Quantcast

Comments about ‘Senate approves Violence Against Women Act’

Return to article »

Published: Tuesday, Feb. 12 2013 10:55 p.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Pagan
Salt Lake City, UT

It's about time!

Furry1993
Ogden, UT

Good for the Senate. it is now time for the extreme far right radical members of the House to (just once) do something for the women of the United States and approve this bill.

Mountanman
Hayden, ID

Yep, that will stop violence against women because as we all know, would be criminals always obey laws! That's why we have no crime in America. Good work Democrats, thanks for keeping women safe and now you can believe you actually accomplished something!

Counter Intelligence
Salt Lake City, UT

Yes - because violence should only be tolerated when it its against men
Fascinating how femysoginists want equality AND preference AND still claim to be a class of victims

Wonder
Provo, UT

@Mountanman -- So your theory of government is anarchy then I guess? Because someone's gonna break every law, but that doesn't mean you don't pass laws. Your argument cuts against every law.

Mountanman
Hayden, ID

@ Wonder. Not at all, I am just amused at the worthless symbolism from the Democrats. Are there not already laws against violence against women? Its all for show, nothing more!

Tolstoy
salt lake, UT

@mountainman
The act provides money and resources to help prevent violence and hep those that are in abusive relationships not just prosecute offenders. I to wonder if you have thought about the consequences of extending you reasoning to its logical end which would be that we should have no laws because people will just break them anyway?

@CI
So because this particular law does not address violence against men then it is a bad law and should be thrown out? There is an increasing need and awareness for the need to address domestic violence against men no doubt but the reality is women are still far more likely to be the victims then the perpetrators of such crimes. We should address domestic violence against men but it does not make this a bad law.

Lagomorph
Salt Lake City, UT

VAWA passed the Senate with no help from Utah. All 22 votes against the bill were by Republican men, including Hatch and Lee. The GOP is doing a fine job of rehabilitating its reputation with women, isn't it? Are they trying to be irrelevant or is it just an unintended consequence? VAWA works to prevent domestic violence, which means fewer ER admissions, fewer police house calls, fewer perpetrators imprisoned, etc. All this lowers the costs of running the government. You would think that the fiscal benefits would have drawn some GOP support, but apparently some are so obsessed with anti-LGBT animus that they will vote against anything favorable to them.

Meanwhile, mountanman is scratching his head pondering why God sent Moses the Ten Commandments on a tablet when it was a foregone conclusion that people would break them. Why should societies codify any rules of behavior? It's all empty symbolism.

Counter Intelligence
Salt Lake City, UT

@Tolstoy
Please note that my original post said nothing about the value of the law - merely the hypocrisy. Nice insertion of words into my mouth so that you could feign indignation. However since you mention it: the current VAWA is NOT the original bipartisan law co-sponsored by Orrin Hatch. The current Democratic Senate made small but meaningful changes designed to politicize the law. For example: the new VAWA take Native American cases out of federal court and into tribal court - which do not have the same constitutional protections. The net effect is actually to weaken domestic violence laws. However the political benefit is that it causes Republicans to raise questions; allowing racist passive/aggressive left wing femisogynists to screech that right-wing Republican have declared war on women - despite the fact that the mere existence of the law is about preferential treatment of women.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments