George Costanza
A Friendly Liberal
Opposition to hate crime legislation under the red herring of "thought crimes" or whatever other deflection that is thrown up, is nothing more than support of those who commit hate crimes.
We've gotten into this before and I don't want to start another long back-and-forth about the merits of hate crimes. I just want to say I think you are very wrong in this statement.
As far as the OP, I would definitely think that it being a transgendered person was the motivating factor before race. Either (or neither) is possible, I just think it's more likely to have been about the transgender.
I know we have, and I don't want to either. My only point is, I have a lot of trouble figuring out (1) why or how anyone could oppose hate crime legislation in the first instance and (2) what the justification for opposing hate crime legislation is other than a desire to protect those who commit such crimes.
I recognize all of the arguments that are put forth (punishes thought, unconstitutional denial of equal protection, etc.). NONE of those arguments hold water. NONE of them. What we are left with is - let the good ole' boys have their fun whuppin' a little minority ass. Why punish them any more for it than anyone else?
It's kind of like opposing gay marriage. Why? What's the REAL reason. In both cases, it's simple - the authoritarian tendency to get off on sticking it to minorities.