Re: What is the point of hate laws?

In article
<c42ad6c9-9c82-4146-a520-272fcd3937b6@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
Michael Price  <nini_pad@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>On Apr 18, 12:04 am, kmc...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 (Kenneth McVay OBC) wrote:
>> In article
<a8333387-8372-403c-ae6b-364b24904...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
>> Michael Price  <nini_...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>
>> >On Apr 17, 3:16 pm, kmc...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 (Kenneth McVay OBC) wrote:
>> >> In article
<533a6f30-ff33-41dd-bdc6-07963ffa1...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
>>
>> >>  <neogenesisf...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> >> >Hate crime laws were established to protect the downtrodden
different
>> >> >from the massively racist society of the U.S., or at least that's
what
>> >> >they want you to think. They serve to show that all Americans
deserve
>> >> >justice but some deserve more than others. When people assault and
>> >> >murder each other it's alway a hate crime. I don't think someone
who
>> >> >was particularly fond of me would mug me and beat me up. Hate crime
>> >> >legislation wouldn't be too horrible if it only allowed the judge
to
>> >> >extend a sentence but in many states it requires that he do so.
>>
>> >> Tell it to the Tutsis.
>>
>> > What the hell are you talking about?  What good would hate crime
>> >legislation do for people who were the subject of genocide?  Surely
>> >the penalty for multiple murder is about as bad as it can get and
>> >hate crime laws wouldn't increase it.
>>
>> The Hutu government actively fostered hatred against Tutsis, using the
>> government's own radio facilities to do it. Genocide was encouraged
>> through hate speech.
>
>  And if hate speech laws had been on the books who would have
>prosecuted?

Those who broadcast the incitements to genocide, perhaps?

>> Without that hate speech, there would have been no genocide.
>>
>  Without the government paying people to kill there would have been
>no genocide.  The government is far more likely to be prosecuted for
>that than for a few radio broadcasts.

The radio broadcasts were the source of the genocide.

>> The same thing happened during the NAZI era, where government organs of
>> propaganda were used to create the atmosphere which permitted genocide.
I
>> think it is accurate to say that the Holocaust began with hate speech.
>>
>  But if hate speech had been all that the government had done it would
>not have created the holocaust.  Murder is already illegal as is
>genocide, so what is the point of making hate speech illegal?

The point of making it illegal would seem to be to dissuade folks
from employing it, don't you think?

Hate speech in NAZI Germany paved the way to genocide. It was the vehicle
that prepared an entire nation for the horrors to come.

-- 
'I fully accept this, it's a fact. The discussion on Auschwitz, the gas
chambers and the Holocaust is finished ... it's useless to dispute it'.
(David Irving on Holocaust denial, as quoted by his Austrian lawyer)
The Nizkor Project:                    http://www.nizkor.org/