Hate Crime

[Turbo]

Ok, that goes beyond a hate crime. That's just shear....um.....let's see, what's a word worse than hate? Oh yeah, God tends to use the word "abhor" when He wants to really stress hate. So that should be considered an "Abhor crime"!

:chuckle:

 

[Free-Agent Smith]

The guidelines used by the law are way too broad. They should be kept more narrow so as to make it seem less biased on how sentencing is issued. When the law started allowing people to use so many different types of excuses to justify peoples actions our law became more of a bargaining unit than justice.

 

[Lovejoy]

How would you present proof of a hate crime?

I don't think you can! Which is why you would base the designation (risk of re-offending) on their history of "hate talk" and violence toward a specific group. It is just a risk analysis, not really proof. The whole term "hate crime" is subjective, and would have to be discarded completely. You have to come up with term implying a general malevolence toward specific groups that increases the risk of violence toward those groups. And then use those guys to do dental care for ill-tempered Great White sharks.

 

[Lovejoy]

The guidelines used by the law are way too broad. They should be kept more narrow so as to make it seem less biased on how sentencing is issued. When the law started allowing people to use so many different types of excuses to justify peoples actions our law became more of a bargaining unit than justice.

OOOOH, that is exactly what I am trying to say! Perfect. I wish I had not already given you rep points.

 

[PureX]

When I was a kid, my dad really HATED Casius Clay (he wasn't Mohommed Ali, yet, back then). He'd never met Casius Clay, of course, but he really hated him. I remember that whenever Casius Clay came on the TV, and began his trash talking about how he was so pretty, and how he was the greatest, and how he was going to humiliate his opponents in the ring, my dad would get all red in the face and say things like "somebody's gonna kill that nigger, and I don't blame 'em!" ... "Listen to that arrogant son-of-a___!" I was just a kid, and had never even met a black man. I had only met one black girl, who went to my grade school, and I really liked her. I even had a crush on her until my mother humiliated me for saying so. At that age I couldn't understand why my dad hated Casius Clay so much just because he said funny stuff on the TV. Everybody said funny stuff on the TV, that's what TV was for, wasn't it?

But now that I'm an adult, I know why my dad hated Casius Clay so much. Casius Clay represented, to my dad, every "nigger" my dad ever had a bad encounter with. And my dad grew up in downtown Cleveland, so I imagine that he'd probably had a few bad encounters with black men or boys while he was growing up. And unfortunately, my dad hadn't forgiven whatever bad encounters he might have had, and instead, he was fostering a huge resentment against a whole race of people based on the very irrational assumption that all black people must be like the one or two black people that may have mistreated him once a long time ago. And Mohommed Ali (I mean Casius Clay) was to my dad the perfect icon for this festering resentment-turned-to-hatred. And not only that, Casius Clay KNEW that he was the perfect icon for every white man's festering resentment turned to hatred, and he pranced around all the more arrogantly because of it. And my dad knew that Casius Clay knew this, and that he was rubbing my dad's own racial bigotry in his and every other white bigot's face.

None of this is a crime, though. It becomes a crime when someone lets their irrational resentment and hatred for a whole race, or ethnicity, or religion, or gender, or sexual orientation, or political group overwhelm them, and they act out in a criminal way. Just as the words imply, "hate crime" is any crime based on an irrational hatred for a whole group of people.

I'm proud to say, by the way, that my dad no longer holds on to his old resentment against black people, as he once did, and I have not heard him speak against blacks or any particular grouping of people in many years. I don't know when or why he decided to face his own racism, and let go of it, but he must have done so, because I don't see any evidence of it in him anymore.

 

[Lovejoy]

When I was a kid, my dad really HATED Casius Clay (he wasn't Mohommed Ali, yet, back then). He'd never met Casius Clay, of course, but he really hated him. I remember that whenever Casius Clay came on the TV, and began his trash talking about how he was so pretty, and how he was the greatest, and how he was going to humiliate his opponents in the ring, my dad would get all red in the face and say things like "somebody's gonna kill that nigger, and I don't blame 'em!" ... "Listen to that arrogant son-of-a___!" I was just a kid, and had never even met a black man. I had only met one black girl, who went to my grade school, and I really liked her. I even had a crush on her until my mother humiliated me for saying so. At that age I couldn't understand why my dad hated Casius Clay so much just because he said funny stuff on the TV. Everybody said funny stuff on the TV, that's what TV was for, wasn't it?

But now that I'm an adult, I know why my dad hated Casius Clay so much. Casius Clay represented, to my dad, every "nigger" my dad ever had a bad encounter with. And my dad grew up in downtown Cleveland, so I imagine that he'd probably had a few bad encounters with black men or boys while he was growing up. And unfortunately, my dad hadn't forgiven whatever bad encounters he might have had, and instead, he was fostering a huge resentment against a whole race of people based on the very irrational assumption that all black people must be like the one or two black people that may have mistreated him once a long time ago. And Mohommed Ali (I mean Casius Clay) was to my dad the perfect icon for this festering resentment-turned-to-hatred. And not only that, Casius Clay KNEW that he was the perfect icon for every white man's festering resentment turned to hatred, and he pranced around all the more arrogantly because of it. And my dad knew that Casius Clay knew this, and that he was rubbing my dad's own racial bigotry in his and every other white bigot's face.

None of this is a crime, though. It becomes a crime when someone lets their irrational resentment and hatred for a whole race, or ethnicity, or religion, or gender, or sexual orientation, or political group overwhelm them, and they act out in a criminal way. Just as the words imply, "hate crime" is any crime based on an irrational hatred for a whole group of people.

I'm proud to say, by the way, that my dad no longer holds on to his old resentment against black people, as he once did, and I have not heard him speak against blacks or any particular grouping of people in many years. I don't know when or why he decided to face his own racism, and let go of it, but he must have done so, because I don't see any evidence of it in him anymore.

Yeah, my dad too. Honestly, from a spiritual perspective, I don't think that sort of things leads to much violence. I think "hate" inside (a general sort) leads to violence, and bigotry becomes an excuse. Just as research shows that alcohol is often consumed after a crime as an excuse for the crime. Philip Yancy has a pretty good book on Grace that talks about his growing up in a segregated church, and on how he overcame bigotry. He also talks about the ones that never overcame it, and on how they where often the ones that were just filled with unforgiveness and hate in general. Good post.

 

[beanieboy]

There are hate crimes in place for religious affiliation, and race. If you were killed by a group because you were Christian, the murderer could be charged with hate crime legislation.

I believe the reason it became an issue was that they wanted to add sexual orientation to the law.

 

[Free-Agent Smith]

"Hate" shouldnt be an issue of whether or not something is a crime. Stealing is stealing. Assault is assault. Auto theft is auto theft. Murder is murder.

 

[Lovejoy]

"Hate" shouldnt be an issue of whether or not something is a crime. Stealing is stealing. Assault is assault. Auto theft is auto theft. Murder is murder.

It does establish motive, though, and is therefore relevant to prosecution. Or so Law and Order reruns would have me believe.

 

[philosophizer]

Ok, that goes beyond a hate crime. That's just shear....um.....let's see, what's a word worse than hate? Oh yeah, God tends to use the word "abhor" when He wants to really stress hate. So that should be considered an "Abhor crime"!

Yes, Turbo certainly has a dangerous mind doesn't he?

 

[Zakath]

"Hate" shouldnt be an issue of whether or not something is a crime. Stealing is stealing. Assault is assault. Auto theft is auto theft. Murder is murder.

"Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery:
But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart." Mt. 5:27-27

Jesus of Nazareth seems to take very different line than you do regarding emotions and crimes (sins). It seems he taught that entertaining emotions like hate or lust were equivalent to committing a sinful action :think:

 

[philosophizer]

If sins = crimes, that is. :think:

 

[PureX]

There are reasons that "hate crimes" carry a heavier penalty. One is that a hate-crime is not just a crime against a person, it's a crime against the whole ideal of freedom and justice for all. If I break into a neighbor's house and trash the place looking for stuff to steal, that's a crime of greed and opportunity against my neighbor. But if I break into his house and trash the place because I'm trying to chase him out of my neighborhood, because I'm a racist and he's of some other race, that's a crime against the very ideals by which we all live. That's a crime not only against my neighbor, but against the civil freedoms and civil rights of every citizen in the nation.

Also, there are practical reasons. Sadly, when neighborhoods begin to mix, it often happens that the racists already living there want to intimidate the new race moving in by perpetraiting criminal acts. In the past, these racists knew that if the crimes were misdemeanors, they would suffer little punishment and so could repeat offend until they drove the people they wanted out, out. To put a stop to this, some misdemeanors were designated "hate-crimes" and carried a much higher penalty than usual.

 

[PureX]

Sins are not crimes, and crimes are not sins. MANY Christians do not understand why this is so, and why it's very important that it remain so.

 

[philosophizer]

Sins are not crimes, and crimes are not sins. MANY Christians do not understand why this is so, and why it's very important that it remain so.

That's really the main issue here, isn't it? That "crime" is a term that refers to a sort of action or deed while "sins" have more to do with what is in a persons heart.

 

[Lovejoy]

That's really the main issue here, isn't it? That "crime" is a term that refers to a sort of action or deed while "sins" have more to do with what is in a persons heart.

...and while the Blood of Christ releases us from the penalty (Judgement) for what is in our heart, it does not release us from the penalty for our actions on earth, as determined by earthly judges. Exactly.

 

[PureX]

Actually, the difference is that crimes are not the result of religious or moral judgemnt, but are instead the result of the need for intra-social protections. "Crimes" are what we call it when one citizen infringes unfairly on the EQUAL rights and freedoms of another citizen. Sins are entirely different. They are subjective religious taboos based on a whole collection of circumstances, myths, traditions, scripture, and wishful thinking. We hace civil laws to protect us both from the ideologies of others, and so that we will have the freedom to follow our own ideologies as far as that is allowable while still protecting us from each other. Civil law has nothing to do with religious moral codes, except to protect them, and to protect us from them.

 

[Zakath]

If sins = crimes, that is. :think:

You're implying that they're not considered crimes, at least by you religionists? :think:

 

[beanieboy]

"Hate" shouldnt be an issue of whether or not something is a crime. Stealing is stealing. Assault is assault. Auto theft is auto theft. Murder is murder.

Stealing a can of soup to feed your starving children is the same as stealing a car, and should have equal sentence?
Torturing a child to death should have the same penalty as hitting a kid that ran out into the street and died?

 

[philosophizer]

Actually, the difference is that crimes are not the result of religious or moral judgemnt, but are instead the result of the need for intra-social protections. "Crimes" are what we call it when one citizen infringes unfairly on the EQUAL rights and freedoms of another citizen.

Yup. Crime means that someone is treading on the "rights" that society establishes to manage our freedoms. And we should note that freedoms do not strictly equal rights.

Sins are entirely different. They are subjective religious taboos based on a whole collection of circumstances, myths, traditions, scripture, and wishful thinking.

Um... okay, sure. Or we could just say that it's what's in your heart, ya know, like I said.

We hace civil laws to protect us both from the ideologies of others, and so that we will have the freedom to follow our own ideologies as far as that is allowable while still protecting us from each other.

Fine.

Civil law has nothing to do with religious moral codes, except to protect them, and to protect us from them.

We all have freedoms. I have the freedom to steal all your stuff. You have the freedom to try to stop me. But when we get to "societies," those conflicted freedoms get kinda messy. So societies invent "rights" to govern our natural freedoms. And "crimes" are infractions upon those rights.