Our great President

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by The Bid

Im not reaching at all, if a straight couple was having sex in a park youd run them off, say something, or slap someone. If a gay couple was having sex in a park youd run them off, say something, or slap someone. Brian is saying thats a hate crime. I say its a well deserved beating.

Um, not so much. Well played again though.

Seeing two men holding hands on a street, and following then home and killing them after screaming anti-gay obscenities at them on the street is a hate crime.

Running people off or "saying something" or "slapping someone" is not a hate crime, even if it's a Black Jewish South African Homosexual you just slapped.

Let me go get you some examples of what a hate crime looks like, since these concepts are clearly all hypothetical in your head.

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by Bababooyee

It may not be a "hate crime" as you define it, but I can promise you that some DA somewhere would prosecute it as such. And that is a risk when it comes to the whole idea of hate crimes...instead of prosecuting the criminal act, you are also getting into, at best, inferring how an accused thinks about some groups and adding additional punishment for how one thinks. And once we start policing thoughts...I'm short on time, but I am sure you see where I am going here.

Of course I see where you're coming from. The run-up to the vote has been interesting to watch because I've been following it and what both sides have been saying about it.

I think that it speaks to your earlier post about the spirit of fairness and how other laws are already on the books. Of course there is always the potential that these laws will get interpreted very loosely by a DA, but there is the potential that they will get loosely interpreted when regarding race and religion as well, which is why I think your earlier post was very important. If there are no hate crime laws at all, that is very much one thing -- but if they continue to exist to protect certain subsets of the population, then I see no reason why they should not also protect a group who accounts for ~16% of all crimes that are already considered hate crimes (at the state level in states that already have these statutes on the books).

I just find it disingenuous that there are so many groups who are already covered by these laws that have people who say "all crimes are hate crimes," but do nothing to get their existing protections scrapped from the books. Those sorts of actions are what make proponents of this bill see those who vote against it and the president who veto it as homophobes or bigots -- because they are denying protection to a group who is very much attacked in the United States based on who they are, while they are enjoying protection from attacks based on who they are. Something doesn't add up there, and if it's not about homophobia or bigotry then what is it as long as we have other existing protected subsets on the books?

[Downthestretch55]

I've stayed out of this thread for a while, though I've enjoyed reading the opinions expressed.
I am not gay, but I have friends and family that are.
It seems to me that "hate" has origins in "fear".
When the fear is addressed, maybe the hate will be resolved.
Not likely, but one only hopes.
Here's an interesting article:
http://advocate.com/exclusive_detail_ektid44550.asp

The Jerry Falwells know exactly the "buttons" to push.
Unfortunately, the effectiveness of their "arguements" is equally as obvious and pathetic.


Also, if someone would go to page 3 of this and bring up "Honeybee news", since whatever I post doesn't come back to the top for some reason, and type a response, it would be much appreciated.


Now, lets go RACIN'!

[somerfrost]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

Of course I see where you're coming from. The run-up to the vote has been interesting to watch because I've been following it and what both sides have been saying about it.

I think that it speaks to your earlier post about the spirit of fairness and how other laws are already on the books. Of course there is always the potential that these laws will get interpreted very loosely by a DA, but there is the potential that they will get loosely interpreted when regarding race and religion as well, which is why I think your earlier post was very important. If there are no hate crime laws at all, that is very much one thing -- but if they continue to exist to protect certain subsets of the population, then I see no reason why they should not also protect a group who accounts for ~16% of all crimes that are already considered hate crimes (at the state level in states that already have these statutes on the books).

I just find it disingenuous that there are so many groups who are already covered by these laws that have people who say "all crimes are hate crimes," but do nothing to get their existing protections scrapped from the books. Those sorts of actions are what make proponents of this bill see those who vote against it and the president who veto it as homophobes or bigots -- because they are denying protection to a group who is very much attacked in the United States based on who they are, while they are enjoying protection from attacks based on who they are. Something doesn't add up there, and if it's not about homophobia or bigotry then what is it as long as we have other existing protected subsets on the books?

I'm staying out of this argument because when I see hate and ignorance I tend to call folks on it and that only degrades the quality of a debate, Baba brings up good points and I agree that in a perfect world, we wouldn't need "hate crime laws" but obviously they are on the books so we have a simple choice: repeal them all or cover all "at risk" groups. When I read "being gay is a choice" or "they bring violence on themselves", there isn't much of a constructive nature I can say...children aren't born to hate they have to be taught, obviously some folks have been taught well and sadly, will probably pass it on to their kids. It remains a mystery to me why who sleeps with who is more important to folks than who is abusing, beating or killing who.

[The Bid]

Its mental abuse being raised in a gay family.

[somerfrost]

Originally Posted by The Bid

Its mental abuse being raised in a gay family.

You really are a bigot aren't you? Why do you hate gays so much? And please, don't bother to deny what your posts clearly show...

[The Bid]

I dont hate gays at all

I think its mental abuse for a child to grow up in a gay family, with two dads. Its hard enough being a child without trying to figure out your sexual orientation, or explain stuff to kids at school

I like gays, what not to wear, and sheer genius are two of my favorite tv shows

[somerfrost]

Originally Posted by The Bid

I dont hate gays at all

I think its mental abuse for a child to grow up in a gay family, with two dads. Its hard enough being a child without trying to figure out your sexual orientation, or explain stuff to kids at school

I like gays, what not to wear, and sheer genius are two of my favorite tv shows

Again, kids have to learn to hate...most have little difficulty accepting UNTIL their parents and other adults poison their minds. Your sexual orientation is your sexual orientation...if a child is "straight" he will grow up that way regardless of who his parents are, a "straight" child raised by gay parents will have no more difficulty with his/her identity than any other...in fact, he/she is likely to have a better understanding. The "some of my best friends are..." smokescreen never works, your earlier posts have given you away...you are a hate-filled bigot if those posts are actually how you feel (obviously on the net a person can pretend...like Repent use to do).

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by The Bid

Its mental abuse being raised in a gay family.

That is the most idiotic, stupid, ignorant comment i have ever heard.


a 1,000,000,000,000,000 times more idiotic than anything PG1985 ever said.


How many gay people with children do you know?

[SentToStud]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

That is the most idiotic, stupid, ignorant comment i have ever heard.


a [B]1,000,000,000,000,000 [/b]times more idiotic than anything PG1985 ever said.


How many gay people with children do you know?

that's a Zillion!

I've heard gays and non-gays use the "F" word, blacks and non-blacks use the "N" word, etc.... I don't use that kind of language and we wouldn't tolerate it in our home from our kids or from guests whether they be gay, black or whatever.

I could care less what people do in private or, for that matter, in public. I might not care for it, I might think it's funny and laugh, whatever.

Personally, I don't care all that much for 'special language' hate crime legislation. It seems like laws that apply to everyone should be enough. Frankly, I credit/blame lobbyists and other lawyers for the legislation.

I don't think you can legislate tolerance and decency.

[Cajungator26]

Originally Posted by SentToStud

that's a Zillion!

I've heard gays and non-gays use the "F" word, blacks and non-blacks use the "N" word, etc.... I don't use that kind of language and we wouldn't tolerate it in our home from our kids or from guests whether they be gay, black or whatever.

I could care less what people do in private or, for that matter, in public. I might not care for it, I might think it's funny and laugh, whatever.

Personally, I don't care all that much for 'special language' hate crime legislation. It seems like laws that apply to everyone should be enough. Frankly, I credit/blame lobbyists and other lawyers for the legislation.

I don't think you can legislate tolerance and decency.

I couldn't agree more.