Hate Crimes Legislation

[Lemniscate]

Actually, they do not have a greater opportunity to be attacked. The number of people attacked based on reasons of sexual orientation is far less than the number of people attacked for other reasons. To say that there is an epidemic of sexuality based attacks is ridiculous, especially because in the last several years, the number of violent crimes against people for reasons of sexual orientation has decreased dramatically.

I agree that people should be protected, but in a case where there is not a disproportionate number of crimes in a certain area to warrant extra protection, the bill then becomes only a limit on current rights of non-violent individuals.

[CrabHelmet]

Actually' date=' they do not have a greater opportunity to be attacked. The number of people attacked based on reasons of sexual orientation is far less than the number of people attacked for other reasons. To say that there is an epidemic of sexuality based attacks is ridiculous, especially because in the last several years, the number of violent crimes against people for reasons of sexual orientation has decreased dramatically.

[/quote']

 

To say that they have a greater opportunity to be attacked is not to say that the majority of violent crimes are committed based on orientation; rather, it is to say that homosexuals are proportionally more likely to be victims of violent crimes than are heterosexuals.

 

I agree that people should be protected' date=' but in a case where there is not a disproportionate number of crimes in a certain area to warrant extra protection, the bill then becomes only a limit on current rights of non-violent individuals.

[/quote']

 

You say that there are not a disproportionate number of crimes against homosexuals, but that cannot be true unless one of the following statements is also true:

 

1) No orientation-based hate crimes are ever committed, anywhere, at any time, ever.

 

2) The ratio of orientation-based hate crimes against homosexuals to orientation-based hate crimes against heterosexuals is equal to the ratio of homosexuals to heterosexuals in the population.

 

3) Heterosexuals have a proportionally greater probability of being the victims of violent crimes unrelated to orientation than do homosexuals.

 

Statement 1 is demonstrably false. Statements 2 and 3 are ludicrous.

 

I suspect that you are using "disproportionate" not in the sense of its actual meaning - that the proportions are unequal - but rather in the sense of "it is common enough that I subjectively care".

[Lemniscate]

There is no sort of corroborated data stating that there is a disproportionate number of crimes committed against homosexuals. In fact, within the last several years, the number of crimes against homosexuals for reasons of orientation has gone down dramatically.

 

Also, you continuously return your arguement to probability, not what actually is happening, but instead what may happen. There is no demonstrable evidence to state that homosexuals are more likely to be attacked than heterosexuals, or that there is a growing number of attacks on homosexuals. The number, as already said, has gone down. Newer generations are more tolerant of the homosexual lifestyle than any before them. Social thoughts and acceptances are changing in favor of homosexuals, and a piece of legislation like this will inflame those who disagree with it, whether rational or not, and would do more to hurt the homosexual cause than allowing society to work through the problems it has and continue on down the road we are currently following.

 

Passing this piece of legislation may help in the short run to curb the already shrinking number of attacks of homosexuals, but in the long run, it will stretch out the length of time needed for society to move beyond its prejudices and grow.

 

I agree that people should be protected, and that no one person's ideologies should be forced upon another, but I also believe that the greater thing to think about is whether it will truly move society forward in the long run.