Thread: GOP Opposes Renewal of the Violence Against Women Act

Object227 wrote:
I'm no expert but why was such an act necessary? The law, prior to the act, should be sufficient to protect all women from criminal violence. What was it the act was correcting?

It has made it far easier, and thereby more culturally acceptable, to prosecute abusers. Statistically speaking, most assailants in domestic abuse cases never spend a day in jail even if their offense does get reported, but even so, the number one most common reason that aggressors do not go to jail or even get prosecuted is because these crimes so rarely get reported. They're humiliating to the victims! By encouraging the victims to report these offenses, and by stiffening sentencing, substantial results have been produced. The United Nations has credited the Violence Against Women Act with the 58 percent reduction in sexual assaults that this country has seen since it became law in 1994. Traditionally, the law has enjoyed bi-partisan support. This is the first time that the overwhelming majority of Republicans have jumped ship on it. Failure to renew the VAWA will unquestionably result in a major spike in cases of domestic violence and everyone knows it. Even the act's opponents on this thread have not bothered to argue otherwise, you'll notice.

jcarlilesiu wrote:
LOL

So we should borrow money until we have no more credit worthiness left.

How American of you.

So let me see if I'm getting this right: Whereas I believe that women (and other victims) deserve serious legal protections against domestic violence, I am therefore guilty of treason?? You have to be cool with rape and abuse to be a good American patriot? Have I about summed up your position?

Why don't you share all your knowledge of what it means to be a good American patriot? This could be enlightening.

Originally Posted by exotix

Depends ... say, when the teabag *Families Values Conservatives* came-out with their *Republican Women are Hot and Democrat Women are Not* videos ...

Believe me, every conservative-congressional woman .... who are in fact women-haters .... who they don't showcase in their videos .... need to be wearing Burkas ...




(R-NC) Virginia Foxx

Incredible thread. Great job of make the conservative point.

Originally Posted by Polly Minx

In case you didn't know, the equal protection clause is precisely what justifies existing affirmative action laws. In other words, the prevailing interpretation of the U.S. Constitution is in agreement with my perspective.

The prevailing interpretation no longer supports or justifies affirmative action laws.

And the former prevailing interpretation which allowed affirmative action in the past was due to the desire to correct for slavery, an injustice which has never been suffered in this country on the basis of gender.

(Incidentally, I would be of this perspective regardless of what a more than 200-year-old document written and signed only by rich, white men says.)

Then get a Constitutional amendment.

As I said, the equal protection clause is not the only problem with VAWA. The bigger problem is that the Constitution does not give the federal government power over intrastate crime, it leaves that to the states.

Originally Posted by Polly Minx

Failure to renew the VAWA will unquestionably result in a major spike in cases of domestic violence and everyone knows it. Even the act's opponents on this thread have not bothered to argue otherwise, you'll notice.

Nonsense. While the Act could be credited with some of the shift in cultural attitudes toward domestic violence, simply letting the Act expire would do nothing to reverse those attitudes.

Nevertheless, the Act already expired, several months ago. I assume, then, you have evidence of a spike since that expiration to support your contention?

BullsLawDan wrote:
Nonsense. While the Act could be credited with some of the shift in cultural attitudes toward domestic violence, simply letting the Act expire would do nothing to reverse those attitudes.

On the contrary, by discouraging women more from reporting offenses, it will have a cultural chilling effect. It will be impossible to completely reverse the cultural impact, but there will be a definite retreat; a definite move back in the other direction as a result.

Nevertheless, the Act already expired, several months ago. I assume, then, you have evidence of a spike since that expiration to support your contention?

Funding for it, however, has not yet expired. That is what is at stake here! Once it does, that is when we'll see the effects I'm talking about.

Originally Posted by Object227

I'm no expert but why was such an act necessary? The law, prior to the act, should be sufficient to protect all women from criminal violence. What was it the act was correcting?

but it hasn't.

thats why such an act is necessary - and not only in the US.

globally, the stats on violence against women are quite shocking, and the effect damages children as well as the lives of the women.

it isn't that long ago that domestic violence was a matter between a man and wife, and the police didn't interfere.

its not that long ago that women had very little recourse against abuse and violence, and rape was legal within marriage.

despite legislation like this, approximately one in four women in the US still experience abuse from their partners.

Originally Posted by Polly Minx

On the contrary, by discouraging women more from reporting offenses, it will have a cultural chilling effect. It will be impossible to completely reverse the cultural impact, but there will be a definite retreat; a definite move back in the other direction as a result.

Based upon what? I mean, the evidence that the Act helped in the first place is based upon a correlative comparison.

Criminal and victim minds do not base criminal actions or reporting decisions on a complex federal law.

Moreover, the programs in question, if beneficial, would simply be picked up and paid for by the states, who are the ones that should be paying in the first place.

Name for me a program or legal change which you think has worked that came about as a result of VAWA.

I can name several; none of them beneficial, and most violative of the rights of the accused.

Originally Posted by cassandrabandra

but it hasn't.

thats why such an act is necessary - and not only in the US.

globally, the stats on violence against women are quite shocking, and the effect damages children as well as the lives of the women.

We can't stop every crime.

Originally Posted by BullsLawDan

Based upon what? I mean, the evidence that the Act helped in the first place is based upon a correlative comparison.

Criminal and victim minds do not base criminal actions or reporting decisions on a complex federal law.

Moreover, the programs in question, if beneficial, would simply be picked up and paid for by the states, who are the ones that should be paying in the first place.

Name for me a program or legal change which you think has worked that came about as a result of VAWA.

I can name several; none of them beneficial, and most violative of the rights of the accused.


We can't stop every crime.

if the incidence is as high as one in four women being abused a response such as saying "we can't stop every crime" looks pretty weak.

BullsLawDan wrote:
And the former prevailing interpretation which allowed affirmative action in the past was due to the desire to correct for slavery, an injustice which has never been suffered in this country on the basis of gender.

Affirmative action laws apply not only to oppressed racial groups, but also to other historically disadvantaged peoples, including gays and lesbians, as well as women in general. The concept is to compensate for historical oppression. It is not always specifically about the institution of slavery and race.

We can't stop every crime.

That doesn't mean there's just nothing we can do to reduce crimes.

cassandrabandra wrote:
despite legislation like this, approximately one in four women in the US still experience abuse from their partners.

Exactly! And it was fully the majority before!

Originally Posted by MisLed

If women are equal why do they need extra legislation? Isn't current legislation sufficient. Not for the left. They need this to demonize the right. This is federal law. It is not up for renewal. It is up for some tweaking on funding it. And seeing as we're doing SOOOOOO well in THAT area thanks to President Obummer....well. good job of faux outrage and you libs especially lib women are so easily worked up and predictable.

this is the right timing to get independent women voters who feel they are oppressed by men for the next election.

it is an affirmative action law for women because it considers the statistics that they are victimized by males the most in violence

equality under the law is not possible when a group is oppressed.

Originally Posted by cassandrabandra

if the incidence is as high as one in four women being abused a response such as saying "we can't stop every crime" looks pretty weak.

I question that figure, initially (because the present definition of "abuse" is so ridiculous), and secondarily, it's not weak if that's all our society can afford.

Originally Posted by Polly Minx

Affirmative action laws apply not only to oppressed racial groups, but also to other historically disadvantaged peoples, including gays and lesbians, as well as women in general. The concept is to compensate for historical oppression. It is not always specifically about the institution of slavery and race.

I know that. However, the prevailing interpretation used by the Supreme Court to justify those laws was based upon slavery, and that prevailing interpretation has now been reversed, and affirmative action is frequently now held to be in violation of the Constitution.

Again, the biggest problem with VAWA are the various provisions which improperly violate the rights of the accused and violate the rights of other parties in court.