The claim of last Thursday's Cardinal View editorial, 'The constitution protects hate,' that hate crime laws 'afford minority populations special, un-equal rights under the law' is both erroneous and ignorant.
The Wisconsin statute cited in Thursday's article defines hate crimes as those committed 'in whole or in part because of the actor's belief or perception regarding the race, religion, color, disability, sexual orientation, national origin or ancestry of that person.'
Nowhere in this description is the term 'minority' even mentioned, let alone emphasized as a defining factor in determining which cases hate crime laws apply to and which are unaffected.
Hate crime laws protect any party victimized because of their race, creed, etc.'regardless of whether the victim is a minority or not. In the eyes of the law, there is no difference between hate crimes committed against homosexuals or heterosexuals, blacks or whites. The law does not intend to outlaw hate as you say, but, in the words of Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice William Bablitch, 'to punish more severely criminals who act with a more depraved, antisocial intent.'
Most importantly, there is a distinct difference between holding a belief, and using that belief to justify a criminal action. Ultimately, hate crime laws seek to oppose the victimization of any party by another person who chooses to act out their own hatred in a criminal manner.
It is simply negligent to allow criminals motivated by bigotry to get off with minimal punishments. The constitution protects the right to hate, but not the right to harm.
