Which is wrong.
If I get beat up by a bunch of people because I am white, They will get the same punishment under the law as I would have for beating them up because they are not white.
If I get beat up by a bunch of Homosexuals for being strait, Same Deal.
If I get beat up by a bunch of Baptists because I'm LDS, Same Thing.
If I get beat up by a bunch of women because I'm a man, same thing.
If I beat up my friend Dan (I would never do that) because he is a Republican, well.....same thing. Ü
What inspired this post, at such an odd time of year? An article in today's Deseret News about a new plan to introduce legislation that does not distiguish classes.
Because saying "race, color, disability, religion, sexual orientation, national origin, ancestry, age and gender" is too general a term, and would punish people unjustly in the eyes of the erutalsigel (That's legislature backwards). Don't believe me? Check out the Quotes:
"An assault is an assault," [Rep. Curt] Oda [R-Clearfield] said. "The
penalties shouldn't be any less for a group that's not included. Maybe
(Litvack's) come upon an answer. Until I've studied it, I can't give an answer."
Rep Oda, when you find the person that has no race, color, disability, religion, sexual orientation, national origin, ancestry, age or gender, come show me to it. I'd like to know. Because then your argument holds water.
"It's still a hate crimes bill that doesn't treat all people equally under
the law," [Gayle] Ruzicka said. "If we need to enhance penalties, it needs to be
across the board for all people for the crime that's committed, not for who it's
We already have laws inhancing the penalty if you commit a crime against your spouce, a State Legislator, and sports referees. Maybe Gayle wants to eliminate those protections, too.