Hate crimes

First, one group wants one thing prosecuted as a hate crime, then another. Thought crimes and hate speech and wrong-think, oh my!

If it's wrong to kill, and you can go to prison for life, what sense is there in prosecuting for the particular reason for the killing? It's superficial eyewash at best, and an attempt to create a protected class of people -- a caste -- and to bring the concept of "thought-crime" to reality at worst. Murder is plenty of evidence of hate; his thoughts and reasons are superfluous except to establish his frame of mind (intent or not, insanity or not).

As for the Islamists offended by the recent cartoons, maybe you should take your religion back from the violent nutjobs whose actions lend themselves to these kinds of caricatures. On the other hand, I agree with the Financial Times (sorry, got it from the WSJ, and both papers are subscription):

… The cartoons are, at best, juvenile. Were it not for the faux-Arabic calligraphy, moreover, they could take their place in an older European tradition of anti-Semitic caricatures.

That said, even if it was stupid to publish them, the newspaper had the right to do so. In an age marked by the growth of religious belief and politicisation, all religion must be open to a full range of opinion and analysis; satire is a form of analysis. …

[Update] I was going to use this quote:

"I wish he would have lived and gone on trial," said Dan Sheterom, 51, who lives above Puzzles Lounge and frequents the tavern.

But in the original version I saw a few minutes ago, Mr. Sheterom finishes with (paraphrasing from memory), "I wanted to see if the commonwealth would send it to the federal level as a hate crime." However, now that part is gone. Why?