GOP Opposes Renewal of the Violence Against Women Act

Yes it should be renamed to the protection of everybody except white males act.

 

Violence against women was legal before this statute came along?

 

I think if the Republicans had their way, women just wouldn't be allowed to vote.

 

Right. It was the GOP who PASSED THE VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN ACT, and the LIE-O-CRATS who tried to use it to MAKE IT A GAY RIGHTS/ILLEGAL ALIENS CONCESSION BILL, which the GOP prevented.




House approves GOP bill to renew Violence Against Women Act; Democrats say it’s too narrow


By Rosalind S. Helderman


On a vote that fell largely along party lines, the House of Representatives has approved a GOP measure reauthorizing the expired Violence Against Women Act — the latest issue that was once the subject of broad bipartisan agreement in Washington to fall victim to election year politics.

The House bill passed on a 222 to 205 vote. Democrats opposed the Republican bill because they said it was too narrow. They said it should have included language barring discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation in grant programs funded through the 18-year-old program and provisions expanding visas offered to illegal immigrants who assist in the prosecution of their abusers.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...ts-too-narrow/2012/05/16/gIQAcFYWUU_blog.html

Guess if the Dems had their way, women would be sacrificed to further the Leftagenda, unless the women are GAY ,or ILLEGAL ALIENS...

 

Well its a trick. If the UN and Clintong are involved its about destroying women and freedom. Remember the UN and the democrats are top in the destruction of women to begin with....they are eugenics based. They are NWO.

Do you understand tricks of the elites?

 

I don't see anything wrong with expanding protection to gay partners and partners of immigrants. Violence against your partner is sick, regardless of sexual orientation or where you're from. I like this comment from Sen. Dianne Feinstein:

“When you call the police in America, they come regardless of who you are.”

Times are changing, guys. Fight all you want, but it's going to happen.

 

I'm more on the prevention side myself. Laws don't stop people from doing anything. An anarchist friend of mine calls me out on that fact all the time. They don't stop you from stealing. It only punishes you later. Same with drugs...drug laws don't do crap except add to the tax burdens as we prosecute and incarcerate nonviolent offenders.

Honestly, we live in a very aggressive, macho, mean-spirited society that doesn't value what it perceives to be common or weak. People learn violence through it being demonstrated on them. If we value children, if we promote love and caring attitudes, if we quit glorifying violence in images and song, we may be able to reduce violent outbursts and bullying and other social ills.

 

This law does a lot towards prevention of these crimes before they happen by educating potential victims. A good read:

http://www.thehotline.org/get-educated/violence-against-women-act-vawa/

 

This law does a lot towards prevention of these crimes before they happen by educating potential victims. A good read:

http://www.thehotline.org/get-educated/violence-against-women-act-vawa/

 

I dunno ! Y'all been down to the Docks lately.The Waterfont.And seen some them Butches
lookin' for work.I dunno.I just don't know ... anymores.

 

Let me know when conservative pandering to Christian / traditional family 'victimhood' costs me money....
then let me know when liberal pandering to victimhood doesn't.

 

Then stop LYING about what took place. The GOP PASSED the Violence Against Women Act, and the thread title is a DELIBERATE LIE.

The protection of women in domestic situations has NOTHING TO DO WITH GAY RIGHTS,and ILLEGAL ALIEN PROTECTION. The Lie-o-crats tried to add on that bullcrap,and got caught.

It was THEY who "opposed renewing the VAW act, unless they got to FORCE SOME MORE OF THE LEFTAGENDA UPON US while doing so...


Why do gays need "special protections?" Are they "WEAKER" than most people, as are the elderly and children?

It's already AGAINST THE LAW to commit illegal violent acts against ANYONE, gays included.

 

ROFL it was the Republicans who championed women's suffrage and the Democrat party which opposed it.

 

Then create a new bill which does so, and all the other protections the Democrats wanted to add in and states so in it's title rather than hiding it under the guise of a bill to protect women. Better yet why don't we just enforce the laws that protect EVERYONE regardless of what special group they claim to be part of.

 

1) So...if we just do away with laws against violence (rape, abuse, etc.) and just let people do whatever they want, that will...stop domestic violence from happening? Gee, now why don't I agree with that logic?

2) As Not the Guardian pointed out, there are actually a number of important preventative measures included in the Violence Against Women Act. It's not about just waiting for bad things to happen and then doing something. But having a real and meaningful official response when bad things do inevitably happen also needs to be part of the package. If there are no consequences for rape and abuse, then those things will increase, not decrease, sorry. That's like deeming it acceptable even while saying it's not. This isn't a matter of picking prevention OR response. Both are needed to minimize violence.

3) Anarchists are not generally the best voices to turn to when it comes to matters of sexual aggression, being, in my long experience with the radical left, some of the most typical and egregious offenders as a group.

 

What states do not have rape laws?

 

Theres the bottom line. We dont need redundant laws catering solely to handpicked recipients. Hate crimes are another one.

 

Only if you ascribe to the fallacy that correlation = causation.

Why? What is the "W" in "VAWA"?

Because such protections - like "victim confidentiality" are unconstitutional. Have you not read the Sixth Amendment? Or are you not concerned with protecting individual rights?

The "War on Drugs". Do you need more examples, or is that trillion-dollar debacle enough?

 

So why are the Repubs voting against it? There must be a decent reason, because it certainly isn't true that Reps hate women. Only the delusional would believe something like that about EITHER party. (not saying that you actually believe it)

 

That's an easy one...tax exempt status for churches. Do away with it. It's that "separation of church and state thing"...

Using that twisted reasoning, why even have the law?

Today those Republicans would be considered extreme leftist anarchists or whatever silly term you guys have for us. The Republican Party of today is far different than it was then...actually far different than it was 12 years ago.

For those of you incapable of reading comprehension, try reading the following.

 

No they would be considered the party of the Constitution as they are today. They were also the party that fought FOR civil rights which the Democrats fought tooth and nail against.

Nope.

 

The "seperation of church and state" thingy is one reason they're tax exempt....taxing churches would place a de facto tax on religion....

not to mention, the "donation" thingy...or the fact donations have already been taxed as income on the donor end...

Churches receive tithes...or voluntary donations...
Political campaigns and candidates receive voluntary donations....

niether are taxable as income.

Why should one 'donation based' activity be taxed and not the other?

 

I wasn't aware the "War on Drugs" was partisan....or a strictly "conservative" effort.....
If you would, please list the number of Democrat/progressive representatives who've been outspoken about....or have been elected on a platform of ending drug prohibitions.

 

So the OP misrepresents the issue when in fact the GOP supported the renewal of the act. The Democrats did not, they wanted a new act under the same name to disguise their true intent, to create more victim classes.

 

What a load of crap. Let's take a short look back and see which side of the isle hated women the most - Palin & Hillary. They are women and the liberal horde is still attacking Palin.

I hope that the law prevented the sexual assaults - know that I always spend a few minutes thinking about the federal laws before I do anything, but sexual predators are less likely to consider the federal law then the woman pressing the charges are.

In Texas we had the death penalty for rape until we learned that the death penalty made if very difficult to get a conviction for things like date rape. Texas is still pretty hard of sex crimes. I don't know where you live but in Texas w protect our women. We don't try to apply laws that are intended to protect women to half of a homo couple because neither look like a man or a woman so we just can't tell. We just use the general criminal laws to break up those cat fights.

And Polly, we don't hate you for this totally political post that is aimed at helping the worst president in history and his progressive minions destroy our country. But remember that when anarchy comes we can only help our true friends. And the anarchists will use you and then eat you when the food runs out.