Why are they being charged with a “hate crime” and the harsher penalty that goes with it, not vandalism? Why is it any better or worse than if they were just in the mood to break some shit and it’s the first thing they saw? Why is breaking up a statue of of Satan or baby Jesus more of a crime than if it’s of Roberto Clemente? Originally Posted by Jacuzzme
From wikipedia
A hate crime is a prejudice-motivated crime, which occurs when a perpetrator targets a victim because of their physical appearance or perceived membership of a certain social group.
If they were breaking a statue of Roberto Clemente, because they didn't like baseball or the Pirates, or they didn't like him because of his heritage, or that he was an immigrant, or they were going after baseball hall of famers, then that would be considered a hate crime.
If they were breaking the statue because it was the first thing that they saw, then that would be simply vandalism.
The person in Iowa went after the Satanic display because the idea of a Satan worshiping religion being given equal space to display next to a Christian one was insulting to them. If they also wrecked the other displays, then they likely would not be charged with a hate crime specifically, but they didn't. Their target was the Satanic Temple's display, because of who they are and what they represent.