Quote:
Originally Posted by Julian
Respect has to be earned it is not a given.  |
There's a difference between treating someone with respect and respecting them as an individual. Your comment applies to the latter, but not the former IMO.
---------- Post added at 13:37 ---------- Previous post was at 13:32 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY
Well, there can't be many groups of people you could think of that are not covered by equality or hate legislation, so you can't help wondering why on Earth such rules should be applied to one section of the population and not the other. It defies logic and should be resolved.
Everyone should be prorected against discriminatory behaviour, hate crime, and have the right to be treated fairly and equally. The only legislation required identifying a particular group is for people with disabilities who require reasonable adjustments. Separate legislation for hate crime is unnecessary because the definition of that is misunderstood and can be interpreted in different ways. All threats, physical and emotional violence should be treated the same and punished accordingly. That's what people understand.
|
The reasoning behind it is because certain minority and disadvantaged groups are more likely to be discriminated against, targeted or treated less favourably because of the protected group that they belonged to. As society wishes to stamp this out, this is deemed to be worse than a random attack and the punishments are more severe.
I agree that everyone should be protected against unacceptable behaviour, but an elderly or disabled person for example, is likely to suffer more severely than a young able bodied person and less likely to be able to defend themselves.