Gay Controversy on Rutger University Campus

By now, a number of you may have hard about the controversial "cyber bullying" case on Rutgers Campus. One of the students had a gay roomie. He must've hated the thought and secretly video taped the gay student having sex. The tape was shown all over "Cyber Space." The homosexual student, suffering grave humiliation, then committed suicide. This case is threatening to add a whole other category to the "Hate Crime" list. They're naming it, Cyber bullying by sexual preference" or something very similar.

Though I don't agree with gay bashing, it looks like a juvenile prank with a tragic ending is threatening to add another category to the hate crime list. My feeling is that, while an argument can be made for protecting certain groups to a degree, this is going way too far. Though the suicide is unfortunate, and the student taping the sex act may have been insensitive, how can a case be made to prosecute him when the media is (a) Intruding on the privacy of public figures via taped phone calls (See "Mel Gibson"), (b) Celebrity Sex tapes, authorized or not, are being circulated around the net (see Pamela Anderson and Paris Hilton). Today's media is a nightmare version of a Gossip magazine. However, when the victim of invasion of privacy is gay, it's prosecuted as a hate crime and the student in question is to be tried in a court of law?

In my opinion, there is no place for the "Hate Crime Law" when (a) Some of "The Protected Groups" are committing most of the crimes in America. (This observation does not include the "Gay Community.) (b) The number one Hate crime in the country, man aggressing himself on woman via rape, has mysteriously been excluded and women don't seem to be a protected group. (c) When will "So called Moderate Muslims" and "Illegal Aliens" be added to these protected groups?

Considering the application of Hate Crime Laws, does it make any sense to have them anymore at this point in our history? Is it realistic to think that they serve "any" purpose in protecting the bulk of society? Is the word "Hate Crime" a ratings ploy for news networks and nothing more? Have gays been made to feel special because they're gay? Is there any statistic that can even remotely suggest that hate crime laws have lowered violent crime in America? Thoughts please.

Why did he commit suicide for though?

freakzilla316ftw wrote:

Why did he commit suicide for though?

The gay student was embarrassed that he was outed. The suspect showed the video tape all over cyber space.

I agree with the general premise but :

In my opinion, there is no place for the "Hate Crime Law" when (a) Some of "The Protected Groups" are committing most of the crimes in America. (This observation does not include the "Gay Community.) (b) The number one Hate crime in the country, man aggressing himself on woman via rape, has mysteriously been excluded and women don't seem to be a protected group. (c) When will "So called Moderate Muslims" and "Illegal Aliens" be added to these protected groups?


Just kind of sounds bitter-racist. I get what you're saying, but like many unpleasant realities, there are going to be people(here or anywhere) who will not be able pro process your intent as anything other than hate speech. It specifically sounds like a dig at black people at first, but then it goes on to single out others. The bold section is indefensible anti Islamic rhetoric though, as it stands, without clarification. Are you trying to say there are no such things as moderate Muslims? I'd almost be ready to argue that the existence of this opinion proves the point that Islamic people in the USA face incredible religious intolerance. I could even tie it in to our country's war on Islam and the deeper socio-religious infection that allows such "evil"(as our society should by rights understand it) to exist. We've already covered that in other threads though so I don't want War on Terror discussion to digress the point.

To the point though, charging that kid with a hate crime because he made a sex tape is Un-American. He was a gay guy having sex. No different than a straight guy having sex. The law doesn't need to be making guestimations on the intent, social damage inflicted, heartache and suffering in the context of the sexual orientation. He was a guy having sex. The details shouldn't matter.

We also need to see more details. When he posted it on cyberspace, where did he post it and in what context? What did the gay student say in his suicide note?

Links?

Wolfgangsta wrote:

I agree with the general premise but :

In my opinion, there is no place for the "Hate Crime Law" when (a) Some of "The Protected Groups" are committing most of the crimes in America. (This observation does not include the "Gay Community.) (b) The number one Hate crime in the country, man aggressing himself on woman via rape, has mysteriously been excluded and women don't seem to be a protected group. (c) When will "So called Moderate Muslims" and "Illegal Aliens" be added to these protected groups?


Just kind of sounds bitter-racist. I get what you're saying, but like many unpleasant realities, there are going to be people(here or anywhere) who will not be able pro process your intent as anything other than hate speech. It specifically sounds like a dig at black people at first, but then it goes on to single out others. The bold section is indefensible anti Islamic rhetoric though, as it stands, without clarification. Are you trying to say there are no such things as moderate Muslims? I'd almost be ready to argue that the existence of this opinion proves the point that Islamic people in the USA face incredible religious intolerance. I could even tie it in to our country's war on Islam and the deeper socio-religious infection that allows such "evil"(as our society should by rights understand it) to exist. We've already covered that in other threads though so I don't want War on Terror discussion to digress the point.

+1 Straight up Islamophobic bullshit that belongs on WorldNetDaily or with that moronic pastor in Gainsville.

I am being accused of racism by Wolf??? Where's my hang man's noose?? I'm serious.

(a) We have a black ( Bi racial ) President. We have Black Professionals and Black owners of mags, etc. I think it's insulting to equate Blacks as a whole with crime. However, there is a disproportionate number of black youths committing crimes. A great deal of their victims are Black people. This is reality. Ever been around somebody who's mother was mugged by two thugs? I have. The Black Males that were looking for these animals stated that they should pray the police find them before they did. My point is that Black Males face much more of a danger in the ghetto then in mainstream society, where the hate crime laws are made to protect them.

(b) Rutgers incident. The gay male in question was being taunted by his roomate via sexual preference. The video tape being circulated on the net was the final straw. This is a horrible occurence, though if you take the word "gay" out, it doesn't may make the local news. What's wrong with this picture.

(c) Moderate Muslims. I don't believe we need hate crime laws in the 21st century. No doubt, there are moderate Muslims who deserve all the rights of any American over here. That said, every case should be judged seperately without having "The Hate Crime" shadow over it. This factor will, in every case, influence the jury.

My post is about the "Hate Crime Laws" not moderate muslims.

[quote="Tobe06"]

Wolfgangsta wrote:

I agree with the general premise but :

In my opinion, there is no place for the "Hate Crime Law" when (a) Some of "The Protected Groups" are committing most of the crimes in America. (This observation does not include the "Gay Community.) (b) The number one Hate crime in the country, man aggressing himself on woman via rape, has mysteriously been excluded and women don't seem to be a protected group. (c) When will "So called Moderate Muslims" and "Illegal Aliens" be added to these protected groups?


Just kind of sounds bitter-racist. I get what you're saying, but like many unpleasant realities, there are going to be people(here or anywhere) who will not be able pro process your intent as anything other than hate speech. It specifically sounds like a dig at black people at first, but then it goes on to single out others. The bold section is indefensible anti Islamic rhetoric though, as it stands, without clarification. Are you trying to say there are no such things as moderate Muslims? I'd almost be ready to argue that the existence of this opinion proves the point that Islamic people in the USA face incredible religious intolerance. I could even tie it in to our country's war on Islam and the deeper socio-religious infection that allows such "evil"(as our society should by rights understand it) to exist. We've already covered that in other threads though so I don't want War on Terror discussion to digress the point.

+1 Straight up Islamophobic bullshit that belongs on WorldNetDaily or with that moronic pastor in Gainsville. [/quote] Oh c'mon Tobe. I'm just making a point that these "Hate Crime Laws" do not protect anyone and are showbusiness pieces for the media. Actually, my point is exactly the opposite of your insinuation. My hypothesis is that hate crime laws bring scornful, resentful attitudes towards the protected group. If moderate Muslims are to have their deserved security in our society, the last thing they need is to be a part of the "PC Hate Crime" media circus which will bring them unwanted attention.

Him committing suicide was the cowards way out.

@(a) I agree with you, and don't find this premise racist. Though others would. The black community calls this reality "the black KKK". Unpleasant truths about minority social problems are always uncomfortable, and people would rather chant "Racist" or "hate speech!" in a modern day lynch-mob than actually talk about or address these issues openly. This website has been awash in such behavior from you-know-who in the last week.

@b details please. Links.


@c You're a politician in training. Whoops I over stated my case and need to back track off that. No one cares about the gay basher, especially since you won't provide us with links or details of the case besides them as filtered through your opinion. Clarify the "So Called Moderate Muslims" statement for Ninja's Court, if you would be so kind sir.

freakzilla316ftw wrote:

Him committing suicide was the cowards way out.

Agree, and I generally disagree with the prosecution of anyone for taunting-to-the-point of suicide, beyond already applicable harassment laws. We didn't charge the victims of Columbine for the bullying that lead to the shooting spree, so why charge a bully if his "victim" just focuses the violence inward? Why reward suicide?

Wolfgangsta wrote:

@(a) I agree with you, and don't find this premise racist. Though others would. The black community calls this reality "the black KKK". Unpleasant truths about minority social problems are always uncomfortable, and people would rather chant "Racist" or "hate speech!" in a modern day lynch-mob than actually talk about or address these issues openly. This website has been awash in such behavior from you-know-who in the last week.

@b details please. Links.


@c You're a politician in training. Whoops I over stated my case and need to back track off that. No one cares about the gay basher, especially since you won't provide us with links or details of the case besides them as filtered through your opinion. Clarify the "So Called Moderate Muslims" statement for Ninja's Court, if you would be so kind sir.

Ok Wolf, but don't tell me you're not having fun with this. As much racism as I've accused you of, you finally have me on the ropes. Truth be told, I usually put the name "So called" in front of every race and religion. I don't believe in either. The "So called" in front of moderate Muslims is a coincedence. I could've put that description in front of everyone. This is where we differ. I will state that So called Caucasians, Blacks, Bi Racials, Indians, WASPS, Irish, what ever, are "So called" because they cannnot be defined by their blood, only by their experiences, background and character. These are my thoughts.

True Wolf, If he was straight and a sex tape was released would the same uproar have happened?

[quote="4445Frank"]

Tobe06 wrote:

Wolfgangsta wrote:

I agree with the general premise but :

In my opinion, there is no place for the "Hate Crime Law" when (a) Some of "The Protected Groups" are committing most of the crimes in America. (This observation does not include the "Gay Community.) (b) The number one Hate crime in the country, man aggressing himself on woman via rape, has mysteriously been excluded and women don't seem to be a protected group. (c) When will "So called Moderate Muslims" and "Illegal Aliens" be added to these protected groups?


Just kind of sounds bitter-racist. I get what you're saying, but like many unpleasant realities, there are going to be people(here or anywhere) who will not be able pro process your intent as anything other than hate speech. It specifically sounds like a dig at black people at first, but then it goes on to single out others. The bold section is indefensible anti Islamic rhetoric though, as it stands, without clarification. Are you trying to say there are no such things as moderate Muslims? I'd almost be ready to argue that the existence of this opinion proves the point that Islamic people in the USA face incredible religious intolerance. I could even tie it in to our country's war on Islam and the deeper socio-religious infection that allows such "evil"(as our society should by rights understand it) to exist. We've already covered that in other threads though so I don't want War on Terror discussion to digress the point.

+1 Straight up Islamophobic bullshit that belongs on WorldNetDaily or with that moronic pastor in Gainsville. [/quote] Oh c'mon Tobe. I'm just making a point that these "Hate Crime Laws" do not protect anyone and are showbusiness pieces for the media. Actually, my point is exactly the opposite of your insinuation. My hypothesis is that hate crime laws bring scornful, resentful attitudes towards the protected group. If moderate Muslims are to have their deserved security in our society, the last thing they need is to be a part of the "PC Hate Crime" media circus which will bring them unwanted attention.

The fact that you're still qualifying muslims with "moderate" shows how deeply ingrained the islamophobia is, and the reason why Hate Crimes legislation is required. To prosecute a crime you need to establish motive, if the motive can't otherwise be proven and the target of the crime is an oppressed group, that's when these laws become useful.

[quote="Tobe06"]

4445Frank wrote:

Tobe06 wrote:

Wolfgangsta wrote:

I agree with the general premise but :

In my opinion, there is no place for the "Hate Crime Law" when (a) Some of "The Protected Groups" are committing most of the crimes in America. (This observation does not include the "Gay Community.) (b) The number one Hate crime in the country, man aggressing himself on woman via rape, has mysteriously been excluded and women don't seem to be a protected group. (c) When will "So called Moderate Muslims" and "Illegal Aliens" be added to these protected groups?


Just kind of sounds bitter-racist. I get what you're saying, but like many unpleasant realities, there are going to be people(here or anywhere) who will not be able pro process your intent as anything other than hate speech. It specifically sounds like a dig at black people at first, but then it goes on to single out others. The bold section is indefensible anti Islamic rhetoric though, as it stands, without clarification. Are you trying to say there are no such things as moderate Muslims? I'd almost be ready to argue that the existence of this opinion proves the point that Islamic people in the USA face incredible religious intolerance. I could even tie it in to our country's war on Islam and the deeper socio-religious infection that allows such "evil"(as our society should by rights understand it) to exist. We've already covered that in other threads though so I don't want War on Terror discussion to digress the point.

+1 Straight up Islamophobic bullshit that belongs on WorldNetDaily or with that moronic pastor in Gainsville. [/quote] Oh c'mon Tobe. I'm just making a point that these "Hate Crime Laws" do not protect anyone and are showbusiness pieces for the media. Actually, my point is exactly the opposite of your insinuation. My hypothesis is that hate crime laws bring scornful, resentful attitudes towards the protected group. If moderate Muslims are to have their deserved security in our society, the last thing they need is to be a part of the "PC Hate Crime" media circus which will bring them unwanted attention.

The fact that you're still qualifying muslims with "moderate" shows how deeply ingrained the islamophobia is, and the reason why Hate Crimes legislation is required. To prosecute a crime you need to establish motive, if the motive can't otherwise be proven and the target of the crime is an oppressed group, that's when these laws become useful.

You first statement is incoherent to me. Moderate equates a non violent and constructive practice of Islam by it's followers. As in contrast with Militant Islam, which is the pollar opposite. As far as motive for violent crimes, a person can very well be a target for lots of reasons ,one of which can be race. These factors can be bought in on specific cases in which they belong. Though what happens when the crime is racially motivated, however a member of one of the protected groups is the criminal? Does hate crime apply there? No. Does that make any sense? No. Is the latter more likely than the former? Answer that yourself. I'm not suggesting anything.

+1 tobe.

Quote :

Ok Wolf, but don't tell me you're not having fun with this. As much racism as I've accused you of, you finally have me on the ropes. Truth be told, I usually put the name "So called" in front of every race and religion. I don't believe in either. The "So called" in front of moderate Muslims is a coincedence. I could've put that description in front of everyone. This is where we differ. I will state that So called Caucasians, Blacks, Bi Racials, Indians, WASPS, Irish, what ever, are "So called" because they cannnot be defined by their blood, only by their experiences, background and character. These are my thoughts.

Honestly frank I didn't remember you calling me a racist until you brought it back up, as my opinions are often construed as racism by the, no disrespect, uninitiated to Pan-Nationalism as I subscribe to it.

I do not believe the rest of this though. You can't take it out of context and wiggle of the hook by saying "Oh i could have so called caucasians". Not buying it. Have a good time at the bonfire.

Link. I thought I put it on already. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1316319/NY-student-Tyler-Clementi-commits-suicide-gay-sex-encounter-online.html

Kiss my ass, Wolf.

Ah the lesson of not obscuring your point by adding an addendum dig meme directed at another group/racial concept/religion/opinion/football team, admittedly is something I too have learned the hard way.

The goddamn kid should not go to prison because he taped his roomate having sex then put the tape on cyber space and humiliated him all over campus and the nation. Nothing he did was illegal that I know of. I feel terrible about the kid but hate crime laws are insane. Replace the word gay with straight. If the gay roomate was straight and caught cheating on his girlfriend, then had the whole episode played all over the net and followed up with a suicide, would the word hate crime be mentioned? Hell no. The more I discuss this, the more my words are twisted to apply to other arguments you guys have had. This is my take. The End.

Your words wouldn't have been twisted if they didn't roll off a winding, fork-tongue taking aim at an entire religious group of people.

The kid shouldn't be charged because an adult committed suicide because of his secret of being a creampuff. If you can't stand the heat, don't be gay!

Is this why the football team has been going downhill?