On October 22,2009, Congress passed the Matthew Shepard/James Byrd, Jr. Act making crimes committed against individuals on the basis of race, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability prosecutable as a federal offense, allowing federal investigators to intervene. Technically, it was only a re-write of a previous "hate crimes" law enacted in 1969 that only protected the first three categories on that list and then only if those people were trying to vote or attend school. With that law, though, one was still able to systematically harass minorities if they weren't voting, or homosexuals, no matter what they were doing, so long as local law enforcement was willing to look the other way.
Considering that the listed categories, with the exception of religion, are generally things that people have no control over, it seems common sense to give some added protection. Oklahoma senator Steve Russell disagrees.
The opposition that has spurred this Oklahoma legislator to suggest state action to shield from compliance with the act, actually starts out reasonably. He says:
The federal government should not be creating a special class of people, and that is just what they did when they passed and signed this bill. All crimes against another person have some level of hate in them, and people can be assured that our laws that protect people against crimes such as murder are sufficient to protect everyone.
It is easy to debate with--for instance, robbery isn't typically motivated by hate and claiming that the government created a "special class" of people is certainly debatable when one considers that people in this class already seem to be targeted--but he certainly has valid points. Then he kept talking.
Sexual orientation is a very vague word that could be extended to extremes like necrophilia.
Oh no he didn't! He dropped the "sex with dead people" hammer. Now, I'm convinced his crusade is just. Because, if you cannot beat the crap out of someone with that disorder, whom can you assault without repercussions? Tell me!
Russell, and those rushing to support his cause, also like to make this a religious issue. Sally Kern's husband, the Reverend Steve Kern, has this to say about "hate crimes" legislation: "The goal of hate crimes legislation is to silence speech determined to be opposed to the homosexual lifestyle."
And if that were true, and I were Steve Kern spouting hate toward gay people from the pulpit, I would be concerned. Except, the thing about the legislation is that it actually protects him just as much as it protects his wife's transgendered opponent for her house seat. Say that the Reverend Kern were to be dragged from the back of Saab covered with rainbow stickers in retaliation for him giving a sermon about an obscure line in Leviticus saying that homosexuals are no better than Philistine heathens. His, assault would be covered by the Matthew Shepard Act due to his persecution for religious views.
But, I don't want Reverend Kern protected, because that would mean I couldn't beat up corpse f'ers.
