I am not a lawyer, and I will never be one, but the law should not protect minorities. The law should protect the citizens (and non-citizens as the case may be) regardless of their majority / plurality / minority status. I take the stance that we1 would be much better off to actively take part in The Rule of Law.
"The answer, of course, is that the minority can change at any time. It is important that the law protect minorities, because damn it man, I could walk into a room full of angry basketball players that have just lost the game and they could look at me and say "Hey, he's short, lets hit him." And I don't want that. I want the law to protect me when the tall people want to play hackey-sack with the short round guy. And, of course, the ballers want the law to look out for them when their step-father's sisters cousins daughter invites them to an overeaters anonymous meeting and all of a sudden they're surrounded by unhappy chubby people who'd just love to lynch the tall sporty guy."
The above quote has made my point for me. Minorities (and majorities) are dynamic. You're the majority one place and the minority in another. Does that mean that the majority should be less protected or not protected at all? I am a white male, aged 18-34. More in the perceived national1 majority I could not be. When another white male, aged 18-34 beats the tar out of me, I'd like to know I'm protected, even if we're at a white male, aged 18-34 convention.
Murder is murder regardless of who commits it. Whites2 killing blacks2 is wrong. Blacks killing whites is wrong. Whites killing whites is wrong. Blacks killing blacks is wrong. Here, let me shorten this: People killing people is wrong. The same statement applies to any crime involving one person harming another.
Simple equality extends past the obvious case of murder, too. Applicants A and B apply for a job at a primarily white firm. A is white, B is black, and A is slightly more qualified for the position. B gets the job because he's a minority and the company wants to show its diversity. Is this right? No. A should get the job. He's more qualified. Don't look out for the minority. Look out for people. If the most qualified applicant is a purple-haired black Jewish lesbian, she should get the job. We don't need new laws; we need enforcement of the laws we already have.
The law is the first place a person's skin color / religion / ethnicity / majority / plurality / minority / education status should be irrelevant. They're people, damn it. And that's enough.
http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=1724116 - blockquoted text
1 - I can speak only of my experiences and thoughts on the U.S.A. as I have never lived under the government of another nation.
2 - Feel free to substitute whatever words you'd like for your groups of choice.
Noung said it better via /msg than I am able to work in here:
The problem with Nazi jurisprudence wasn't so much that it failed to protect the Jews, but that it aggressively persecuted them.