Comments about ‘Dating violence protection bill sparks traditional marriage debate’

It really speaks volumes about the intelligence of our legislators when they seek to amend a bill to include a definition of marriage when there is already a Utah Constitutional Amendment defining marriage. What is the purpose, then, of a state constitution? What is the purpose, then, of amending a state constitution?

Oh, ye of little faith. Give it up already!

Amending a state constitution without declaring a constitutional convention makes this law revocable and baseless.

So how will such a crime be enforced? This is the most illogical legislation to ooze from an orifice. Logical or not, this kind of impudence of our legal system makes our legislator "look" monkey rejects. I'd rather have legislator on 3 months paid vacation than waste our time and tax dollars on dribble legislation.

So when you go out on a date we have to hire a body guards? If people are so desperate for public expositor without any common sense behaviors of no or self defense responses they should not be dating, this law is an affront to the intelligence of any first grader.

If you have no resolve to defend or protect yourself without a body guard then you should never leave your bubble domain. The hope of every procreating or mating is a lost cause and the law should so state. If one feels threatened by dating and goes on a date, they are responsible and accountable only to themselves, no law can protect/prevent this kind of public behaviors.

As a man I would like this bill to be 'sex neutral'. What about if I am abused by my spouse, where are my protections? I am all for changing the verbiage! Reports show that 40% of domestic violence victims are male.

@mytwocents
So using your logic we should do away with all criminal law get rid of our pice department and people should just hire their own body guards and/or self defense, right.

@my2cents: Huh?