit crimes against a "special" group, not knowing they had this special protection and then getting zinged.

Why is killing a black grand-mother more heinous than killing a white-grandmother?

Why is killing a heterosexual parent more heinous than killing a homosexual parent?

MLK wanted a color blind society, a society that doesn’t judge on skin color, gender, sexual orientation, etc. Hate/thought crime legislation only perpetuates racial and other social unrest.

Should we not all be equal under the law?

 

[Rowan Ravenseed]

I don't know much about the hate crimes act in the states.....

I agree with you shaken that we should all be equal under the law..... but were not and that's the simple fact.... In so many states in the US homosexuals are still not granted equal rights in marriage and are still not permitted to adopt the children of their long term partners because homosexuals are not seen as fit parents.

That issue aside though... the hate crimes act as far as i understand it is there to make an example of people that still believe its ok to execute violence against people of different race creed or color

 

[3664shaken]

That issue aside though... the hate crimes act as far as i understand it is there to make an example of people that still believe its ok to execute violence against people of different race creed or color

Why is killing a black grand-mother more heinous than killing a white-grandmother?

Why is killing a homosexuall parent more heinous than killing a hetrosexual parent?

Why is a white person killing a black worse than a black person killing a white?

MLK wanted a color blind society, a society that doesn’t judge on skin color, gender, sexual orientation, etc. Hate/thought crime legislation only perpetuates racial and other social unrest.

Should we not all be equal under the law?

Until someone can explain it to me I don't see any reason why killing person X should be punished more because X was X and not Y.

All these laws do is increase racial unrest and sexual orientation bigotry, now we have protected classes of people, it's like giving a job to someone solely based on their skin color and not merit.

We don't live in a fair world but legislating unfairness is the antithesis of the ideal.

 

[b.c.]

...That issue aside though... the hate crimes act as far as i understand it is there to make an example of people that still believe its ok to execute violence against people of different race creed or color

That's about it in a nutshell.

Not surprisingly the people who don't see a need for these kinds of laws are usually the same people who deny the history and statistical evidence of hate crimes - incidents that clearly indicate a need for such laws.

They don't believe the laws were necessary in the initial legislation nor for the more recent.

They argue from the position that any law or any legislation, be it in law enforcement, employment, housing, healthcare, anything designed to protect various minorities from discrimination and/or to level the "field" creates a situation of what they call "reverse discrimination", the current position being that hate crime laws create an "inequality under the law" for those who are not minorities.

But rather than argue the point from that obvious position the Republicans in Washington (and their supporters here in this thread) have tried to postulate from some bogus "thought crime" argument. At least we've dispensed with that and have gotten to the "meat" of the matter, eh?

 

[3664shaken]

Not surprisingly the people who don't see a need for these kinds of laws are usually the same people who deny the history and statistical evidence of hate crimes - incidents that clearly indicate a need for such laws.

HUH - we have 40 years of history and it is obvious that favor one class of victim over the other has not lessened thought crimes.

We also know that these crimes are unfairly prosecuted, ignoring whole swaths of the community.

We also know that once federal dollars are brought in justice is swayed rather than served.

It is the intent or what are you thinking crime proponents that must ignore history and the data.

Please get real.

They don't believe the laws were necessary in the initial legislation nor for the more recent.

Should we not all be equal under the law?

MLK wanted a color blind society, a society that doesn’t judge on skin color, gender, sexual orientation, etc. Hate/thought crime legislation only perpetuates racial and other social unrest.

Why is killing a black grand-mother more heinous than killing a white-grandmother?

Why is killing a homosexual parent more heinous than killing a heterosexual parent?

Why is a white person killing a black worse than a black person killing a white?

The intent of the perpetrator is just one of the many insurmountable obstacles that must be hurdled to support such nonsense.

Only a ardent racist would think that a death of a black grandmother is worth more than a death of a Hispanic grandmother but this is exactly what these thought crimes put forth.

We are NOT equal
We are NOT viewed by a color blind justice system

We are to be judged by characteristics that are beyond our control such as skin color, gender, handicaps, etc.

Anyone who agrees with this is a blatant bigot.

 

[Pendlum]

After reading all of the posts in this thread it seems as if some of the posters believe that our legal system is fair and unbiased. Ha! Judges and police officers can and have allowed their own feelings to affect criminal prosecution. How many times have we heard the jokes about the slow police response time when a crime happens in a black neighborhood. Here's a news flash...it's not a joke. This is not what matters now. What does matter is that the hate crime law will enforce a mandatory penalty so that a homophobic judge doesn't have the opportunity to sentence a gay basher to 50 hours of community service as a punishment for kicking a man and breaking his ribs or causing a concussion.

Says the man who assures me that I would be protected equally under the hate crime law.

 

[HazelGod]

I categorically reject any legislation that codifies special treatment for any demographic subset of the citizenry. Period.

The longer we insist on having divisive privileges written into our rules, the longer our society will take to reach egalitarian footing.

 

[StormfrontFL]

There is idealism and than there is reality.

Idealism makes you feel good but reality is where we live.

Thought/(hate) crimes have been around since 1969 - 40 years - and although we have admissions from criminals that they attacked a person because they are white there has not been a single hate crime prosecuted against a white crime victim.

When an abortion doctor is slain it is considered a hate crime
When an pro-life advocate is slain it is not.

There are numerous examples in the last 40 years of people who commit crimes against a "special" group, not knowing they had this special protection and then getting zinged.

Why is killing a black grand-mother more heinous than killing a white-grandmother?

Why is killing a heterosexual parent more heinous than killing a homosexual parent?

MLK wanted a color blind society, a society that doesn’t judge on skin color, gender, sexual orientation, etc. Hate/thought crime legislation only perpetuates racial and other social unrest.

Should we not all be equal under the law?

We should all be equal under the law unfortunately , we are not. Until man can rid himself of hatred and bias, other means must be available to see that justice can prevail.Disparity in justice doesn't only apply when it comes to race it also applies to wealth. How many celebrities have received a slap on the wrist for offenses that you or I might have received jail time for?


As for some of your other remarks...I can't recall ever reading about a pro life activist that was targeted on various web sites calling for their death. If a person is killed and that person just happens to be pro life then how is that the same as a doctor who is specifically the target?


As for the white victim of a black criminal there is already a system in place to deal with this. Punishments for black criminals have always been significantly harsher than the ones for white. It's sad that this is the way it is.

 

[StormfrontFL]

Says the man who assures me that I would be protected equally under the hate crime law.

If I, a black man, targeted you, a white man, and attacked you and all the time shouted how much I hate white people then yes, it should be considered a hate crime. If I just went after you because I was angry that you took my parking space then that would not be a racially motivated crime because then your race was not the motivating factor. If you attacked me because I am gay and you hate gays then that is a hate crime. If you attacked me because we disagree on an issue then that is not a hate crime. Simple.

 

[StormfrontFL]

I categorically reject any legislation that codifies special treatment for any demographic subset of the citizenry. Period.

The longer we insist on having divisive privileges written into our rules, the longer our society will take to reach egalitarian footing.

Same argument was made regarding the Civil Rights Act in the 60s.

 

[Pendlum]

If I, a black man, targeted you, a white man, and attacked you and all the time shouted how much I hate white people then yes, it should be considered a hate crime. If I just went after you because I was angry that you took my parking space then that would not be a racially motivated crime because then your race was not the motivating factor. If you attacked me because I am gay and you hate gays then that is a hate crime. If you attacked me because we disagree on an issue then that is not a hate crime. Simple.

Again, I've been playing devil's advocate here, but my point was that on one hand, you say that it will equally protect me, as a white guy, and then on the other hand say that current legislation doesn't protect others equally. Now, I haven't read the bill, so I'm not sure how much it forces someones hand for applying the law, and that is the only way I can see it correcting the wrong behavior of judges etc. But if it doesn't do that, and still gives prudence to judges and prosecutors (which is my guess how it works), then it doesn't do much to correct that problem, which is what you said is what makes the system not fair, if I understood what you said earlier correctly.

Now maybe a judge in Washington may be more likely to apply the law against a black man in my hypothetical case, but I think in regions where the black population is significant, I think they would be much more prudent in using it. I'm not saying that is right, but I think it is likely, since judges usually want to look good for re-election or whatever it is they do.

And of course my assumptions about the law could be wrong. They are ASSumptions after all. :wink:

 

[HazelGod]

Same argument was made regarding the Civil Rights Act in the 60s.

And...?

 

[mitchymo]

I think it is pretty sad that some people oppose hate crime legislation on the grounds that it is somehow prejudice towards non minority groups, pretty ironic.
It is there for the benefit of all regardless of who benefits the most.

It is like the wealthy in the UK whining that they have to contribute to an NHS when they would prefer not to contribute and simply pay out their own pocket whenever THEY needed medical treatment, they can afford it, others cannot.

The legislation does'nt give special treatment any more than it simply levels the playing field.

 

[HazelGod]

It is like the wealthy in the UK whining that they have to contribute to an NHS

It's nothing like that at all. This is not a proactive social program, it's a set of discriminatory criminal sentencing mandates. It applies to criminal suspects only, not to everyone.

The legislation does'nt give special treatment any more than it simply levels the playing field.

How, exactly, does a law that changes the sentencing for commission of a criminal offense based on some arbitrary demographic characteristic of the victim "level the playing field?" Your statement implies that people who commit violent offenses against people of a particular persuasion are somehow currently advantaged by the status quo, a notion that's ludicrous on its face.

 

[StormfrontFL]

HUH - we have 40 years of history and it is obvious that favor one class of victim over the other has not lessened thought crimes.

We also know that these crimes are unfairly prosecuted, ignoring whole swaths of the community.

We also know that once federal dollars are brought in justice is swayed rather than served.

It is the intent or what are you thinking crime proponents that must ignore history and the data.

Please get real.



Should we not all be equal under the law? We should, but we aren't

MLK wanted a color blind society, a society that doesn’t judge on skin color, gender, sexual orientation, etc. Hate/thought crime legislation only perpetuates racial and other social unrest. Hate would exist without the law but the law is meant to lessen the violence

Why is killing a black grand-mother more heinous than killing a white-grandmother? It's not unless that black grandmother was specifically chosen because the murderer wanted to kill a black person, any black person for no other reason than not being white.

Why is killing a homosexual parent more heinous than killing a heterosexual parent? Again, it's not unless the killer specifically wanted to kill any gay person they could

Why is a white person killing a black worse than a black person killing a white? You get the point by now, don't you?

The intent of the perpetrator is just one of the many insurmountable obstacles that must be hurdled to support such nonsense. If the perpetrator was heard yelling "Die faggot" or "Take that nigger" then it goes beyond a simple crime. It becomes a hate crime.

Only a ardent racist would think that a death of a black grandmother is worth more than a death of a Hispanic grandmother but this is exactly what these thought crimes put forth. Not even close! All murders are horrific regardless of the victim's ethnicity. It's the impetus behind the crime that is judged by this legislation.

We are NOT equal
We are NOT viewed by a color blind justice system

We are to be judged by characteristics that are beyond our control such as skin color, gender, handicaps, etc.

Anyone who agrees with this is a blatant bigot.

Unfortunately the world is not perfect and we are all judged by aspects of our being. I was once introduced to someone I had spoken to on the phone many times. The person I met found it hard to believe that I was the person he had spoken to. He stated that he had believed me to be a young white guy because of the manner of my speech. He had a preconceived idea of black males speaking in street slang and of not being able to carry on a professional conversation. This is minor. Think of the question about what would you do if you were walking down the street and a couple of black guys started walking toward you. A large number of people said that they would get nervous. Simply put, people get judged every day by things beyond their control. It would be nice if this weren't so. Before you call me a bigot you should know that my grandmother is Hispanic, my paternal grandfather is Greek, my mother is black and Native American, and my boyfriend is white. I try to hate no one except those who embrace hate and perpetrate violence.