Fri October 23, 2009
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The Senate passed groundbreaking legislation Thursday that would make it a federal crime to assault an individual because of his or her sexual orientation or gender identity.
The expanded federal hate crimes law now goes to President Obama's desk. Obama has pledged to sign the measure, which was added to a $680 billion defense authorization bill.
President George W. Bush had threatened to veto a similar measure.
The bill is named for Matthew Shepard, a gay Wyoming teenager who died after being kidnapped and severely beaten in October 1998, and James Byrd Jr., an African-American man dragged to death in Texas the same year.
"Knowing that the president will sign it, unlike his predecessor, has made all the hard work this year to pass it worthwhile," said Judy Shepard, board president of the Matthew Shepard Foundation named for her son. "Hate crimes continue to affect far too many Americans who are simply trying to live their lives honestly, and they need to know that their government will protect them from violence, and provide appropriate justice for victims and their families."
Several religious groups have expressed concern that a hate-crimes law could be used to criminalize conservative speech relating to subjects such as abortion or homosexuality.
Attorney General Eric Holder has asserted that any federal hate-crimes law would be used only to prosecute violent acts based on bias, as opposed to the prosecution of speech based on controversial racial or religious beliefs.
Holder called Thursday's 68-29 Senate vote to approve the defense spending bill that included the hate crimes measure "a milestone in helping protect Americans from the most heinous bias-motivated violence."
"The passage of this legislation will give the Justice Department and our state and local law enforcement partners the tools we need to deter and prosecute these acts of violence," he said in a statement.
Joe Solmonese, president of the Human Rights Campaign, called the measure "our nation's first major piece of civil rights legislation for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people."
"Too many in our community have been devastated by hate violence," Solmonese said in a statement. "We now can begin the important steps to erasing hate in our country."

This month, Obama told the Human Rights Campaign, the country's largest gay rights group, that the nation still needs to make significant changes to ensure equal rights for gays and lesbians.
"Despite the progress we've made, there are still laws to change and hearts to open," he said during his address at the dinner for the Human Rights Campaign. "This fight continues now, and I'm here with the simple message: I'm here with you in that fight."
Among other things, Obama has called for the repeal of the ban on gays serving openly in the military, the "don't ask, don't tell" policy. He also has urged Congress to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act and pass the Domestic Partners Benefit and Obligations Act.
The Defense of Marriage Act defines marriage, for federal purposes, as a legal union between a man and a woman. It allows states to refuse to recognize same-sex marriages. The Domestic Partners Benefit and Obligations Act would extend family benefits now available to heterosexual federal employees to gay and lesbian federal workers.
More than 77,000 hate-crime incidents were reported by the FBI between 1998 and 2007, or "nearly one hate crime for every hour of every day over the span of a decade," Holder told the Senate Judiciary Committee in June.
The FBI, Holder added, reported 7,624 hate-crime incidents in 2007, the most current year with complete data.
*
*
*
*
Missoni
Selected
Quai D'Orsay
On the surface this bill seems like a no brainer to me. But I wonder how they are going to distinguish between what is and what isn't a hate crime. And if the victim of the crime is dead, then how can they know that the act was perpetrated because of hate for what they are and not who they are?
1How about it's a crime to strike someone
this hate crime BS is going to far. Keep piling
them on, soon it will be just a crime again because everything will be a hate crime.
2problem is, when you are mad you can say some stupid sh*t... that doesn't mean that what you say in that moment is why the fight initiated. And people are always quick to jump to an association. People are prosecuted for supposed hate crimes for freedom of speech proceding an incident.
3Damn, you just can't please some people above.
Get over it and appreciate the help, if brutal hate is ever taken out on you.
4I can see where Hain is coming from, Pink (not that I necessarily agree with her point of view). There can really be a fine line when deeming crimes hate related.
5When some people hear about white on black crime they automatically assume its about race. So how does one decide if its race related or not? There was a white couple that was carjacked and brutally murdered in TN by a group of black people. Their names were Channon Christian and Christopher Newsom. I think that what happened to them would have made all of the major news outlets if they had been black and their murderers white. I thought that was race related murder but who am I to make that call? And what if it wasn't and the perpetrators were prosecuted under a hate crime? Its just hard to decide what is and isn't a hate crime, IMO.
6Its just hard to decide what is and isn't a hate crime, IMO.
I agree as well.
7It's not hard to understand or decide if you've worked OR are working within the justice system. Each case is surely different and should be dealt with in that manner.
8Crime is crime. I don't see the point of "hate crime" legislation because what is the rest of the crime? Love crime? Does it really make it worse to be murdered because of your sexual identity versus just being murdered just because?
9This is the best thing the Democrats have done with their majority. What a great day for civil rights! I'm especially surprised that the transgendered made it onto the list - they are the ones that need this kind of protection the most. When I was in college, I knew a transgendered person that would get death threats while just walking down the street. Of course, it was Mississippi, she had a beard and tried to use the women's restroom, so it caused a lot of chaos.
PinkNC, I totally agree with what you said.
10To me, the reason for committing the crime doesn't matter unless its self-defense.
A crime is no less of a crime because it was committed against a straight white person.
11Completely agree with Pink, this is what we have a judical system with a jury of your peers. Think about it from a legal prespective, if you assualt someone now it isn't a felony. You have certain penalties etc. But if this assault was hate related, and the prosecutor can prove that it is, that charge would be a felony with even harsher penalties.
12I dont think this is a great day for anyones rights, labeling crimes as "hate" or otherwise is taking a step backwards. Its a crime, how on earth are we going to differentiate what type it is?
13But mydia, you're essentially saying then that crimes against minorities, homosexuals, etc are WORSE than crimes against straight people, white people, etc.
Don't you see something wrong with that? Aren't we all created equal?
14Then I guess you don't see a difference between premediated crime or something done in the heat of the moment (like 1st vs 2nd or 3rd degree murder)? A prosecutor would still need to prove its murder but the intention and therefore the charge determine the penalties (you can only get the death penalty for 1st degree murder).
15You can have hate crimes against straight people or white people so I don't really know what you are trying to say
16No Mydia, you can prove motive and intent I dont see how you can prove its "hate"
17Where is the legislation of hate crimes against straight people or white people?
I'm honestly asking because I've never heard of it... is it religion based?
But then again, if that's true then EVERY crime is a hate crime, so whats the point of this legislation?
And I hadn't thought of the premeditated aspect, my gut instict is no it doesn't matter to me, prosecute to the fullest extent, but I'll have to digest that for a bit.
18"Some have argued that if it is true that all violent crimes are the result of the perpetrator's contempt for the victim, then all crimes are hate crimes. Thus, if there is no alternate rationale for prosecuting some people more harshly for the same crime based on who the victim is, then different defendants are treated unequally under the law, which violates the United States Constitution"
that says it best.
19Space you can take your character assisinations and personal attacks somewhere else. This group is for people who can have a civilized conversation.
20CG - Totally agree with #20
If everyone is equal under the law, then everyone should be equal under the law.
21The motive would be hate, I think it some cases it would be easy to prove (like people vandalizing a GLBT community center with slurs ) but others like a beating of a homosexual would be difficult.
22Space, we dont pull out the H word or R word here like they do in Tres and nothing happens to you for that, here? you can get kicked out easily, so choose your words wisely!!
23mydia - yes some would be easy to prove, but again, it's still saying that vandalism isn't as bad if it's not motivated by homophobia or racism or whatever.
don't you think that's off? isn't vandalism always bad?
24Well you wouldn't find them against straight people because this sexual orientation part was just passed. I don't see why it wouldn't be possible to assault someone just because they are straight. As for assaulting or committing a crime against someone because they are white I'm sure has happened. How to prove it though it usually very difficult.
What this law does it just give more legal recourse, there is still a very difficult road to hoe to prove that something was a hate crime. Like its difficult to prove something is sexual harassment for example.
25No, I do think that hate vandalism is worse because its more of a threat to those victims of the crime. If my church was vandalized with some quote from Shakespeare I wouldn't feel as uneasy, threatened, or victimized as if they had put satanic symbols all over it.
26Lets say I am a known racist, and one day i am walking down the street and I see two people fighting, a white man and a black man, so i go to break it up because there are kids around, and shove both of them to the ground and the black man is the only one that gets hurt, and he cries "hate crime" when it wasnt. what then? where is the line? is it automatically a hate crime because i have a membership to the KKK? or is it a hate crime because the black guy got hurt only?
(btw this does not give anyone permission to quote me saying i am a racist)
27That's up to the judical system where the crime was committed. You always have the legal recourse to try to get the charges adjusted, dropped, or changed.
28Look, the punishment should fit the crime and the overall impact on society is taken into consideration. hate crimes have a greater affect on society as a whole because they spread more fear and threats of dangerous escalation than non-hate crimes. So therefore I have no problem with potentially harsher penalties on somehow who has been proven in court to have committed a hate crime. You have harsher charges for someone that does a hit and run than someone that stayed on the scene of the accident because the impact of hit and run is worse on society. This kind of thing exists in lots of areas
29Mydia, how can you prove a hate crime and get it right all the time?
30http://legistar.milwaukee.gov/attachments/dfa04e64-c6b2-46c9-a5b3-f3b3e3...
31Look, don't be a racist criminal and then you'll be just fine.
32Being either one or BOTH at the same time is terrible anyway.
33but how do you tell if its a racist criminal or not?
34Bigots should get harsher punishments...for obvious reasons.
35you can say that about any crime CG! Our judicial system isn't perfect, you can always appeal the decision. I posted this link to show that its very difficult to prove a hate crime in a lot of cases so prosecutors don't go that route. I would imagine that the only crimes that get this hate enhancer would really really warrant it and not be fuzzy.
36No Mydia, if some shoots someone its a murder. to then label it a hate crime on top of that? is where it gets sketchy.
37Wasn't that already explained?
38I call for removal of spacekatgal.... take that kind of venom somewhere else. And to think this is the girl that said she was being bullied. HA!
39Pink, but what if said Bigot, wasnt being a bigot when the crime was commited.
40Yeah I feel like I'm just repeating myself at this point. I appreciate the debate though, its good to think these things through instead of just saying its a no brainer.
41Well you seem racist against white people pink, so dont commit a crime or it will be a hate crime.
42
43Well Mydia, I always like chattin with ya!
44Oh, let her stay. She reminds me of a younger Gkitty only not as smart.
45Whoa. This thread devolved pretty fast.
46"Look, the punishment should fit the crime and the overall impact on society is taken into consideration. hate crimes have a greater affect on society as a whole because they spread more fear and threats of dangerous escalation than non-hate crimes. So therefore I have no problem with potentially harsher penalties on somehow who has been proven in court to have committed a hate crime."
That is quite a presumption. I would hazard to guess that a random attack or a series of random attacks would spread much more fear and panic across every single group in a society than a "hate crime" against one group.
I don't see why a crime against someone who's gay for being gay is anymore shocking or depraved than a crime against a teenager whose victimization was caused by being born on the wrong block. When it comes down to it, hate crime laws are just arbitrary. They choose to protect only specific groups who the people in power want to favor.
47LOL comment 40
48well said Org!
49well said 48 ... but I guess because I believe that everyone should be treated equally in the eyes of the law I must secretly wear a KKK coat and be a homophobe.
50Post A Comment
To post comments, please log in or register.