Link (Archive)
For example, California has enacted legal protections for groups beyond those outlined in the Constitution. The same is true for the District of Columbia, and a handful of states have made a short list of additions as well. Unsurprisingly, the states with the fewest protections tend to be majority republican.
The NAACP has helpfully created a comprehensive list of the 50 states and their laws protecting citizens from hate crimes. The protections cover religious worship, race or ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, disability status, political affiliation, and age. Not all of these groups are covered by the Fourteenth Amendment (The Equal Protections Clause), so discrimination on the basis of some of them is not a federal cause of action under the Constitution. This is where the states have the chance to step up and fill in the gaps.
Here are four states that absolutely did not do that.
Bonus: Indiana also has a statewide abortion ban, with exceptions only when the life of the fetus or pregnant person is at risk.
The Worst States To Live in for Anyone Other Than White, Straight, Cisgender, Able-Bodied Men
Certain groups of people have protections under the United States Constitution. Those protections supersede contrary state laws. Therefore, there is a Constitutional baseline for civil rights protections for most groups in the United States. It is up to the states, however, to decide whether to expand on those legal protections within their borders.For example, California has enacted legal protections for groups beyond those outlined in the Constitution. The same is true for the District of Columbia, and a handful of states have made a short list of additions as well. Unsurprisingly, the states with the fewest protections tend to be majority republican.
The NAACP has helpfully created a comprehensive list of the 50 states and their laws protecting citizens from hate crimes. The protections cover religious worship, race or ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, disability status, political affiliation, and age. Not all of these groups are covered by the Fourteenth Amendment (The Equal Protections Clause), so discrimination on the basis of some of them is not a federal cause of action under the Constitution. This is where the states have the chance to step up and fill in the gaps.
Here are four states that absolutely did not do that.
Georgia
With Black people making up 33% of its constituents, but only 25% of its legislature, Georgia’s lack of added hate crime protections on the basis of race starts to make a little more sense. Underrepresented portions of the population simply don’t have the same chance at legal protection and recourse as accurately represented groups, and Georgia is a shining example of that phenomenon.Indiana
Next up is Indiana, where, like Georgia, there are zero protections for the aforementioned groups of people. It’s not exactly a shock in a state where (as of 2015) 72% of the population is Christian and 84% of the state’s lawmakers belong to some branch of Christianity.Bonus: Indiana also has a statewide abortion ban, with exceptions only when the life of the fetus or pregnant person is at risk.
These pretentious cocksuckers might as well just come right out and say what they want to and save themselves the time. They want extra special privileges and protections for their each and every very special group. I genuinely hate the trend towards ever-increasingly tramping on established rights and protections by adding fancy new buzzwords like "hatespeech" or "hate crime". I really hope the pendulum starts to swing back the other direction, and quickly. And I would gladly watch with glee as the tranny faggots, pedos, BLM grifters, and other woke lunatics start to pay the price for their sins. It's not hyperbole when I say that the more of this modern societal degeneracy that I see, the more I can see the justifications of a certain Austrian painter in the Weimar Republic of the 1930s...
