I confront a guy who ********* and ***** my prepubescent ******** and, in a spontaneous fit of rage, I shoot him to death. Or, I lay a trap for a gay guy to meet me for drinks at a bar and, in a well-planned and fully intentioned act of ********, take him out to a field, strap him to a post and beat the living **** out of him until he dies.
Both acts result in the same outcome for the victim.....they die. Are both crimes equally "bad" from a moral standpoint?
I can see what you're trying to say Jagger, but aren't the difference between these two motives already covered when one of these perpetrators is charged with ****** and another one is charged with a lesser manslaughter charge?
I don't see why the type of **** has to be brought into it other than one thing. It's only purpose is for a few politicians to be able to suck up to different groups of people by saying "see, I like you and your people more than my opponent does because I got tough on people who are targeting people like you..."
]