By Javier Manjarres
Congresswoman Sandy Adams has introduced a reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act that will extend the provisions of the original act for another 5 years. The GOP led House of Representatives is expected to pass the bill, but not without major objections from the Democratic Caucus.
Adams herself is a past victim of domestic violence and has been a strong advocate for continued dialogue on the issue and has helped other victims of domestic violence cope with their issues.
One of Adams’ closest allies, Congressman Allen West told the Shark Tank he is supportive of Adams’ re-authorization but wants to make sure that this bill is not used as a political football by certain members of Congress.
Democrats are opposing the bill because the bill does not specifically state that Lesbian Gay Bisexual and Transgender (LBGT) couples would be covered under the Act. Republicans contend that the Act covers couples regardless of whether they are gay or straight and that Domestic Violence affects all people, regardless of their sexual orientation.
Democrats have been emboldened by President Obama’s recent pandering to gay-marriage supporters within the Democratic party by announcing his completion of his “evolution” in support of gay marriage. Obama’s newly articulated support of gay marriage is actually a return to the position he held in the late 1990′s before he entered electoral politics.
Congresswoman Adams has recently teamed up with congressional candidate Karen Harrington in promoting their Women for Freedom initiative.
If you liked the article, please share it below.
9 Responses to “Sandy Adams’ Violence Against Women Act Opposed by LGBT Friendly Democrats”
I hate it when Republicans act like progressives and pass laws that federalize what should be a local law enforcement matter.
How is this any different from hate crime laws that punish a criminal more harshly simply because her victim was “more specialer” than other victims on the Progressive Hierarchy of Victims’ Specialness and Preference? (See how they want specific LGBT inclusion?)
The only redeeming thing about this law I see is that there is an apparent sunset provision. West’s support for this bill only demonstrates the need for term limits in that even the most conservative become squishy after marinating in the DC swamp.
Hey Bo Go: I suggest you will not feel the same the first time your daughter is beaten insenseable by her husband / boyfriend an the DA says sorry we do not have enough proof of the beating you took. This bill takes away there power to marginalize beaten women or beaten men…..I hope BoGo never has to face that fact…..
I’m not saying that there aren’t worthwhile programs that are part of this bill. My issue is that these programs should be instituted and funded by the states, not the feds.
Next thing you know, the feds will be dictating that you have to purchase a specific product, like, oh I don’t know – healthcare.
This bill is a watered down version of the Senate passed bill. That bill was passed with unanimous Democrat approval along with all Republican women voting for it, as well. What is wrong with ensuring protection for those in the LGBT, Native American and undocumented persons communities? During open debate on the house floor, Republicans wouldn’t even mention any of those groups in their speeches. Do they think that if they don’t say their names that when these groups become victims, they will not feel guilty? How can they not feel guilty? Are they not human?
This is a bill about domestic violence against women. It’s not an opportunity for progressives to insert their “shout outs” to their favorite groups in the progressive Hierarchy of Victims and Specialness.
There are several programs specifically directed at Native Americans in the bill, so no need to call them out separately. In fact this bill should ONLY cover Native Americans given the Federal oversight of the reservations. All others should be covered at the state level.
Shouldn’t those that apart of LGBT community be protected or should they get a bill for themselves? Of course the Conservatives in the house would support a separate bill? As for undocumented foreign nationals that are in our country, do you feel these Hispanics should be considered non-human because of their circumstance or is it just the color of their skin? Why should violence be overlooked on these groups?
They’re ILLEGAL ALIENS and they’re not all Hispanic.
How are they being treated as non-human or violence being overlooked? Every state has a penal code that should be enforced regardless of whatever little box you want to categorize the victim. Local law enforcement has a duty to investigate every crime reported to it. This applies to LGBTQQ’s as well (not very PC of you to keep forgetting the QQ’s, bad progressive).
This bill does provide valuable prevention programs as well as programs to assist victims. My question is why do you think the feds do these kinds of things better than the states?
I’m sorry. I am not familiar with QQ after LGBT. Would you be so kind to tell me what the QQ stands for. As you are someone who is a representative of Karen Harrington I am interested in know if she knows what the QQ stands for.
Yes you are correct, not all undocumented foreign nationals are Hispanic, however most are. If one of these individuals were the victim of a horrible crime, what protection would they have from the possibility of deportation, if they tried and report the crime. Why does Allen West think that this is not important, as he voted on this watered down bill, instead of the bipartisan bill from the Senate?
The QQ stands for Queer Questioning.
As to what Karen knows and Allen thinks, I don’t presume to speak for anyone but myself.
The non-reporting of crimes against ILLEGAL ALIENS (the correct term) for fear of deportation is a frequent argument from the progressives. The fact is that the crime wouldn’t have been committed against them if they weren’t here to begin with.
I’m by no means blaming the victim and unfortunately there is no perfect justice in these cases. By creating more programs and protections for illegal aliens we are encouraging more of them. They are often smuggled in by coyotes in deplorable conditions only to be held hostage for more money and often times raped. Then they are forced to live in the shadows for fear of deportation. How compassionate is it to perpetuate such a system?