Atheist Claims Assault Was \'Hate Crime\'
 

http://media.www.thevarsity.ca/media/sto...e-2817715.shtml

Also in this issue was an editorial talking about this incident. The writer believed it wasn't a hate crime.

[ QUOTE ]
To be a victim in the media is a desirable prize. But in order to really be a martyr, Justin, you have to have a religion first. In our interview with him, he did call the principles of atheism "beliefs." But that either means the "justified true belief" of knowledge, or it means religious faith, and only one of those is protected under the laws against hate crime.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sounds way off to me.

Re: Atheist Claims Assault Was \'Hate Crime\'
 

Canadian law commentary on hate crime here -

[ QUOTE ]
The law has special criteria for crimes motivated by hate. These are crimes committed against a person or group because of hate or prejudice on account of their:

* race, colour, or national or ethnic origin
* language
* colour
* religion
* sex, or sexual orientation
* age
* mental or physical disability

[/ QUOTE ]

It would seem if you are harmed for belonging to a certain category rather than either randomly or for something personal it may fit hate crime? If any other 'unknown' person was identified as being in the same category and would be harmed for that reason alone, that would seem to be the basis of the law.
"sorry, nothing personal, but you're xyz."

Atheism is obviously not a religion, but it is a category within that topic. If an anglican took to beating all non-anglicans ( theist, deists, atheists, adeists) it's hard to see why the baptist beating would be a religious hate crime and the adeists beating wouldn't be. but...

luckyme

Re: Atheist Claims Assault Was \'Hate Crime\'
 

I don't like hate crime laws in general, but if attacking someone because they are Christian is a hate crime, attacking someone because they are an atheist has to be as well. If it isn't, then it is an equal protection violation and the law needs to change.