[BibChr]

Charitably assuming that the misunderstanding some of you seem to have is a sincere misunderstanding, let me put it another way. This has helped clarify the matter for some who had approached it as you seem to.

1. Two people commit the SAME EXACT CRIME
2. ONE ONLY of the acts is judged to be a "hate crime"
3. The person who committed the "hate crime" is punished more severely than the person who in committing an identical act committed a garden-variety, unmodified crime
4. Therefore, to the degree the "hate criminal" is punished more severely, he is being punished for what he thought

If your misunderstanding is sincere, that should clear it up. If we can punish people for what they think — and "hate-crime" supporters necessarily say we can — then the premise of this article is perfectly valid.

Dan

[Orual]

My objection is that the example given at the beginning of the article is absolutely ridiculous. That would never happen and will never happen. What follows that opening therefore loses all credibility.

[Dimensio]

I am not misunderstanding anything. In the case of a hate crime, the person is being punished both for their action and their motive for the action. Without the action, there is no crime and there are no charges, thus the thought alone isn't going to put someone in jail.

I'm not saying that I like it, but I do at least try to understand it before criticizing it.