House Passes Violence Against Women Act Without LGBT Protections

  • metta

    Posts: 39144

    May 16, 2012 11:48 PM GMT

    House Passes Violence Against Women Act Without LGBT Protections

    http://www.advocate.com/politics/washington-dc/2012/05/16/house-passes-violence-against-women-act-without-lgbt-protections
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 16, 2012 11:53 PM GMT
    The most POWERFUL statement made:

    Republican Rep. Judy Biggert wanted to add an amendment to increase specific protections for LGBT victims of domestic violence, but House leadership blocked her from introducing the amendment.

    Well republicans??
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 17, 2012 12:09 AM GMT
    TropicalMark_GySgtUSMC saidThe most POWERFUL statement made:

    Republican Rep. Judy Biggert wanted to add an amendment to increase specific protections for LGBT victims of domestic violence, but House leadership blocked her from introducing the amendment.

    Well republicans??




    Oh, you know- Domestic violence against lgbt victims isn't that important when we have bigger things to worry about it. We don't have time right now to protect people against violence.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 17, 2012 12:15 AM GMT
    Iceblink said
    TropicalMark_GySgtUSMC saidThe most POWERFUL statement made:

    Republican Rep. Judy Biggert wanted to add an amendment to increase specific protections for LGBT victims of domestic violence, but House leadership blocked her from introducing the amendment.

    Well republicans??




    Oh, you know- Domestic violence against lgbt victims isn't that important when we have bigger things to worry about it. We don't have time right now to protect people against violence.
    Dont worry.. not one of them will show their face in this thread.. they have no balls. None.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 17, 2012 12:16 AM GMT
    Iceblink said
    TropicalMark_GySgtUSMC saidThe most POWERFUL statement made:

    Republican Rep. Judy Biggert wanted to add an amendment to increase specific protections for LGBT victims of domestic violence, but House leadership blocked her from introducing the amendment.
    Well republicans??

    Oh, you know- Domestic violence against lgbt victims isn't that important when we have bigger things to worry about it. We don't have time right now to protect people against violence.

    And the conservaposse here cheers the Right Wingers in Congress they support, and that they encourage that we support as well. What does logic tell us about the conservaposse, regarding gay civil rights?

    Prepare for ad hominem attacks, and unrelated diversions into lying economic issues, in 1... 2... 3...
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 17, 2012 12:37 AM GMT
    Didnt take long.. someone quote the post above this so i know its SB! now its below.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 17, 2012 12:45 AM GMT
    southbeach1500 saidAny "Violence Against (fill in the blank) Act" is meaningless at preventing violence against the group mentioned in the title.

    It's just "feel good" legislation to make the weak-minded feel "safer" - and for politicians to point to proudly saying that they have taken steps towards "stopping violence against (fill in the blank)."




    If you believe that, then is that the reason Republicans in the house passed a bill but did not include the lgbt language in the Senate version of the bill that had already passed? They excluded lgbt's because it was just a "feel good" bill?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 17, 2012 12:47 AM GMT
    Iceblink said
    southbeach1500 saidAny "Violence Against (fill in the blank) Act" is meaningless at preventing violence against the group mentioned in the title.

    It's just "feel good" legislation to make the weak-minded feel "safer" - and for politicians to point to proudly saying that they have taken steps towards "stopping violence against (fill in the blank)."




    If you believe that, then is that the reason Republicans in the house passed a bill but did not include the lgbt language in the Senate version of the bill that had already passed? They excluded lgbt's because it was just a "feel good" bill?
    Wheres the JOBS bills? Wheres the ECONOMIC bills?

    Just 'feel good bills'?

    Oh gawd.. the bitch is way off her meds again!
  • JP85257

    Posts: 3284

    May 17, 2012 1:01 AM GMT
    Why was something like this allowed to expire anyway??
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 17, 2012 1:09 AM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    Iceblink said
    southbeach1500 saidAny "Violence Against (fill in the blank) Act" is meaningless at preventing violence against the group mentioned in the title.

    It's just "feel good" legislation to make the weak-minded feel "safer" - and for politicians to point to proudly saying that they have taken steps towards "stopping violence against (fill in the blank)."




    If you believe that, then is that the reason Republicans in the house passed a bill but did not include the lgbt language in the Senate version of the bill that had already passed? They excluded lgbt's because it was just a "feel good" bill?


    My point is that this isn't a Republican vs Democrat point, which is why I used the word "politicians" in my post.

    LGBT people won't suffer any more (or less) from not being included in this "Act."



    So something like providing grants for transitional housing to allow those in domestic violence situations to escape their dangerous living situations is nothing? Or legal aid for those in domestic violence situations that cannot afford it on their own? Or services for those in rural areas that are often left out of services found in urban and suburban areas? That's all nothing?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 17, 2012 1:12 AM GMT
    Well it's clear SB knows nothing about the judicial system and why there are difference degrees of sentencing etc based on motivation.


    So *sighs* some education we doubt he'll bother to read.

    http://www.adl.org/99hatecrime/print.asp


    http://aaacriminaldefense.com/federal-sentencing-guidelines/federal-sentencing-guidelines-hate-crime-motivation-or-vulnerable-victim/
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 17, 2012 1:16 AM GMT
    Iceblink said
    southbeach1500 said
    Iceblink said
    southbeach1500 saidAny "Violence Against (fill in the blank) Act" is meaningless at preventing violence against the group mentioned in the title.

    It's just "feel good" legislation to make the weak-minded feel "safer" - and for politicians to point to proudly saying that they have taken steps towards "stopping violence against (fill in the blank)."




    If you believe that, then is that the reason Republicans in the house passed a bill but did not include the lgbt language in the Senate version of the bill that had already passed? They excluded lgbt's because it was just a "feel good" bill?


    My point is that this isn't a Republican vs Democrat point, which is why I used the word "politicians" in my post.

    LGBT people won't suffer any more (or less) from not being included in this "Act."



    So something like providing grants for transitional housing to allow those in domestic violence situations to escape their dangerous living situations is nothing? Or legal aid for those in domestic violence situations that cannot afford it on their own? Or services for those in rural areas that are often left out of services found in urban and suburban areas? That's all nothing?
    Gee ask SB why they passed an act for "women" in the first place? I thought violence was against the law for everyone.. so what was this about? "feel good" bill? or a waste of time seeing that women are already covered under our 'existing' violence laws.icon_rolleyes.gificon_rolleyes.gificon_rolleyes.gificon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 17, 2012 2:23 AM GMT
    GOP-congresswoman-slams-Obama-budget.jpg

    Well, if you took this yammering twit -- who seems to be the G.O.P's go-to gal for basically pointing and screaming "Democrats did it!" every time she gets asked about the party's downgrading of women on TV -- at her word, then protections for gays and even Native American women are "separate issues" to be dealt with accordingly.

    We don't wanna go changing the definition of domestic abuse. It might confuse the children.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 17, 2012 2:27 AM GMT
    Elusium saidGOP-congresswoman-slams-Obama-budget.jpg

    Well, if you took this yammering twit -- who seems to be the G.O.P's go-to gal for basically pointing and screaming "Democrats did it!" every time she gets asked about the party's downgrading of women on TV -- at her word, then protections for gays and even Native American women are "separate issues" to be dealt with accordingly.

    We don't wanna go changing the definition of domestic abuse. It might confuse the children.
    Who is that bitch?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 17, 2012 2:29 AM GMT
    metta8 said
    House Passes Violence Against Women Act Without LGBT Protections
    Does this mean we're now required to be violent against women, but not against LGBT's?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 17, 2012 3:43 AM GMT
    "Who is that bitch?"

    Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA). She's basically the party's on-camera apologist, one of several female members it's using to put a more female-friendly face on its policy.

    The thing is: she's terrible at it. You know how when someone's bullshitting you they pause and take a breath, conveying "I can't believe I'm actually saying this?". She can't help it, plus she physically turns her body rightward when she's lying or evading a question. She's got more giveaway tells than the worst poker play you've ever seen.
  • metta

    Posts: 39144

    May 17, 2012 5:56 PM GMT
    Shame on House Republicans who voted to gut the Violence Against Women Act

    http://act.credoaction.com/campaign/bad_vawa_vote/?r=6890571&id=40282-848452-1eqe6qx