Subject:
|
Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Sat, 11 Sep 1999 06:06:09 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1902 times
|
| |
|
|
Scott Edward Sanburn <ssanburn@aeieng.com> wrote
> "Moz (Chris Moseley)" wrote:
> > I'm afraid I have to disagree with both of you.
> > Take hate crimes.
> I am sorry, but I think hate crime legislation is very wrong. How can you hate
> anyone anymore than by taking his life? It it worse to kill a room full of
> Jewish people than a room of white people? Come on!
The abortion thing is probably a better example of why hate crimes are worse
than random ones. Those doctors are killed to terrify other abortionists,
and so the hate part of the crime is not necessarily against the dead person,
but against all other members of that class. And should be prosectued as such.
Call it a banned form of communication, if that makes it easier for you to
see the second crime.
> It maybe naive to be racist, sexist, etc. but it is not prosecutable.
No, of course not. Only deeds can be prosecuted. *act* in a racist way and I
don't think you should be allowed to say "oh, but I'm not the govt so it's OK".
> And if you are tried for murder, as in your example, and you are sentenced to
> death, how can "hate crime" legislation make a worse sentence? By turning up the
> volts or something?
Depends on your country. In the USA perhaps they should hold the inmate on
death row for longer. Sentence them to 10 years on the row, then death.
In countries that don't yet torture criminals there is always the option
of introducing that, or simply prolonging the existing punishment.
> > On a lower level, should the government be allowed to help a business do
> > something the government is explicitly forbidden to do?
> Do I want to ask? OK, what do you mean by this?
I gave two examples, what more do you want? Any government is restricted in its
powers, should it be allowed to hire people to do those things. Take genocide.
Few governments are allowed to organise that, but should they be allowed to
hire mercenaries to do it for them?
Take a simpler example. The USA govt is not supposed to be racist (don't laugh,
that *is* the law.) Should they be allowed to, say, appoint a non-governmental
manager whose job is to create and manage racially segregated public transport?
I mean, the government wouldn't be doing anything racist directly.
> Rude? Gosh, I know about 190 cashiers around the Michigan area that can be tried
> then! Discrimination against Americans!
You mean they're polite to foreigners?
> So, it is OK to be rude, as in your example, to white people, then?
Whatever gave you that idea? Do you think racism can only be directed against minorities
or something?
> Where did this come from? Killing anyone is wrong, both in God's word and
> against the law, whether you are a abortion doctor or a conservative.
Killing animals is ethically hard to defend in most cases, but I think there are
gradations of naughtyness involved. I don't think it's enough to say "you killed,
you must die", and ignore everything else involved.
Moz
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
Message is in Reply To:
276 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
