Matthew Shepard was a 21 years old who identified as gay and was brutally attacked by two men who tied him to a fence and hit him until leaving him unconscious. He was found after 18 hours of being there and died 5 days later. James Byrd Jr., was an African American male who was tied to the back of a truck by two white supremacists who dragged him and eventually he was decapitated. By that time, either of this cases were prosecuted by the justice because the 1969 Federal Hate Crimes Law didn’t cover any of the situations. First, Shepard was murdered for his sexual orientation (which wasn’t stated in the law) and even though Byrd was chosen for his skin color, he wasn’t engaged in any federally-protected activity (in this case, the law would …show more content…
This Act shows compassion, understanding and acceptance to all of those who feel “different”, and also protects anyone without the victim having to be engaged in any federally-protected …show more content…
Another person who voted against the Act was U.S. Representative John Kline, who had previously voted for the bill before it included the expanded hate crimes provision. When he voted against the law, stated “I disdain racism, sexism and bigotry, but under this legislation, any pastor, preacher, priest, rabbi or imam who gives a sermon out of their moral traditions about sexual practices could be found guilty of a federal crime.” (“Rep. John Kline and other Republicans say under Hate Crime bill; religious leaders could be prosecuted for preaching about sexual practices,” 2009). It is interesting to see how one of the opponents said that he didn’t believe the numbers on hate crime were real (of course, he is a white privileged man); and the other one states that whomever disagrees with certain sexual practices and behaviors could be guilty of a federal crime, doesn’t realize that it is considered a hate crime when the victim is physically abused or when the property where they live, is