Religious And Civil Rights Groups Call For Hate Crime Hearings

[cbayer]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/25/religious-and-civil-rights-groups-hate-crime-hearings_n_1829076.html

Religion News Service | By Chris Lisee
Posted: 08/25/2012 8:10 am Updated: 08/25/2012 8:10 am


Members of the Sikh community attend a vigil to commemorate the victims of the Wisconsin Sikh Temple shooting and other hate crimes Wednesday, Aug. 8, 2012 in New York's Union Square. (AP Photo/John Minchillo)

(RNS) Amid a rash of recent attacks that are being investigated as hate crimes, a coalition of more than 150 organizations is calling on the Senate Judiciary Committee to conduct hearings next month with the aim of revamping hate crime legislation.

Led by the Sikh Coalition, the group of civil rights and religious organizations issued a letter on August 21 urging committee chairman Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., and ranking member Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, to look into hate crimes and hate groups in the United States.

The letter noted that the shooter that killed six at a Wisconsin Sikh temple, or gurdwara, in August had ties to hate groups. It also cited 10 Islamic institutions in seven states that have been vandalized, shot at, or burned in the past month.

"We want to do everything in our power to make sure what happened in Oak Creek never happens to anyone again," said Rajdeep Singh, director of law and policy for the Sikh Coalition.

more at link

[eqfan592]

1. I'll be honest and say that I'm not a fan of hate crime legislation.

A crime is a crime, and tacking on more jail time for specific motivations just doesn't strike me as being a Good Idea for a variety of reasons.

"Given the persistence of hate crimes and sheer number of hate groups in the United States, we want our policymakers to be proactive about uprooting bigotry in the United States."

I sympathize greatly, but the sad fact is that you can't legislate away bigotry. If we start to crack down on these groups, we are likely to cement the bigotry in their minds and the minds of their children. Better ensure that their children get a quality education and exposed to different ideas outside of their home as much as possible.

But that's just my opinion.

[cbayer]

2. Are you the member of any group that might be the target of a hate crime?

I'm just guessing here, but I suspect you might be a white, straight, American born, fully abled, employed male with no affiliation with a specific religious group.

Please correct me if I am wrong.

[eqfan592]

3. I am indeed all of those things.

Ya know, I've never been a huge LBJ fan for several reasons, but he did say something that I can't agree with enough.

"You do not examine legislation in the light of the benefits it will convey if properly administered, but in the light of the wrongs it would do and the harms it would cause if improperly administered."

The simple fact is that I do not trust our government with the sort of authority that hate crimes legislation opens the door for.

I'm no fan of bigotry, but I don't think it should be it's own brand of crime either. Bigotry must be combated, but you don't do that by attaching penalties to it, you do it by winning over the hearts and minds of those who may be influenced by it.

[cbayer]

4. I don't question either the sincerity or validity of your arguments against

hate crime legislation, but I suggest that your perspective might change were you a member of a targeted group.

Hate crimes are not their own brand of crime, but are already established crimes that are fueled by bigotry.

For me there is a difference between one who threatens to kill someone for sleeping with his wife and someone who threatens to kill someone because they are gay.

While I love the concept of confronting bigotry through education and tolerance, I also think that there has to be serious consequences for violent actions driven by bigotry.

OTOH, I agree that the laws can be problematic because "hate crime" is not always that easy to define.

[eqfan592]

5. Oh, I'm sure it may change indeed.

In fact, because of that, I had a more mixed opinion on the issue when it first looked likely to pass a few years ago. I actually sought out a discussion of the issue with somebody who would be more directly impacted by it (a good friend of mine who is also a gay black man). We discussed it at some length, and it was actually his arguments that lead me to the position I hold today. He wasn't fond of the idea that somebody killing him because he was gay was somehow worse than somebody killing him for some other reason. He also felt it underscored the things that might separate him from the majority of the people in the country, which would run counter to combating the bigotry that permeates the nation.

It is, without a doubt, a very complex issue, with many valid arguments to be made on both sides of the issue. But in the end, I find that I stand in opposition to the legislation.

[cbayer]

6. Interesting take from your friend that he felt it might further marginalize him.

I haven't really explored that.

I guess there are times when treatment of some groups appears to be ok, and it has to be definitively shown that it's not.

Watched "Far From Heaven" last night for the first time and really liked it. If you haven't seen it, it explores bigotry of various kinds during the late 50's. Great cast, very stylized, good script.

[eqfan592]

9. I've added that to our watch list here. :) (nt)

[Evoman]

7. I think people don't "get" what hate crime legislation is for.

It's not to punish bigotry. It's not punishment for a thought. You make the punishment worse because a real hate crime is an attack on both an individual AND the community. It's not just a gay guy or black guy being beaten....it's a threat to all black people or gays, which is way worse. People who commit hate crimes are essentially committing a terrorist act.

[eqfan592]

8. I do understand that reasoning.

And I'm not denying that there isn't validity to it. My point is that the same reasoning explained here could be applied in other, scarier ways as well.

It doesn't mater much now anyway. The legislation is passed, so I guess we'll see what happens. I hope I'm wrong and that this doesn't end up setting a dangerous precedent.

[Evoman]

10. Any law/punitive measure can be misused. Doesn't mean we shouldn't have them.

If they weren't misused, we wouldn't have innocent people sitting in jail. But then, not having the laws would be worse.

In cases where it isn't clear cut, we need to be really careful how we apply hate crime legislation. But cases like this are pretty obviously hate crimes....it's not like the guy even knew the people he killed personally.

[eqfan592]

11. I understand that any law can be misused, but certain laws lend themselves more to future misuse...

...than others. I believe this is an example of one of those.

[Evoman]

12. So then, instead, nothing should be done?

Should there be no distinction between a murder, and a murder that also damages the community? A murder that causes fear, distrust, and sows discord between racial/sex orientation groups? A murder that will most likely beget more violence, cause retaliation, and make the world an overall shittier place?

[eqfan592]

13. I didn't say nothing should be done.

I've said repeatedly that I think bigotry must be combated, just that I don't believe this is the way to go about it.

Any crime with even the appearance of a motivation rooted in bigotry is capable of doing all of the things you mention there. I'd rather work on preventing such crimes than tacking on extra jail time for them, as that doesn't seem to be an effective deterrent.

These are things that can be done without opening the door for dangerous government abuse. But like I said, what's done is done and I hope I'm proven wrong in the long run.

[Evoman]

14. I'm not usually an advocate for more jail time. I don't get off on punishing people, and I don't

think much of it as a deterrent. Hell, If it was up to me, I'd get more creative. I'd sell all the guys stuff and put the money towards a nicer bathroom for the Sikh Temple. I'm not a genius...I don't know how to solve this problem, or deter hate crimes. I just agree with the rational that a worse crime needs to be dealt with harsher. It would seem a crime for a thief to get the same punishment as a murderer, and it seems to me that a person who causes additional damage in the community needs to get a sentence that reflects their more dangerous crime.

I don't have any ideas how we should approach this. Do you? Do you have any suggestions?