Hate Crime Laws: Are They Constitutional?
Are hate crime penalty enforcement laws constitutional?
"That 's Gay." If you are around teenagers today, that is a phrase you will most likely hear very often. It is not necessarily meant as a homophobic or hate-filled remark, and most of the time it is referring to an object, an idea, or a conversation; things that obviously have no sexual orientation. But now, according to a bill passed by the senate, it could almost be considered a hate crime. Many people support the widening of hate crime laws, assuming that with stricter penalties, the crimes will lessen. In June, 2004, Senate passed a bill that received a record number of votes, passing 65-33, including 18 Republicans voting yes. The measure will add sexual orientation, gender and disability to the list of motives that provide for enhanced federal prosecution of a violent crime against a person (Lochhead). The current hate crimes law, which originated during the civil rights movement of the 1960s when many Southern states failed to prosecute assaults on African Americans, includes crimes motivated by hatred based on race, color, religion, and national origin. Many see this as a step forward, but there are some who think it is unconstitutional. Religious groups argue that "It advances the radical, well publicized agenda of homosexuals to gain acceptance for, and legal recognition of, homosexuality as a normal lifestyle" (Toalston). So who 's right? Should there be a separate category for crimes committed to minorities? Shouldn 't all crimes be treated just as serious as another? I believe that the categorizing of crimes into Hate Crimes is just further segregating people because of their differences, and that paying more serious attention to crimes committed on minorities is sending a bad message to those who are in the majority. First off, many people perceive hate crime perpetrators as crazed neo-Nazis or "skinheads". However, most hate crimes are carried out by otherwise law-abiding citizens who see
"That 's Gay." If you are around teenagers today, that is a phrase you will most likely hear very often. It is not necessarily meant as a homophobic or hate-filled remark, and most of the time it is referring to an object, an idea, or a conversation; things that obviously have no sexual orientation. But now, according to a bill passed by the senate, it could almost be considered a hate crime. Many people support the widening of hate crime laws, assuming that with stricter penalties, the crimes will lessen. In June, 2004, Senate passed a bill that received a record number of votes, passing 65-33, including 18 Republicans voting yes. The measure will add sexual orientation, gender and disability to the list of motives that provide for enhanced federal prosecution of a violent crime against a person (Lochhead). The current hate crimes law, which originated during the civil rights movement of the 1960s when many Southern states failed to prosecute assaults on African Americans, includes crimes motivated by hatred based on race, color, religion, and national origin. Many see this as a step forward, but there are some who think it is unconstitutional. Religious groups argue that "It advances the radical, well publicized agenda of homosexuals to gain acceptance for, and legal recognition of, homosexuality as a normal lifestyle" (Toalston). So who 's right? Should there be a separate category for crimes committed to minorities? Shouldn 't all crimes be treated just as serious as another? I believe that the categorizing of crimes into Hate Crimes is just further segregating people because of their differences, and that paying more serious attention to crimes committed on minorities is sending a bad message to those who are in the majority. First off, many people perceive hate crime perpetrators as crazed neo-Nazis or "skinheads". However, most hate crimes are carried out by otherwise law-abiding citizens who see
Bibliography: Lochhead, Carolyn - "Senate OKs bill including gays as hate crime victims" The San Francisco Chronicle, June 16, 2004 Toalston, Art – "Baptist agency lists '10 Reasons ' to oppose hate crimes legislation" The Baptist Press, July 2 CivilRights.org - "New FBI Data Reports Increase in Hate Crimes" November 17, 2004 http://www.civilrights.org/issues/hate/details.cfm?id=26241 APA.org - Hate Crimes Today: An Age-Old Foe In Modern Dress http://www.apa.org/pubinfo/hate/ www.fbi.gov – Uniform Crime Reports http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/ucr.htm