Uncategorized

What Would Romney Suggest About VAWA?

VAWA is short for Violence Against Women, an act that was instituted in 1994 and was reinforced in 2006.  The US Attorney General has gotten signatures from AG’s in many states across the US to get Congress to re-authorize the act.

In the past domestic violence was sometimes seen as a private matter.  The idea was that both parties in a domestic violence situation were “consenting adults” and it was their business.  We used to ask questions like ” Why does she stay with him?”  or ” Why does he put up with that kind of abuse?”  Now we know that there are a multitude of reasons that victimized spouses decide to stay with abusers and we know that it isn’t okay to say it’s just their choice. or their dumb luck for marrying a wretch.

Yes, our atttitude towards domestic violence has shifted here in the US, but we’ve reached a crossroads.  Do we continue to work to make domestic violence a thing of the past?  Do we help young women between 18 and 24 to avoid violence in dating or in casual relationships?  Or do we accept that things have changed and hope for the best?

When I first looked at the question I thought it was a “no brainer” I wanted Congress to act on signing the Violence Against Women Act again.  But then I wondered what it was that might be stopping Congress from signing something that seemed so helpful?

Guess what?  Included in the regulations built into the VAWA is a ” fast track” for illegal  immigrants.  And that might be the sticking point for members of Congress who don’t want to appear to be going easy on illegals.

Why would there be a fast track approval for citizenship in a Violence Against Women Act?  Well, sadly it looks like sometimes the women who come into this country as spouses and who are waiting for legal authorization to become citizens can be victims of violence as well.  And if they complain they are likely to lose their path to citizenship.  In otherwords, their spouse can get them to do what the spouse wants because they are liable to be deported otherwise.

Please note that the women that are able to enroll in this program are here legally.  This isn’t about allowing illegal aliens to enter the US.  This is about allowing what would have been a legally welcomed individual who may have had  to change their status after experiencing  physical abuse.

I wonder what Mitt would do?   What would Paul do?  What about Santorum?  Huntsman?  Gingrich?

What would you do?

love,

mo

 

Advertisements

4 thoughts on “What Would Romney Suggest About VAWA?”

  1. This legislation is feminist garbage that should be totally repealed. Abuse is defined so broadly under the law as to make arguing with your spouse, abusive if it upsets him/her. It completely obliterates the fourth and fifth amendment rights of men and harms/threatens every family member in America subjecting men to oppressive automatic arrest, automatic restraint and automatic prosecution processes through bribes given to state and local governments (the 1.6 billion spent by our corrupt government under the direction of the “Justice Department).
    This law by itself has proven beyond doubt that the United States no longer represents freedom for at least 1/2 of its citizens (men), that for this group of targeted citizens, being free is not something that is any longer a right or something under their control, that the mere opinion of another person can land them in jail, ruin them financially, obliterate their career/ability to make a living and brand them for life, all based upon nothing more than someone’s unsubstantiated opinion.
    And let’s not forget, we just approved retaining individuals for life without legal representation and due process. Put all this together and the US is beginning to look a lot like Nazi Germany just before and during World War II.

    1. Hello Bobo,

      Thanks for your comment. First things first huh? I don’t agree with what you are saying if you are saying that a law that protects women from violence combined with a law that protects the US from terrorism makes the United States just like Nazi Germany. That is simple reckless exaggeration.

      Second, I’m afraid I have to object to your worry that the US doesn’t represent freedom for 1/2 of it’s population, or more specifically men. Bobo? Have you seen most legislators?

      Third, I truly doubt that there is a real worry about our jails being overwhelmed with prisoners who got thrown in there because their spouse lied about being abused. Abuse is real and the first line of defense for most victims at least in PA is a restraining order. Being asked to avoid someone is not the same thing as being jailed.

      Bobo, I’m glad you are standing up for your rights. I wish you lots of luck and energy. However, I am going to continue to stand for “Women’s rights”. I don’t worry about a return to Nazi Germany. I worry about living in a country where women can’t object to being oppressed by a spouse that abuses or restricts their rights as citizens of these United States! Marriage is a contract between two people, at least currently one male and one female, and both partners should have equal rights under the law. I don’t think women are asking to be put on any pedestals. If you want laws created that will make the union more appealing for men, then I think working on that is your best bet. I would lay off the bid to take away women’s rights to find legal solutions to egregious problems.

      love,
      mo

      1. Mo,
        One day you will lose your husband and change your mind. I know many men whose lives were turned into ashes because of this unconstitutional law. One woman was arguing with her husband and neighbour called the police. Of course mandatory arrest for husband and Restraining Order for a wife. Children begged the officer not to take their father away – it did not work. Wife asked officer not ot take her husband away – it did not work. VAWA as a Divorce Industry means MANDATORY arrest of a man. After that VAWA representative threatened the wife to file restraining order. “You can not jeopardise your children” was the “reason”. “We will take your children away from you if you don’t comply”. Wife filed Restraining Order. Husband paid thousands dollars to VAWA “representatives”. And there is no family any more. Husband lives in a car – he lost his job. His wife has troubles feeding the kids. But husband is not allowed to see children without VAWA officer present. $150/hour. Think about this Mo- you still have time to change your mind. Read more about immigrants who use VAWA to get Green Cards.

      2. Thanks for your thoughts, even though I have to say I’m a little surprised by your opening sentence. I’m wondering how that prognostication has anything to do with changing my attitude toward protecting women?

        What was it you said? “One day you will lose your husband and change your mind.” Hmmm.
        bi
        Look, I know how easy it is to chain your heart to someone who doesn’t get you. I am sure a lot of men don’t even realize when they are being aggressors. I’m sure the same goes for women. Humans aren’t at their best when they are in emotional pain, or when they are highly stressed. The problem is that family relationships often take place behind closed doors and for too long we were willing to blame women for choosing to live with men that abused them. Guess what? That isn’t okay anymore!

        You object to the machinery of the penal system used against argumentative, or abusive spouses but what is your plan to deal with abuse or aggression in families? While I won’t insist that families should be shredded by a grinding legal process- I’m thinking that these are probably the families that were skirting trouble anyhow. We can’t blame the legal system for attacking wholesome families.

        Are there better ways to deal with partners enmeshed in caustic relationships? Probably. But I don’t know what they are and I don’t think I’m alone.

        Friend, there is a bigger picture here. Violence is destructive and debilitating. It ruins lives. I’d like to think that your fight is with the violence that pollutes some families. I’m with you on that. But I’m going to continue standing against you if your plan is to make aggression or violence or harsh language, or abuse a ” personal matter.” If the police or authorities are called in, then it isn’t a personal matter anymore.

        mo

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s