Video
Twitter
RSS Feed
THE QUESTION
A crime to hate?
Congress has voted to expand federal hate crimes laws to add "sexual orientation" to a list that already includes "race, color, religion or national origin." Is this necessary? Should there be special laws against crimes motivated by intolerance, bigotry or hatred? Isn't a crime a crime?
(Cover photo: Judy Shepard, whose son Matthew was killed because he was gay, stands next to a photograph of the fence where he was slain. AP)
Posted by
Sally Quinn and Jon Meacham on October 20, 2009 1:24 PM
FROM THE PANEL
Hate crimes legislation is a well-intentioned mistake
Punishing individuals for what they believe and not what they have done is a scary precedent which avoids the real cultural challenges we face and potentially devalues the significance of crimes not rising to the level of a hate crime.
Posted by Brad Hirschfield, on October 27, 2009 7:50 AM
Hate crimes are different
We know all too well that hate crimes are different from other crimes. They are more than individual murders, beatings, and assaults. Rather, they seek to terrorize entire groups of Americans.
Posted by David Saperstein, on October 22, 2009 12:31 PM
Throw-away lives
Where education, including religious education is insufficient to shape moral character, federal legislation must be the force to stay violence. Hatred is taught and needs to be unlearned. As long as hate crimes are not named by society, and called out as such, they become normalized.
Posted by Katharine Henderson, on October 22, 2009 11:44 AM
When the only motive is hate
When hate leads to crime--and hate is the only motivation--it seems clear that such a crime is particularly severe.
Posted by Aseem Shukla, on October 21, 2009 4:31 PM
Moving beyond hate
What we need to understand and do as a society is to address head on what causes such hatred. I see two issues: fear caused by ignorance and greed for power. Resentment, prejudice, and hatred are typically caused by fear, which is most often the product of ignorance.
Posted by Ramdas Lamb, on October 21, 2009 2:23 PM
Laws against discrimination
A law may stop people from showing their hate but it will never eliminate hate. A law can only protect a person from the physical manifestation of hate, but it cannot transform the hater.
Posted by Arun Gandhi, on October 21, 2009 2:13 PM
Where law takes over from morals
Law has to take over where religion can't hold the line. In the case of where religion is plainly saying the same general thing as the law ("don't steal" or "don't kill"), we still need laws to enforce these things in the civil code.
Posted by Leo Brunnick, on October 21, 2009 1:31 PM
A crime should be a crime, but...
Making these types of crimes part of the hate-crime law at least signals to the LGBT community that there is some sensitivity to the danger they are in, as well as the overall discrimination they face.
Posted by Susan K. Smith, on October 21, 2009 11:48 AM
Motivation matters in criminal cases
At the same time as it punishes particularly nasty crimes proportionately, the demarcation of hate crimes and added penalties for them sends a clear message that bigotry, racism, homophobia, etc are not acceptable in our society.
Posted by Pamela K. Taylor, on October 21, 2009 10:35 AM
Hate is not a religious value
All crimes are not equal. We see this not only in how our legal framework metes out punishments based on the crimes committed, but in how we as individuals are affected by some crimes more or less than others. The issue of hate crimes is far more than a law-and-order issue; it is also a moral and religious issue.
Posted by Welton Gaddy, on October 20, 2009 2:52 PM
Hate is no crime
What would free speech amount to if the speakers had no legal right to their biases? I believe that it is hateful to have on the books any laws criminalizing anything even remotely qualifying as "hate speech."
Posted by Willis E. Elliott, on October 19, 2009 10:47 PM
Crime is Crime is Crime. Not.
It is most helpful to see hate crimes legislation as a reflection of changing social boundaries and mores. For this reason, the debate should be joined over more substantive consideration of which ethical or ideological system is most appropriate for the society we wish to create and protect.
Posted by Mathew N. Schmalz, on October 19, 2009 7:36 PM
Freedom to hate
I don't want to hold the accused guilty of having an opinion, in addition to the crime committed, because even a reprehensible criminal deserves a free speech right to express an opinion. We have the right to hate, but not to commit crimes.
Posted by Herb Silverman, on October 19, 2009 6:31 PM
Crimes against community: a special kind of hate needs a special kind of law
It takes a special kind of hate to make a hate crime. It takes the kind of hate that targets a whole community through the torture and death of one of its members. In religious terms, this makes such a crime not just sin, but evil. In the language of law, it makes it a hate crime.
Posted by Susan Brooks Thistlethwaite, on October 19, 2009 5:32 PM
Hate crimes an extra menace to society
For the victim, a crime is a crime is a crime. But for society, a crime has more significance if its intent is to undermine basic human rights.
Posted by Susan Jacoby, on October 19, 2009 2:14 PM
FEATURED COMMENTS
