Both parties renewed the act in the past with no controversy and no fighting, but this year Cantor and Issa both raised a fuss over which women, exactly, were being protected by the law. In the Senate’s updated version of the law, VAWA would have protected American Indian women living on reservations, undocumented immigrant women, lesbian women and transgender women. In the version Cantor and Issa preferred – the House’s version – these women were left out.
Yes, all of this law enforcement and all of these efforts to protect women require money – which is a major sticking point for the GOP. But it’s disgusting to think that protection for women is considered okay to cut. This is discounting significant protection of over half the population – in campaign terms, it is a disservice to “The 50.8%.”
It’s disgusting to think that excluding certain groups of women from this law is okay.
So it is no longer illegal to kill women? Congress repealed the law? Or are you saying women deserve more rights than men when they are killed or harmed?
For killing a woman in your world would get you 20 years, but killing a man would only get you 10 years? Sounds fair to me.
Besides Congress is almost back in session, so maybe they will have actual time to work out a compromise.
Sounds like a gotcha opinion piece just trying to smear Republicans.
Thomas Sowell: There are no solutions, just trade-offs.
I don't want to change the subject Wicked...But I think thats a picture of my daughter in your avatar...She's been in 100's of magazines, bill boards, ads, and few TV shows and movies..Other people have the rights to 1000's of her pictures and I see them in ads all the time..Just saw this one they other day..They photoshoped a kilt on her here. Where did you get that?
FredHayek wrote: I was in that pharmacia super a couple weeks ago. Couldn't believe they didn't have any cartas de cumpleanos.
You know how we got Zanax..I just wrote my own perscipton..Whats he gonna do? Call America and check it out? He didn't even speak english... Zanex, HGH, whatever you want..Cheap
Big Doug wrote: I don't want to change the subject Wicked...But I think thats a picture of my daughter in your avatar...She's been in 100's of magazines, bill boards, ads, and few TV shows and movies..Other people have the rights to 1000's of her pictures and I see them in ads all the time..Just saw this one they other day..They photoshoped a kilt on her here. Where did you get that?
I Googled "Wicked Women" and picked one that I liked. Kudos to your daughter for being Wicked - well-behaved women rarely make history!
FredHayek wrote: So it is no longer illegal to kill women? Congress repealed the law? Or are you saying women deserve more rights than men when they are killed or harmed?
For killing a woman in your world would get you 20 years, but killing a man would only get you 10 years? Sounds fair to me.
Besides Congress is almost back in session, so maybe they will have actual time to work out a compromise.
Sounds like a gotcha opinion piece just trying to smear Republicans.
No, it is still illegal to kill women, but what this bill did was provide concrete mechanisms to help reduce violence against women (much like we're debating now how to end violent acts happening in schools and other public places - rather than take the guns out of people's hands, we train law enforcement, we provide assistance to victims, and bring harsher penalties to those guilty of the crimes) and it made an impact. By not renewing this bill, they have to start over from scratch passing it again.
"The law was written in 1994 by then-Senator Biden, and allotted more money for investigating crimes against women, and ensuring automatic and required legal sentences for offenders. It created the National Domestic Violence Hotline, trained over half a million law enforcement officials and judges in prosecuting domestic abuse cases, and made stalking illegal and rape a felony.
And the act worked – According to the National Organization of Women (NOW), the number of women murdered by their partners had dropped by 43%, and the number of women abused by their partners had dropped by 53%. Not only did VAWA create mandatory legal consequences for these abusers, but it disincentivized abuse for potential abusers."
And for what? Political posturing? Refusal to add protections for unorthodox groups of women that these Republicans don't support? If they keep excluding groups that continue to gather mainstream acceptance in society, they are going to further marginalize themselves until they are irrelevant, and not supporting legislation that previously had been supported by both parties is a dumb, dumb move.
We'll hold this line until Hell freezes over --Then we'll hold it on ice skates.-Anonymous picket sign
Couldn’t, wouldn’t, mustn’t, shouldn’t – these are the laments of the spineless. –Bette Davis
Feminist. We Just Call Out Bulls**t Where We See It.