
Originally Posted by
Bluegrass
Sparta, you have it right.
I would support "hate crime" legislation if it covered all acts of assault on other human beings. However, naming it "hate crime" would be a huge redundancy.
Some who are against hate crime legislation are in a lose/lose situation, no matter many good points they illustrate about how it undermines justice by making penaltys different, based on race and sexual orientation, minimizing other victims of violence.
Under the current political landscape of big party loonery, if someone says they oppose "hate crime" legislation, one political faction paints them as anti-(insert demographic here). They will bend and twist that person's intention of promoting a fair justice system by playing to the racially paranoid, distorting that person's postion.
The other political faction will give this person a bad name. They too oppose "hate crime" legislation, however, their intentions will be rooted in their fear and hatred of (insert demographic here).
It's a lose/lose situation for the rational, objective person who wants to see justice apply the same way to every person, regardless of what demographic they are in. The Republicrat machine shreds logic and the byproduct is irrational, reactionary spin that is neither rooted in reality or logical when applied to the notion of true justice.
Bookmarks