So. Why exactly is it important to have this category?
Why is it more wrong to kill someone because they are Iraqi, Cherokee,....or just plain in your way?
I never got it about hate crimes either.
It seems like all these extra categories are ways of saying that there is murder and then there are worst things.
So far as I can see, there are accidents, there's self-defense, there's euthenasia, and then there's everything else.
Joanna
^^^^
CB: I'd say it is good because it specifically criminalizes racism, extreme national chauvinism and religious bigotry.
The anti-genocide law doesn't make it _more_ wrong to kill someone for hating, because the punishment for genocide is no greater than the punishment for regular murder ( especially in states where the punishment for regular murder is the death penalty). Also, the UN Convention doesn't require that a murder be committed for a genocide conviction. Can be doing other things less than killing, like sterilizing members of a group, removing children from a group.
Therefore , as a whole the anti-genocide law specifically focuses on declaring racism , extreme national chauvinism or religious bigotry themselves as wrong. That's good. :>) I don't think there has ever been a law in history like that before. Have to think about that. Lets see Hieroglyphs, Hammarabi's Code, Ten Commandments....
Also, it is a law that is especially applicable to high government officials. That's kind of nice too. Can't charge Bush with regular murder in Iraq because he didn't pull the triggers.
What are any laws for ? In part, for society to send a message on what it holds to be wrong and right. Racism , chauvinism and bigotry are big problems in world history. Quite an accomplishment to get bourgeois world society to even declare them wrong. It's actually a credit to the bourgeoisie, in a way.