Here’s how the AP began its story about today’s House vote to expand federal hate crimes legislation:
The House voted Thursday to expand federal hate crime categories to include violent attacks against gays and people targeted because of gender, acting just hours after the White House threatened a veto.
The New York Times:
The House of Representatives voted today to extend “hate crime” protection to people who are victimized because of their sexuality. But the most immediate effect of the bill may be to set up another veto showdown between Democrats and President Bush.
The Los Angeles Times gets it right:
The House, defying a fresh veto threat, passed legislation today to expand the federal hate-crime law to include violent acts motivated by a victim’s sexual orientation, gender or disability.
I have a feeling the disability component of the bill was overlooked or buried by most news outlets because it isn’t provoking nearly as much overheated rhetoric from social conservatives as the provision regarding sexual orientation. Here’s an illustrative quote from Concerned Women for America:
Perhaps most frightening is the fact that liberal legislators have refused any amendment which would substantively protect religious expression in association with this legislation. Similar laws have been used around the world — and right here at home — to silence opposition to the homosexual lifestyle. That refusal speaks volumes about the true agenda behind this legislation, which is to grant official government recognition to both homosexual and cross-dressing behaviors, and to silence opposition to those behaviors.
It seems to escape much of the radical right that the bill kicks in after a crime has been committed and the last time I checked, being a homophobic crank isn’t a crime. But I digress.
According to 2005 numbers from the FBI, 53 hate crimes were motivated by disability bias. A small number, to be sure. Nevertheless, the inclusion of disability in the House bill is significant because it acknowledges the persistent stigma and prejudice that can and does motivate violence against people with disabilities act. I’m also willing to bet that the number of violent incidents motivated by disability bias is substantially underreported.
Conservatives like to argue that all crimes of the same class should be treated equally. But they overlook the fact that our criminal judicial system does make distinctions based on things like intent and the status of the victim. Hate crimes legislation will probably not prevent these violent acts, but until we can learn to play nice together (or at least learn to assault and kill each other for purely personal reasons), these crimes deserve a forceful response from the state.
