Our great President

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

wants to veto a law against hate crimes committed against "gender" or "sexual orientation"

Why would he want to veto that bill??

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/05/...ill/index.html

I love how Mr. Bush looks out for the best interest in "his" country.

I've been following this pretty closely, and even the whole run-up to it was sick. The "family" groups have been lying about what the bill means, twisting transcripts to make it look like an anti-Christian bill and so forth. They've completely made the bill into something it wasn't to scare people into opposing it.

Andrew Sullivan says it best. It's disgusting, and there is no argument for opposing it outside of simply disliking, or hating gays.

[The Bid]

Ist America, if they can be gay, you can dislike them.

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by The Bid

Ist America, if they can be gay, you can dislike them.

Yep, and according to the federal government (post-veto), it's still more okay to kill them for being gay than it is to kill an African-American of a Catholic just for being black or Catholic.

It's not about liking them or not.

[The Bid]

I would tend to agree with that. I dont want queer thrown in my face. If someone wants to be gay, they should do it on their own time, in the privacy of their own home. I dont want to explain to a child why 2 men are holding hands in the street.

Im glad he knocked the bill out.

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by The Bid

I would tend to agree with that. I dont want queer thrown in my face. If someone wants to be gay, they should do it on their own time, in the privacy of their own home. I dont want to explain to a child why 2 men are holding hands in the street.

Im glad he knocked the bill out.

Well, of course that's your prerogative to feel that way -- but that has nothing at all to do with the bill that was passed in the House yesterday. Our hate crime laws protect subsets of people based on their personal characteristics -- being black, a Muslim, a Christian, a Mexican, you name it -- they are protected from being attacked based on who they are. It doesn't matter if I want Islam "thrown in my face" or not, that's not the point of the law. This law, whether passed or not, will have zero effect on whether you have you explain to a child why two men are holding hands on the street. You'd still have to before the bill, and you'll still have to after the bill.

I haven't heard (from anyone) a good argument about why homosexuals should not be included under federal hate-crime laws.

[The Bid]

Gays arent a race or religion, its a choice. I dont get any special privledge for being straight. What if a group of crazed gays attacked a guy like me, why wouldnt that be a straight hate crime?

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by The Bid

Gays arent a race or religion, its a choice.

Are you kidding me? Whether or not you think homosexuality is a choice is irrelevant. Are you even thinking before you type? You're saying homosexuals choose to be gay, but Christians don't choose to be Christians? Religion is very much a choice, and still protected by these laws. So that argument it inherently flawed and nonsensical.

Originally Posted by The Bid

What if a group of crazed gays attacked a guy like me, why wouldnt that be a straight hate crime?

Does this happen often? No, in fact I'm not sure I've ever heard a story about a crazed group of gays attacking a man for being straight. Using that argument is setting up a worst-case scenario fantasy hypothetical straw man so that it's easier to tear down.

Hate crimes terrorize entire groups of people. When someone assaults a homosexual on the street just for being a homosexual in Chicago, it creates paralyzing fear in all homosexuals in Chicago when they walk on the street afterwards. FBI statistics show that 1 in every 6 hate crimes is motivated by sexuality. So while your straw man argument might seem like a logical conclusion to you, the fact remains that these things are already happening all over this country. And plenty of people yesterday exposed themselves in basically saying, "Yep, it's happening, and we don't care."

[estreetposse]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

Well, of course that's your prerogative to feel that way -- but that has nothing at all to do with the bill that was passed in the House yesterday. Our hate crime laws protect subsets of people based on their personal characteristics -- being black, a Muslim, a Christian, a Mexican, you name it -- they are protected from being attacked based on who they are. It doesn't matter if I want Islam "thrown in my face" or not, that's not the point of the law. This law, whether passed or not, will have zero effect on whether you have you explain to a child why two men are holding hands on the street. You'd still have to before the bill, and you'll still have to after the bill.

I haven't heard (from anyone) a good argument about why homosexuals should not be included under federal hate-crime laws.

Why is it more of a crime to hurt or kill someone(gay,black,muslim,etc.) out of hate then it is for sh!ts and giggles(premeditated randomness). Assault or murder(premeditated) should be the same charge no matter the race, religion or creed. Labeling things in our society has gotten way out of control...why do we label anything? To be able to separate and organize as we need just like socks. The more protesting, the more laws that are enacted, the more we feel we aren't being treated fairly = the more our everyday rights are being taken away as a whole society. Keep crying about how people are oppressed, treated unfairly, don't have equal rights and guess what...there won't be any rights to be bitching about cause Big Bro ain't far off from snatching them away. It's time the American people bent over and used their good eyes!!!

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by estreetposse

Why is it more of a crime to hurt or kill someone(gay,black,muslim,etc.) out of hate then it is for sh!ts and giggles(premeditated randomness). Assault or murder(premeditated) should be the same charge no matter the race, religion or creed. Labeling things in our society has gotten way out of control...why do we label anything? To be able to separate and organize as we need just like socks. The more protesting, the more laws that are enacted, the more we feel we aren't being treated fairly = the more our everyday rights are being taken away as a whole society. Keep crying about how people are oppressed, treated unfairly, don't have equal rights and guess what...there won't be any rights to be bitching about cause Big Bro ain't far off from snatching them away. It's time the American people bent over and used their good eyes!!!

Only for this reason: Hate crimes terrorize entire groups of people.

I'm perfectly fine with your assessment that hate crimes shouldn't exist at all. That's a valid argument, and one that I have no problem supporting. Getting rid of them wholly is one thing, but if we're going to keep them and let certain groups have them (religion, races) but not a group that makes up ~16% of all hate crimes, something is very wrong.

[SentToStud]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

I've been following this pretty closely, and even the whole run-up to it was sick. The "family" groups have been lying about what the bill means, twisting transcripts to make it look like an anti-Christian bill and so forth. They've completely made the bill into something it wasn't to scare people into opposing it.

Andrew Sullivan says it best. It's disgusting, and there is no argument for opposing it outside of simply disliking, or hating gays.

I don't agree with Sullivan, though he may be right.

I think the real reason is the same reason that I found my tongue on the floor the other night as the Repub candidates (save Rudy G.) lined up like trained pigs to state they were in favor of overturning Roe v Wade. I expected at least a few of them to give a little more insight as to why they would support overturning a pretty important law but the short, straight "Yes" response was obviously directed at the Christian far-right.

The same applies to Bush here. It's a shame the Republicans have degenerated into what they've become. It's fairly stunning how quickly they have been able to start chipping away at Roe. Really, how the heck could you expect Bush to do anything different?

[somerfrost]

Originally Posted by SentToStud

I don't agree with Sullivan, though he may be right.

I think the real reason is the same reason that I found my tongue on the floor the other night as the Repub candidates (save Rudy G.) lined up like trained pigs to state they were in favor of overturning Roe v Wade. I expected at least a few of them to give a little more insight as to why they would support overturning a pretty important law but the short, straight "Yes" response was obviously directed at the Christian far-right.

The same applies to Bush here. It's a shame the Republicans have degenerated into what they've become. It's fairly stunning how quickly they have been able to start chipping away at Roe. Really, how the heck could you expect Bush to do anything different?

I think abortion is a far different issue than treating all people with respect...I'm about as far to the left as anyone here, a proud feminist and yet I oppose abortion...that is a very difficult issue for many folks!

[timmgirvan]

The "Violent Crimes Act of 1994" pretty much covers protections to any group! I really don't see that we need another Bill....We could just enforce the ones already on the books!

[Cajungator26]

Originally Posted by Bababooyee

BTW, I prefer "breeder" over "straight".

k, thanx!

That you are!