Absolutely, Rob. Political Correctness is just another form of discrimination - thoughts are being judged, not actions. Should you receive a jail sentence for thinking those thoughts without acting upon them? What if you hate the person you attack because of their religion, but you actually assaulted them for the money? Should your sentence be longer even though that wasn't the reason? How about if you thought you were attacking someone because they were Jewish, but they're really Methodist? Does that mitigate a "hate crime?" It becomes silly very early on.
Wouldn't it help with the perception of equality everywhere if a criminal's sentence were the same no matter his/her color, national origin or religion and no matter the color/national origin/gender/religion of the victim? This brings up the old Animal Farm slogan: All animals are created equal, but some are more equal than others.
I'd much rather go with Horton: A person's a person, no matter how small.
The Whistler
· 4 years ago
One of the biggest problems with this kind of "hate crime" law is that it is not enforced uniformly.
KurtP
· 4 years ago
The percentage was 6/10 (if I remember right). The southerners wanted them to be counted as a whole person, but the east coast Yankees (Kennedy and Kerry's people) wanted them not to be counted at all.
Just thought I'd throw that in.
The Whistler
· 4 years ago
The Southerners wanted their cake and eat it too.
They did not want to acknowledge slave's as citizens, but they wanted to count them as persons when it came to representation in Congress. So the 3/5's compromise was born to create the union.
The important thing to remember is that up to the time of the constitution slavery had existed for thousands of years. Within two generations slavery in this country was ended.
In fact slavery was brought here by our "mother countries" when we were colonies.
All we did was end it in a historical short time.
Neofarmer
· 4 years ago
In regards to KurtP and The Whistler.
This thing about black Americans counting only as 3/5 of a man is a great canard that just doesn't seem to die. Every half-educated, good-hearted person I know loves to cite it.
As far as I know, nobody's vote in this country has ever counted for a percentage of a vote. A vote either counted as a whole vote or not at all.
Whistler has it nearly right.
In the Constitution as it was originally adopted black slaves counted as 3/5 of a person when counted by the Census for representation purposes in Federal elections.
Southern slaveholders wanted their slaves to count as whole persons for representation purposes. Since slaves were never allowed to vote, that would give white voters from the Southern slave-holding disproportionately greater power.
As a sidebar, counting slaves as whole persons in terms of voting would therefore be an incentive for increasing the total number of slaves.
On the other hand, the anti-slavery forces in the North did not wanted to count slaves at all in terms of Federal elections.
Since such a relatively high proportion of the South's population was made up of slaves, this would cut down the slave-holding states' representation in the House of Representatives and in the Electoral College.
This, in turn, would eventually lead to the ending of slavery peacefully, they hoped.
KC
· 4 years ago
Let's face it, this is Thought Crime pure and simple.
If you assault someone, you should be prosecuted the same regardless of your/their race, religion, etc. I understand making a distinction along the lines of whether you used your bare hands or a chainsaw or even whether you knocked the person out or gave them brain damage, but the crime is the same.
robert108
· 4 years ago
Yay, Neofarmer! It's always good to explode liberal myths with the facts!
Robin S.
· 4 years ago
Anytime this is brought up, I'm reminded of a piece from (I think) Larry Elder's The Ten Things You Can't Say in America. He said that if a member of the KKK sneaks up behind him and hits him in the head with a brick, the word he's most worried about in that sentence isn't "KKK", it's "brick".
All Comments
Wouldn't it help with the perception of equality everywhere if a criminal's sentence were the same no matter his/her color, national origin or religion and no matter the color/national origin/gender/religion of the victim? This brings up the old Animal Farm slogan: All animals are created equal, but some are more equal than others.
I'd much rather go with Horton: A person's a person, no matter how small.
Just thought I'd throw that in.
They did not want to acknowledge slave's as citizens, but they wanted to count them as persons when it came to representation in Congress. So the 3/5's compromise was born to create the union.
The important thing to remember is that up to the time of the constitution slavery had existed for thousands of years. Within two generations slavery in this country was ended.
In fact slavery was brought here by our "mother countries" when we were colonies.
All we did was end it in a historical short time.
This thing about black Americans counting only as 3/5 of a man is a great canard that just doesn't seem to die. Every half-educated, good-hearted person I know loves to cite it.
As far as I know, nobody's vote in this country has ever counted for a percentage of a vote. A vote either counted as a whole vote or not at all.
Whistler has it nearly right.
In the Constitution as it was originally adopted black slaves counted as 3/5 of a person when counted by the Census for representation purposes in Federal elections.
Southern slaveholders wanted their slaves to count as whole persons for representation purposes. Since slaves were never allowed to vote, that would give white voters from the Southern slave-holding disproportionately greater power.
As a sidebar, counting slaves as whole persons in terms of voting would therefore be an incentive for increasing the total number of slaves.
On the other hand, the anti-slavery forces in the North did not wanted to count slaves at all in terms of Federal elections.
Since such a relatively high proportion of the South's population was made up of slaves, this would cut down the slave-holding states' representation in the House of Representatives and in the Electoral College.
This, in turn, would eventually lead to the ending of slavery peacefully, they hoped.
If you assault someone, you should be prosecuted the same regardless of your/their race, religion, etc. I understand making a distinction along the lines of whether you used your bare hands or a chainsaw or even whether you knocked the person out or gave them brain damage, but the crime is the same.