Comments on: 14th Amendment – no need for hate crimes legislation

By: Miguel Sanchez

Miguel Sanchez — Sun, 25 Jan 2009 02:41:46 +0000

I agree with chritian attorney. theres no need for speacial attention to anyone. treat others the way you would like to be treated. The Homosexuals are no different, just cause they arnt normal that dont mean they need speacial attention. they brought it on themselves to be different. so they should just live with what comes with being different. Being different brings attention, and theyre suffering cause they choose to be that way.
“The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution guarantees equal protection under the law,” he explains. “Hate crimes legislation is a prima fascia violation of the Fourteenth Amendment in that it elevates one class of citizen based upon their chosen sexual behaviors above other people. It creates a two-tiered justice system where there are first-class victims and second-class victims.”

By: Vanessa Carlos

Vanessa Carlos — Sat, 24 Jan 2009 01:07:27 +0000

Well, for one thing this article is way too short so it is very hard to come to a conclusion on what my opinion is on the reintroduction of this bill. Also there are no facts to back up any of the opinions of this piece. There are only vague opinions that people make without having any backup evidence on why they believe the things they do. For example, if I say that I believe that the “Z” letter should be eliminated from the alphabet because it is not very significant in our language; then I would not convince very many people because I do not have any facts to back up my opinion. However, if I say that the letter “Z” should be eliminated because only 0.1% of the English language has words that use the letter “Z”. In contrast to the 88% of people who misuse, misspell, or do not know words with the letter “Z”; then I would convince many people with my argument because it sounds reasonable as a result of my research. (Warning: These are not real facts I only used them as part of my example)
Now even though this article has many flaws and not very many facts I still have an opinion after reading this article. I believe that the fourteenth amendment was written to try to have fair treatment among all U.S. citizens. This means that there should not be such thing as hate crime, but since we sadly live in a world surrounded by hate and violence there needed to be an arrangement to fit the hate crime law. Now I believe that every time you use violence you should be punished because it is not right, but since that is not possible something else needs to be done that does not exclude regular citizens like me. I’m not sure what yet, but definitely not changing the hate crime law one more time. What needs to be done is create one universal hate crime law.
So in the end I agree with Matt Barber.

By: **iAn*oLaZaBa**

**iAn*oLaZaBa** — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 04:13:01 +0000

I think the 14th amendment is one of the best amendment there is dealing with race, the thirteenth and fifteenth also have a very idea of how to stop a citizen from being racist. This country is ivolving as a whole with all the different racial diversities, we really don’t need any kind of hate crimes in the United States. What i think the 14th amendment could work on is also helping the people who are not citizens or naturalized. It will be a much better place to live in.

By: madalyn guerrero

madalyn guerrero — Sun, 18 Jan 2009 06:32:57 +0000

I agree with Sheila Jackson-Lee for wanting to include crimes against a persons sexual orientation/gender into the definition of a hate crime. In the 14th Amendment it protects all people naturally born of the united states equal protection, but this really isn’t being enforced especially when dealing with transgenders and gays.

In the reading Matt Barber stated that he believed the bill was unnecessary because there isn’t an epidemic of hate crimes being committed against homosexuals/transgenders, but he is completely wrong. In 65% of hate crimes are because of a person is gay or something of that short. Society puts these people as out casts and they shouldn’t because they are people with feeling just like another person would have.

I think something needs to be done to the 14th amendment to be more strong in its purpose. Because currently those words, “equal protect” are not help anyone and things need to be CHANGED!

By: julia su

julia su — Sat, 17 Jan 2009 06:26:04 +0000

After reading the article, I would have to agree with Matt Barber. Because by adding gay people and transgender into the amendment is a form of discrimination. Gay people and transgender are no different from straight people or anyone else. So why “exclude” them? People get picked on for different reasons and life throws challenges at you. And if we make a law or punishment for every little thing, then what is going to happen? Besides we already have the 14th amendment. This amendemt protects all persons born or naturalized in the United States and nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Isn’t this enough?

By: Colleen Eckvahl

Colleen Eckvahl — Sat, 17 Jan 2009 04:54:56 +0000

I agree with matt barber. The 14th amendment already provides equal protection so the bill is not necessary. Making a bill for only homosexual or transgender people like this is not necessary when they are already covered.

By: clay

clay — Sat, 17 Jan 2009 03:36:18 +0000

A number of you have said that the 14th Amendment already provides equal protection under the law, so why add it. At the same time, many you feel, as Stephanie noted by noting 19 years of research, that the current understanding of the 14th Amendment needs to be updated so the court system considers another category of individuals.

Both are good points. I would prefer to see the judicial branch of the government address this issue rather than the legislative branch. Why? The legislative branch tends to overdue it creating legislation that results in more problems than it solves.

I am wondering if hate crime legislation has reduced crime.

By: laura cortez

laura cortez — Sat, 17 Jan 2009 02:11:39 +0000

i agree with Matt Barber, I think that this bill is not necessary, yes there are hate crimes against homosexuals but they are not the only ones that are being judged and/or mistreated. the 14th amendment says that every person has equal rights, passing this bill will be like granting homosexuals special treatment, and it would just be a waist of time because they are already protected, and if someone commits a hate crime, they will be punished for that.

By: Joe Diaz

Joe Diaz — Sat, 17 Jan 2009 01:19:07 +0000

I think that this bill is not necessary. The Fourteenth Amendment already protects everyone equally under the law. Making a bill only for transgender or homosexuals is not needed; they are alredy protected. Adding a bill is just a waste of time and money.

By: ivett

ivett — Sat, 17 Jan 2009 01:04:18 +0000

I think that if they are going to make a bill they should apply it to everyone and every race not only a certain type of people or race. Hate crimes do not only apply to homosexuals.There are other people effected by hate crimes.If there making this bill to protect homosexuals they should make it to protect everyone too