[JViello]

Originally Posted by skytrekker

'Special Rights' are not what many Gay/lesbian/bisexual/trans gendered people want- but they want and do deserve protection under the law; which they still do not have in many states.

Sky, with all due respect since when does an assault law change because the person was gay or black? I didn't know the judge or prosecutor made the distinction or cared. They don't and shouldn't. I expect someone to get X jailtime for 1st degree assault, and not special Y jailtime just because the victom was gay.

Assault is assault. Period. We have laws and punishment against assault. The law needs to be enforced - period, I don't think we need special laws for individual groups. If so I want "middle aged American, Christian, white male protection" laws because we seem to be the most hated group in the world. LOL

[brattpowered]

I think someone just crossed the line from "concerned" to "fixated", if you catch my drift. Nice photos.

[JViello]

Originally Posted by brattpowered

I think someone just crossed the line from "concerned" to "fixated", if you catch my drift. Nice photos.

LOL Not sure what you mean, but I'll assume it was directed towards me.

I guess I don't catch your drift, I was just making a point, that's all.

[Rich Lee]

Originally Posted by JViello

Sky, with all due respect since when does an assault law change because the person was gay or black? I didn't know the judge or prosecutor made the distinction or cared. They don't and shouldn't. I expect someone to get X jailtime for 1st degree assault, and not special Y jailtime just because the victom was gay.

Assault is assault. Period. We have laws and punishment against assault. The law needs to be enforced - period, I don't think we need special laws for individual groups. If so I want "middle aged American, Christian, white male protection" laws because we seem to be the most hated group in the world. LOL

I believe that the concept of "hate crimes" evolved as a result of "motive." For example, in a robbery, a victim is targeted because (s)he is perceived to have something of value (purse, jewelry, car, etc.) not because (s)he is black, gay, Jewish, etc. When Matthew Shepard was targeted in Wyoming, four straight (or heterosexual) individuals went to a gay bar to get one of its patrons to leave with them under the guise of a "date." This was premeditated or, at the very least, calculated. They didn't go to a straight bar to have one of the females act as the decoy.

There was hatred present in the minds of at least one of these individuals. Perhaps Matthew Shepard was random, but that night a "gay male" was the target. Deep-routed hatred often leads to more heinous acts.

As for "Pride" parades, they're not my thing. (It reminds me of a spoof done on "In Living Color" in the early '90s.) Since it's been brought up, I don't know why there isn't an "English" or "British Isles" pride parade when there are Greek, Irish, Italian, Lithuanian, Polish, Portuguese, and Puerto Rican pride parades!

[sgfludd]

[quote=JViello;910957]Sky, with all due respect since when does an assault law change because the person was gay or black? I didn't know the judge or prosecutor made the distinction or cared. They don't and shouldn't.


Wow - I hope I live in the Utopian world you live in when I get there. As an African American - I have more than enough first hand experience as how judges and prosecutors "care". You would be stunned to see the sentences (for same crimes) based on race. Let's look at the case in the spotlight of the young man in Georgia - who was convicted of rape with a minor when at 17 he had CONSENSUAL oral sex with his then 15 year old girlfriend. His conviction was overthrown last week - and the GA prosecutor who obviously has nothing better to do - immediately appealed. When the mother of the girl spoke to the press - she told them SHE never wanted to press charges - but was told if she didn't - she would be charged with child neglect. Now - let's be honest - if this guy were the blonde, blue-eyed captain of the football team - none of this would have ever happened.

I could go on forever (Rodney King, Emmit Till, etc) So yes - there IS a need for special protection under the FEDERAL law - because as the song goes in Avenue Q - everyone's a little bit racist - and when people with extreme views are in positions of power - minority groups are the ones who pay the price.

[sgfludd]

Here's a great test that studies bias - try it if you dare - YOUR results may surprise you
https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit

[Rich Lee]

Originally Posted by sgfludd

Here's a great test that studies bias - try it if you dare - YOUR results may surprise you
https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit

There are several different tests. I was taking the one on genders/sexes but answered "history" as "science" instead of "liberal arts" (I was going too fast), and it wouldn't let me proceed.

[skytrekker]

Originally Posted by Rich Lee

I believe that the concept of "hate crimes" evolved as a result of "motive." For example, in a robbery, a victim is targeted because (s)he is perceived to have something of value (purse, jewelry, car, etc.) not because (s)he is black, gay, Jewish, etc. When Matthew Shepard was targeted in Wyoming, four straight (or heterosexual) individuals went to a gay bar to get one of its patrons to leave with them under the guise of a "date." This was premeditated or, at the very least, calculated. They didn't go to a straight bar to have one of the females act as the decoy.

There was hatred present in the minds of at least one of these individuals. Perhaps Matthew Shepard was random, but that night a "gay male" was the target. Deep-routed hatred often leads to more heinous acts.

As for "Pride" parades, they're not my thing. (It reminds me of a spoof done on "In Living Color" in the early '90s.) Since it's been brought up, I don't know why there isn't an "English" or "British Isles" pride parade when there are Greek, Irish, Italian, Lithuanian, Polish, Portuguese, and Puerto Rican pride parades!

Actually Gay Pride is not my thing either- just my 'choice' of course I do support all those who attend.

[OHtoCT]

When did being gay so quickly turn into assault crimes and photos of people in thongs? I think you have the problem. You are perpetuating this.

[JViello]

Originally Posted by sgfludd

Wow - I hope I live in the Utopian world you live in when I get there. As an African American - I have more than enough first hand experience as how judges and prosecutors "care". You would be stunned to see the sentences (for same crimes) based on race.

I actually grew up in one of the hardest "black" neighborhoods in Waterbury with a single mother. I've seen things first hand that you probably haven't a clue about.

Your arguement is like a gun control argument which says make new laws to stop the guys who are already breaking the laws from breaking the laws. LOL

IF the current laws were inforced there would be no need for "special" laws right? Good, so that's clear.

IF the current prosecutors and judges have a bias, what makes you think a new law would discourage them when what they are supposedly doing is already illegal?

You think the social injustice that goes on in the courtrooms is a racial problem, I happen to think it's a social problem.

I could throw the Duke lacross players back at your example. White boys getting unfairly smeared by an overzealous white prosecutor with an agenda. Where is there protection aside from the money their respective families have to fight their wrongfull accusations? If they were poor white boys they'd be in jail.

How would a judge or prosecutor know if the victom was gay? Can he "spot a gay at 50 feet"? Can he "just know"? Are all gays that "obvious"? I bet there are gay guys and women all around you that you have no idea about.

Originally Posted by OHtoCT

When did being gay so quickly turn into assault crimes and photos of people in thongs? I think you have the problem. You are perpetuating this.

I didnt' think you would respond in a manner that furthers the dicsussion. Oh well.


Rich Lee: I understand what you are saying about the Wyoming incident. It makes me sick myself to think of such a crime in ANY capacity can take place.

However, I will say there are also women targeted. Do we have special women laws? How about the edlerly that are sought out as a target. Do they get special prosecution laws? What about the rich who get targeted because they "carry bank" around?

See my point? I think giving special rights/laws above and beyond a benign law that says "assault is bad, regardless of color, culture or sexual orientation" is going down a slippery slope we shouldn't.

Do I think that anyone who assaults someone because they are gay (How they know the person is, is beyond me...but) or denies them housing (Which is already illegal) or whatever is wrong and should be punished? Yes. But I would say the same for a white person, black person, Puerto Rican person or whoever was wronged.

On another note that relates to our home state regarding "gay rights"...

It was said that not allowing gays to marry in this state was denying them certain rights. Fair enough...so we passed a civil union bill and civil unions have been recognized so all gay partnerships can attain the same "rights" as a married couple such as insurance and medical decisions and whatnot.

Well, now I see that the gay marriage bill is being pushed. Why? Was it about rights or changing the definition of marriage? (<==honest question) If it was about rights, they have been attained - no?

Moreover, a recent example of how this can whiplash back is when my wife was approached by one of her employees who has a domestic partnership for about 7 years. She was asked to add her partner on her insurance benefits. She did and all was well.

Two months later, the insurance for the parnet was dropped. Why? They are a heterosexual couple. They are now suing and it's a mess my poor wife has to deal with on top of her already stressful job.

What's the difference? They were domestic partners? Granted they have the option of marrying, but they said they didn't want to follow that practice as they are not religous but wanted the same rights as a married couple which the civil union bill gives. That's a real situation, what would be some of your take on that subject?

P.S. I appreciate the discussion and I myself am in no way heated on this...just a discussion about a subject facing our state that I think can be had in a civil manner by all.