It is surely a very gruesome and unfathomable thing to beat to death a little child, sometimes more than beating a person to death in a club brawl. Although the thought of a little child getting beaten to death is as you say, "something worse", i believe that in the end, it is still killing a living person. That's just my opinion. I think what is important is the motive behind the killing. Your statement might be more acceptable to me if both parties in the pub brawl had a hand in starting the actual brawl. but what if the killer or the victim is just defending himself?

anyway, that's my opinion. great blog sir. i shall be subscribing to this

No Matt…  It would mean that the idiots who belong to these groups who go around with their "God hates fags!" signs bashing men who they suspect are gay should be criminalised.  And who would be against that.  It is NOT a matter of "<span style="color: black;"><span><span>believing that homosexual conduct is wrong" The thugs who beat the life out of (ie. murder or try to murder) someone for being gay are NOT noble philosophers merely expressing their well thought out beliefs – or saints upholding their spiritual beliefs.  They are akin to Nazi gangs on Kristalnacht.  </span></span></span>

Any YES! "<span style="color: black;"><span><span>the state is in a position of ruling which political beliefs are orthodox and which are heterodox."… thats why we don't have slavery… why women can vote… and why you are free to practice your religion… because the Big Bad State passed rulings on which political beliefs are orthodox (freedom, equality, etc.) and which ones are hetrodox (beliefs supporting racism, slavery, etc)</span></span></span>

<span style="color: black;"><span><span>Bad ideas like racism ARE fought with the rigorous propagation of good ideas that is why thet BECOME legislation.  I believe we are seeing this great tradition continue in our own lives.</span></span></span>

<span style="color: black;"><span><span>Now lets suppose a John (a European) beleives Bob is a Maori who lives in his neighbourhood, John on this basis beats Bob to death again clearly a crime and clearly justly punished. This however <span> </span>is considered a hate crime and punished more harshly. </span></span></span>  
<span style="color: black;"><span> </span></span>  
<span style="color: black;"><span><span>Whats the difference? In both cases the person had a moral judgment that an action was wrong and in both cases the person acted unjustly. The only difference is that the content of the moral judgment made <span> </span>in the former case it was a judgment about theft in the latter a judgment about race. The person in the latter case is incarcerated for longer solely because he believes Maori living in the same neighbourhood as Europeans is wrong. </span></span></span>  
<span style="color: black;"><span> </span></span>  
<span style="color: black;"><span>Now should people be discriminated against and have their liberty revoked because of their moral opinions about Maori living in the same neighbourhood as Europeans? I think the answer is clearly no that violates the persons civil rights. I have no problem with people being incarerated or even executed for murdering others, but I do not think that in addition to this they should be punished for not accepting a liberal view of race relations. </span></span>

Same deal?

In addition to being executed??

I have already answered your objections above I believe.  The person who kills someone because they think they are gay is more likely to re-offend, is more likely to convince others to commit similar crimes – just like the racist.

They are not being punished for hating gays – they are being punished for putting this hatred into action.  Personally I would be in favour of a preventative system in this instance which would stop the murder in the first place.

Just try to remember this Matt:  The people walking around inthe USA with "God hates Fags!" placards are not as sophisticated nor as tolerant nor as forgiving as you are.  Your arguments while having a coffee in a nice cafe inAuckland translate to a broken beaten body and a grieving mother in less intellectual atmospheres.  Always worth bearing in mind.

So yes.  I guess I am rather arrogant and totalitarian.  But you say this as though it is necessarily a bad thing.  As though to throw the word "democracy!" in the air is the same as having a reaoned belief.  But that is just my pet peeve….

To the question:

If someone's crime is motivated by a fanatical hatred of (lets say) black people – and the whole reason they killed was due to this prejudice, then they are far more likely to re-offend than someone who was motivated by a one off event (seeing their wife cheating say).  They are also more likely to incite other people to commit similar crimes.

I think there is a real difference between the KKK member and the over stressed husband who snaps.  To say mantras like "assault is assualt" an "murder is murder" just brushes the differencces under the carpet.

Hate crime laws are policing thought?  I guess so in a way.  Do you not think that thoughts can lead to violence and murder?  Do you think that we should (for instance) ban a Nazi party in this country or are you happy for them to have their say?  I would sy ban them.  Characterise me as totaitarian if you wil lbut – Here I stand.

Do I believe in punishing people for their beliefs?  I guess i do in some instanes.  Do I think *my* beliefs are better than other peoples?  Yes! Yes! Yes! I genuinly blieve that Nazism is NOT as good as what *I* believe… I think that the KKK do not have as good a grasp on principles of what it is to be human as *me*
You say this makes me arrogant?  So be it.  You say to try to shut these idiots up is totalitarian?  Again.  So be it.   I don't worship at the alter of Freedom until it becomes so important that I will allow attrocities to be committed in its name.

Am I to take from your comments Max that freedom of conscience, the freedom others have to form and manifest their own opinions about morality, is not as important as your beliefs about these things?

A little arrogant and totalitarian don't you think?