Backlash On Homosexuals Over Gay Rights

There is no hate crime if a gay man is attacked for some unrelated reason. But I personally do not support hate crime laws.

 

I have read the news, including the reports of gay people being assaulted because they were gay. I have not seen anything in the news about a straight person being attacked because they were straight. If the law appears to you to be enforced unequally, perhaps it's because nearly all the crimes that target sexual orientation are based on the perception that the person was gay. That isn't preferential or unequal enforcement, but a a matter of gay people being part of a disfavored minority.

 

Thanks for the LOL. To claim that laws that protect "sexual orientation" (and gender identity, dont forget that is also protected by the Matthew Shephard Act) does not mean homosexuals, what a hoot you are.

- - - Updated - - -

You have just proven my point.

 

You have just proven my point. Gays get special treatment because they are a "disfavored minority".

 

It's not the gay folks who receive "special" treatment....It's the miscreants who attack them. Do you feel "special"?

 

Your argument was refuted in the post of mine you quoted

 

It protects sexual orientation, which includes heterosexuals and bisexuals targeted on the basis of their orientation, not just homosexuals. Of course, heterosexuals aren't common targets because they aren't a disfavored minority. That doesn't mean the law fails to protect them.

Seriously? The part you highlighted in red refutes your point instead of supporting it. Not sure why you would think otherwise.

 

Ridiculous. Did you even bother to read the rest of what I wrote? Seemingly not.

Let's try again:

If the law appears to you to be enforced unequally, perhaps it's because nearly all the crimes that target sexual orientation are based on the perception that the person was gay. That isn't preferential or unequal enforcement, but a a matter of gay people being part of a disfavored minority.

It's not special treatment. It's gay people being singled out as targets of violence, and hence the most common cases covered by that law. The only "special treatment" going on here is by perps beating up on gay people.

 

The physical crime is the same, the injury is the same, but the crime is treated differently because of the perceived thought of the perpetrator. That is special treatment.

 

That's right, special treatment of the perpetrator. The theory behind it is that the crime is worse if a member of a defined protected class is attacked, because of their member in that class,. In that case, the attack is really against that entire community.

 

All you are doing is proving my point. A gay person has special treatment based not upon the crime or injury but because of his social status. He is in a - literally, by your own words - a protected class.

 

If you insist on spinning it that way, go right ahead. I made my point. Why don't you go commit a hate crime and see just how special you will feel?

 

Yes, you made your point that there are 2 sets of laws, which is applied depends upon subjective & political criteria.

 

If you insist. There are two sets of laws. One for the garden variety miscreants who attack people at random, and one for those who attack people based on there membership in a particular group that the attacker disapproves of because , in effect , the attack is on the whole community of people in that group. Deal with it. It's not the victim who is given special treatment. There is nothing subjective about being abused by a perpetrator who is calling you a (*)(*)(*)(*)ing queer. By the way, if you were attacked because of your race or religion, whatever that might be, that would also be a hate crime and the perpetrator would also be subjected to hate crime penalties .

 

On that I agree, as I'm not a fan of 'hate crime' law. But that still doesn't mean that homosexuals receive preferential treatment in the law as written.

- - - Updated - - -

That's not what the law says.

 

In 30 years of experience ,the individuals that comprise the "gay and lesbian Activist ", milieu ,come form the most self centred ,venal ,vicious neo-Fascistic sections of the Middle class.

Extreme in their Right-Wing pro-capitalist Politics.The Provocative ,nature of their Putrid ,Right-Wing Petty-Bourgeois Politics ,leads necessarily to attacks .on the Innocent Homosexual Community\Minority.

I have many Homosexual friends,as well as relatives ,and am Bi-sexual myself ,Never until the GLBTIQWERTY,came about in the 1990's.Based on the ideology of Lesbian Feminist Separatist Fascist[Communalism ] Ideology!

Did the question of "gay Marriage ", present itself ,actually the reverse was the case, nor was their any independent from Political parties ,a "gay and lesbian Lobby"!

The LGBTIQWERTY, speaks for a tiny Petty-Bourgeois Layer of Radical Nature .

And in NO WAY ,speaks for the Homosexual Community [normal human ]

PS ,Could the *Identification of the LGBTIQWERTY* as "left" or "progressive " be stopped as they are a .Extreme RIGHT-WING Middle class political formation .

Its like ,saying Adolf Hitler was Left wing or progressive.[I expect the Pink triangle crew to be most Indignant ,YES I HAVE YOU COVERED AS WELL !,its called the method of Zionism ,trade on the Holocaust to hide their own ,Extreme Right Wing Nature]

 

You can try to paint the gay rights movement as an extreme fringe all you like.

That falls in the face of the fact that its driven by individuals from every walk of life that want their full freedom and rights as citizens of the united state of america.

 

I have to concur. The bigot here is the culprit, not necessarily the system or the systematic change of laws. That being said, there is such a thing as a transition period. This is precisely why the Founders believed that the problem of slavery could only be resolved via a national change in opinion. Diktat through law, rarely(if ever) solves anything.

The reason why Liberals still believe racism exists, is primarily because it was "solved" via legislation. And the greatest irony is that they still believe it can be resolved through legislation. No, it can never be resolved through legislation and we can write some of the most strict laws ever and it still wouldn't solve the problem.

Same with gay rights. Give them Gay Marriage? Sure, why not. Give them whatever other rights they may be "entitled to". But in some form, in some fashion the larger heterosexual community will inevitably react. All Liberals have done is created another form of class and social warfare.

Which is their home turf. Class and social warfare is where the 2-minute segments shine, and some ideological babble(even if it doesn't make coherent sense) rings to the intellectually deficient masses and in turn has them vote for a political ideology.

 

That is EXACTLY what the law says.

 

yes, that is part of what being placed into a "protected class status" gets you. Who is denying that homosexuals have sought and received a protected status just because of how they have sex?

It's a sad testament that those who engage in heterosexual sex are considered "lesser" when it comes to crime committed against them. Assault is assault and how one has sex should not matter.

 

Heterosexuals do not have crimes committed against them for the way that they have sex......gays do. It is the perpetrator who gets the "special" treatment as in longer jail time because their actions are an assault on the entire community comprised of the protected class. Deal with it

 

I find that quite interesting. So, it appears that what you are saying is that it is much more serious if a homosexual gets a broken nose in a fight than if a heterosexual does. Why do you feel it is right and just to give preferential treatment to those who engage in homosexual sex?

I thought justice was blind?

 

Ps. Many straight people do sex the same way as gay people, usually without being rebuked for it. . So it's not the form of sex that people object to, it who they are doing it with. Please explain the problem

 

Prove it. Post the text of the law that shows homosexuals receive preferential treatment to other orientations, such as heterosexuals or bisexuals. The words 'gay' and 'homosexual' do not appear in the text.

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-111publ84/html/PLAW-111publ84.htm

 

You put up a military law.

Here is the link to the Matthew Shephard Act http://www.justice.gov/crt/about/crm/matthewshepard.php

Thats a federal law. Here is the relevent part:

Subsection (a)(2) criminalizes acts of violence (and attempts to commit violent acts undertaken with a dangerous weapon) when motivated by the actual or perceived gender, disability, sexual orientation, or gender identity of any person.

"sexual orientation" theoretically includes heterosexuals, but we all know it really means gay. The death of a gay man (Shephard) was the entire motivation for this law.

I'm amazed you present yourself as an expert on all things gay, but have zero knowledge of the subject.