Senate rejects GOP bid to limit Violence Against Women Act
I thought this was a good article to post because we have recently been talking about how a bill becomes a law between the House and the Senate. Recently, the Senate has rejected a proposal that prevents federal aid given to homosexual, immigrant, and Native American victims of domestic violence. This rejection has caused the congressional re authorization of the Violence Against Women Act, which is a law that gives about 1.6 billion dollars toward the investigation and prosecution of violent crimes against women. It has had bipartisan support since it was created in 1994. The quotes in this article show how members of the House and the Senate feel about it and why the every new proposal is "wrong."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I have known people in domestic violence cases and the court is automatically biased to favor the woman. It's a difficult issue to handle, but I would not begrudge the various groups listed- immigrants, homosexuals, and Native Americans- the opportunity to purse justice just because I disagree with them.
ReplyDeleteI am glad that this was blocked. I would be curious, Grace, as to what you're basing your claim (that the court is biased to favor women) off of. I just haven't heard that before, and I would hope that the court is not biased towards anyone. However, it is important to ensure that victims of domestic violence are helped.
ReplyDeleteI don't want to be that girl who goes super feminism here, but no one should get hurt by other people. This includes any gender, race, anything. I feel that this is a good bill to be a law, but at the same time, I see how other bills could be more favored than this one. I see where Grace maybe coming from though. Many of the judges in courts are much older, so they have a much different view point to women than do many people now. That's where I think Grace is coming from at least and being in a family with my dad, I can understand the disconnection and how older people have much different opinions on this stuff.
ReplyDeleteI would of course, as everyone else would, hope that no prejudice exists, however it does. And I do not think that immigrants, same-sex couples, nor Native Americans should be denied the federal aid.
ReplyDeleteI think it's very hard for anyone to control her or his prejudices because they come out subconsciously at times. It can likely be argued that the members of the Senate, just as the journalists we learned about earlier this year, may show their prejudices, whether intentionally or not.
DeleteI agree with Sara, we live in a country where everyone is preoccupied with rights, why would we deny them or have unequal rights for immigrants, native americans, or same sex couples? I don't think this should even be an issue because its 2013.
ReplyDeleteI think it's ridiculous that such a discriminatory bill would even be up for discussion
ReplyDeleteI agree this bill is better off not being passed as it is far too discriminatory.
ReplyDeleteI dont think this bill should have even ever come to a vote I don't understand how we can have a legislature that is supposed to represent all of the people in their district which in every senators case will include the native americans, same sex couples, and immigrants that they attempted to pass a bill that purely discriminates against them.
ReplyDeleteI think that the Senate shouldn't have opposed this bill. I am, however, confused as to why the Democrats opposed expanding government to help more people. That is, after all, a something the Democratic party is almost always in favor of. I'm surprised that it didn't get through the Democrat-controlled Senate.
ReplyDeleteSara said this perfectly. We are Americans. We are supposed to be united. Let everyone have the same rights and the same protections. If we don't, are we really the America we claim to be?
ReplyDeleteI agree with the popular opinion on here that this bill should not have been up for discussion because it is so discriminatory.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, it is sad that this bill was ever considered in this day and age. It brings up the question, "when will equality be second nature?" Evidently, to many people's surprise, we have not come to that point yet.
ReplyDeleteThis bill is not something that should be discussed. As everyone has said, this is just way too discriminatory to be passed nowadays.
ReplyDelete