Such an important bill. For everyone.

God, this is a wonderful day for civil rights. This is the best thing the Democrats have done so far with their majority! I am so happy!

I am really surprised and pleased that the transgendered made it onto the list. They face a lot of violence - look at Gwen Araujo, who was brutally murdered. When I was in college, I knew a transgendered person that would get death threats yelled at her from people in cars.

When I think about what I love most about America, it's our universal implementation of civil rights. Yes, it doesn't work perfectly, but it's the ideal we strive for. This is America at it's best!

Yay!

I think its a sad day for americans rights, all americans. and No Space...I am not a homophobe.

@catepillargirl-what? how is protecting lgbt americans sad?

this is a GREAT day for america, and this country has really evolved since matthew shepard. and including transgendered people on the bill as a protected class was extremely necessary because i believe they bear the brunt of the most physical violence and murders in the lgbt community.

A sad day for their rights to commit crimes, maybe.

No a sad day that we have to pass bills based on emotions. I posted this else where and I stand by it.

"Some have argued that if it is true that all violent crimes are the result of the perpetrator's contempt for the victim, then all crimes are hate crimes. Thus, if there is no alternate rationale for prosecuting some people more harshly for the same crime based on who the victim is, then different defendants are treated unequally under the law, which violates the United States Constitution"

LOL, wait CG, you think rounding up pregnant women and sequestering them from their classmates is A-OK under the equal protection clause, but favoring gay people is not? Hate to tell you, but when the conservatives on the S. Ct. decided not to afford gay people a protected status under the Constitution, the result is that all laws favoring or disfavoring gay people are subject to rational basis review. This has obviously backfired on conservatives because although it is more difficult to strike down a law as unconstitutional on the basis that it discriminates against gay people, it is also easier to create a law that FAVORS them. In contrast, your dream scenario of discriminating against pregnant women is different. Classifications based on gender are subject to intermediate scrutiny and thus are harder to uphold.

chloe. This has nothing to do with equal protection. nothing. this has nothing to do with conservatives vs liberals IMO, This isnt anything to do with being homophobic, or racist, or bigoted, nothing. It has everything to do with legislating based on EMOTIONS.

CG - you wrote "different defendants are treated unequally under the law, which violates the United States Constitution." I was responding to that portion of your statement.

I know, I mean that the HATE CRIME LAW Has nothing to do with equal protection...got it?

According to a study I found, there were 121 transgender people murdered in 2008 and another 81 so far in 2009. The study also denotes that violence against transgender people is worst in North America and Latin America. It also says that a transgendered person murdered every 3rd day. Because the population is so low, just 1 in 30,000 of the populace, that is very significant.

I don't think any of those people murdered would think anti-hate crimes legislation was purely emotional in nature.

CG, with all respect, I do think that your opposition to this bill belies your true feelings.

While I have nothing against gays and minorities I really hate Mormon Polygamists and many would agree with me. If my friends and I beat up some FLDS mormon pligs, could this law be applied against us?
I hope not.

I disagree with penalty-enhancing hate crime laws, but I am glad this is seen as a moral victory for the LGBT community.

The hate crime laws are created to protect "minority" groups in society. They are constitutional as the pass the rational test that all government laws must in order to be held up by the court. There is a difference between a person committing murder during robbery and a person who kills based a the victims race, religion, ethnicity, gender or sexual orientation. All things now protected under the hate crimes law. The court system already treats criminals differently based a myriad of laws. We have degrees of murder. I think it is a great victory for civil rights. Finally, it can be argued that all legislation is based on emotion, from anger to sadness. It is a national emotion and we hear it all the time. Protests are based on emotion. Nothing in life is devoid of it, as evidence by these comments.

I can't wait for the day that LGBT community has the same standard of living as every other citizen of this country - including protection from hate crimes. Glad to see this bill is getting passed.

Matthew Shepard was not killed because he was gay. What happened to Mr. Shepard was an incredibly grotesque crime. No one is questioning that in the least. But, what about Jeffrey Curley? Jeffrey was only 10 years old when he died at the hands of 2 gay men. The same thing happened to 13-year-old Jesse Dirkhising. Or what about Channon Christian and Christopher Newsom in Knoxville? They were white and the animals that brutalized and murdered them were black. They were charged and convicted with first degree murder, among a litany of other charges. I don't recall hearing a hate crime charge being among them. Now that I think about it, there was very little national coverage of this abomination in TN. Were hate crime charges applied to any one of these people?

What I'm trying to say with these examples is that this law is on a very slippery slope. Phater, you made a good point. Theoretically, this law would certainly apply to you. A crime is a crime. CG's quote sums it up much more eloquently than I ever could. Hate crime laws, various religious and regular speech codes, etc. often protect certain minorities at the expense of others.

Spacekat, were you the one with the gay Iranian friend? Please tell him to be safe and not to trust anyone on Facebook, Twitter, etc. Many gay males have been hunted like dogs through the social networking sites, especially in the Middle East. The fundies consider this mission halal. Please tell him to be careful!!

Oh, Cirrus...

Matthew Shepard was, without a doubt, murdered for being gay. Two Christian men went to a gay bar, determined to befriend and intimidate gay men. During the trial, their girlfriends testified that they had previously plotted to rob a gay man. I really think you should get your facts straight before making such bold, incorrect claims about such a sensitive issue.

As far as my Iranian friend, it was a she, not a he. Assuming your concerns are genuine, thank you. As far as I know, she's still in the closet.

I'm glad they passed such an important bill, but why did it take so long? I believe that whole ordeal happened in 1998, right? So, why has the bill just now gone into effect in 2009?

Sorry, I misread your other posts concerning your friend. If she is able to stay in this country, she needs to do so. She faces a horrific fate, if she is found out while in Iran.

Let me rephrase concerning the other point. There is enough doubt in my mind as to whether he was murdered for being gay. The story has taken on a life of its own, with Mr. Shepard becoming a folk hero. I saw an interview with the animals that did this to him. They were just evil, pure and simple. I'm pretty sure some of the detectives on the case thought that the main motive was robbery. And, they were Christians (??) like Rev. Phelps and his gang are Christians. Meaning...they're not. (I find it kind of interesting that you brought that up.)

Sorry. I just can't buy into this.

"G, with all respect, I do think that your opposition to this bill belies your true feelings"

Space, You like to call others racist and homophobes, but you throw those terms around WAY TOO MUCH for them to have any impact or to be true in any sense, I would hold back on doing that so your credibility goes up. especially on Citizen 4.0. where you are treading on thin ice.

No matter what you think of me, I am being honest and true about my concern for your friend.

CG, I have to ask. What is your avatar?

a spider..isnt he cute? and unnerving at the same time.

Agree with CaterpillarGirl & Chouette4u -- ALL people should be protected. One group shouldn't me more protected than another, or criminals shouldn't be more harshly punished because of who they hurt. If someone mugs a gay guy walking down the street because he's wearing a Rolex, is it a hate crime because he's gay?

Sad day for America.
Why? Because it took THIS LONG for this piece of legislature to actually be applied.

I thought this had been passed years ago, when they took away "gay scare" as a defense in court.

How is a crime determined to be a hate crime? Do they look at the past of the criminal? Statements from family and friends? I really would like to know. I would google it but it is difficult searching websites from my phone.

Mamacita, you know I have a ton of respect for you - but do you really feel that way? I think prosecutors can look at the evidence they have and determine if they have the neccasary evidence. Then, it's up to a jury to convict them. There is the same burden of proof as in any other crime.

We are all innocent until proven guilty. I'd have to look at the law, but I'd imagine there are clear standards for establishing intent.

I also want to say this. One of the things that really influenced my view of the world was learning the psychology of how we make decisions. We'd like to think that we are rational, think about the facts we have and then make our decisions. But the truth is, the human mind rarely works this way.

The truth is, we decide how we want to feel and then justify our reasoning for it with facts we might have. That's why, from my worldview, it's hard for me to understand why someone would oppose this legislation if they didn't dislike gay people. I am sure some people have reasons, but I honestly do not understand them.

Not everyone who opposes the hate crime bill dislikes gay people.....to think that? is illogical.

Spacekatgal, is there anyone here saying that they disapprove of this bill but still agree with harsher punishments for other types of hate crimes? Am I somehow bigoted against all of these specially protected groups because I disagree with the basis of hate crime laws?

I could go into a lot of nerdy details about likeability heuristics, reasoning chains, and emotional shortcuts - but I won't. I do believe, in my own opinion, the decision psychology goes something like this.

"Gays. Emotionally I don't like gay people. Do I support gay rights? No. Why don't I support gay rights? Let's use my conservative lens of the world to put my feelings in a way I can understand."

Emotional dissonance is distressing. It's confusing for the person experiencing it, so the mind seeks to minimize it. Not supporting gay rights and considering that you might be a homophobe is something that would cause significant emotional dissonance. There has to be a reasoning chain that lets the person justify their feelings.

I am not aiming this at anyone in particular, I am just explaining the way I see people that don't support anti-hate crimes legislation. This is my own worldview.

SKG, to respond, I can pull from CaterpillarGirl -- just because I dislike this legislation does not in ANY way mean I don't support equal right (I don't call myself a "gay rights" or "womens rights" supporter -- its equal rights).

I volunteer with an organization in NYC that has different sub-committees handle different "outreach" umbrellas. One committee regularly lobbies in Albany (NY state capital) for a law to be passed that lets women who have been abused and assault or kill their abuser will be given time off of their sentence. MY sub-committee puts me on 8 hour overnight shifts in New York City emergency rooms to sit with domestic violence victims and be their advocate during their visit. That said? I think murder is murder is murder. Someone who takes another's life should be punished for it as provided by the law. They shouldn't have to serve more time because the person they killed was a different color or gender or was hetero- or homosexual, and they shouldn't be allowed to serve less time because the person they killed was a hateful person. If we all want equality, we need to be treated equally.

Also, I've taken those psych classes too, and do not trust The Masses or their decision making skills that much, either. However, it doesn't mean my belief on this changes just because people can be easily influenced. Just my two cents.

Thank you for explaining.

I guess I just can't understand why'd you'd feel that way, especially after seeing it first hand. I do respect your prerogative to come to a different conclusion than me, though. It's honestly surprising, though.

Having lived a life where I've spent so much time in the GLBT community, had girlfriends, had boyfriends, and eventually decided to marry a man - this is a really personal fight for me.

And I applaud you for it!! I am not saying that GLBT members of society shouldn't be protected and shouldn't have equal rights/opportunities, etc. I just think that laws shouldn't be conditional. I think someone said above that if the GLBT community is taking this as a major victory, then I'm very truly thrilled its having a positive outcome.

@cirrus1701- i find your commentary despicable. matthew shepard was CLEARLY targeted because he was gay and to deny that to make your asinine point is disgusting and besmirches his memory, and is a form of trying to deny homophobia and the myriad ways that lgbt americans are discriminated against. you don't get to whitewash how this young man was murdered because you can't take the truth, do you understand?

and i love the isolated incidents of gay people attacking children you brought up,that a lot of homophobes like to bring up in their arguements that homosexuals are inherently patholigical, predatory, and shouldn't be around are but sorry on a whole most people who attack, rape, and murder children, including young boys, ARE STRAIGHT MEN. sorry that diversion didn't work. and your example of the two white people killed by two blacks isn't particularly relevant to this conversation, but explain to me when white people were ever the victims of systemic, instutionialized racism in the united states? black people are the most targeted group for hate crimes based on race. http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/hc2007/victims.htm . hate crimes laws are supposed to protect groups of people who are victims of systems of oppression and are sought out for violent reprisals simply because they possess "undesirable" attributes they cannot change. sorry to inform you, but white straight people do not have to contend with systems of oppression the way other groups of people do and that's just a fact. they are seen as the norm and are the most privileged group in society.

This is another attempt to bring us into a orwellian police state and further legalize thought crime.

Stop the new world order and bring real human rights and civil liberties to the table, http://uswgo.com/