-Caveat Lector- http://pioneerplanet.com/opinion/ocl_docs/034910.htm Published: Tuesday, September 14, 1999 Robert E. Regier Commentator Hate-crime label trivializes equally heinous violence A night of drinking and partying took an ugly turn for Brad Young when the young white man was severely beaten by three Sioux Indians in Martin, S.D., in August. In a similar crime in July, Sioux Indian Robert Many Horses had been slain by four whites near Mobridge, S.D. Alcohol had been a factor in this crime as well. Young's assault received a great deal of attention from the media and a statement from South Dakota Gov. Bill Janklow. Many Horses' killing received relatively no attention from either. Young's assault went national after being labeled a ``hate crime'' by the local sheriff. Even NBC's ``Today'' show covered the tragic beating -- but not the slaying of Many Horses. The unavoidable fact is that the media sprang to action in the Young case only because the label of ``hate'' was used. Janklow's press secretary said that his office had received no press calls on the Many Horses killing. In Young's case, however, ``the sheriff used the words `hate crime' and the media gathered.'' The sheriff later explained that he did not think the beating was a ``hate crime'' of the racial sort. He had meant the term in the more general sense -- that such a brutal act must have been committed out of hatred. The sheriff is on to something here. All crimes are committed out of some manner of animus, such as anger, jealousy or greed. The perpetrators in both the Many Horses and Young cases acted hatefully. Can a physical attack on another human being be considered anything but an ultimate expression of hatred? The South Dakota discrepancy reveals the absurdity of the concept of ``hate crimes.'' The ``hate crime'' tag sensationalizes crimes that should be treated no differently from any other offense. Like all people, Robert Many Horses and Brad Young deserve equal protection under the law. ``Hate crime'' laws trigger selective outrage and concern. When homosexual University of Wyoming student Matthew Shepard was killed a year ago, the press and politicians from Tom Daschle to Bill Clinton and Barney Frank spoke out about it. Homosexual activists used the tragedy to lobby for ``hate crime'' laws. Yet there was nary a word from anybody about an 8-year-old Wyoming girl, Christin Lamb, who had been abducted, raped, killed and thrown in a landfill just days before. Wyoming Gov. Jim Geringer wondered aloud during a speech about Matthew Shepard why that was. The likely reason Katie Couric, Dan Rather and the gang disregarded the little girl's death while playing up the college student's is that the former wasn't a ``hate crime.'' Apparently, Christin Lamb was murdered out of some other ``nonlove'' emotion. ``Hate crime'' laws imply that an 8-year-old girl is not quite as deserving of the same protection under the law as a homosexual college student. Nobody in his right mind would dispute that the killers of Matthew Shepard must pay the penalty for their horrific act. At the same time, no one in his right mind could look into the eyes of young Christin's mother and tell her that Shepard's killers deserve tougher punishment than the killers of her daughter. No one could honestly look in the faces of the parents of the athletes killed in the Columbine High School massacre and tell them that Cassie Bernall -- one of the Christian students -- and Isaiah Shoels -- the black student -- were more deserving of legal protection because ``athletes'' is not a group covered by ``hate crime'' laws. A recent Wirthlin Worldwide poll revealed that nine out of 10 Americans believe that criminals should be punished for their actions alone, not their beliefs, and that their victims should receive equal protection under the law. That opinion has an excellent historical foundation. The Declaration of Independence proclaims that ``all men are created equal,'' and the Constitution's 14th Amendment guarantees equal protection under the law. No one should be given more ``equal'' justice than anyone else. Regier is a writer for the cultural studies department at the Family Research Council, a social conservative research and advocacy organization at 801 G St. N.W., Washington, D.C. 20001. Distributed by KRT News Service. © 1999 PioneerPlanet / St. Paul (Minnesota) Pioneer Press - All Rights Reserved copyright information -- ----------------------- NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ----------------------- DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic screeds are not allowed. Substance—not soapboxing! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
