Re: I-VAWA: liberal lies tempt women to embrace a radical agenda
- From: Dustbin <dustbin_address@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2010 16:21:39 +0000
The International Violence Against Women Act, recently introduced in
Congress, is a bill that purports to curb partner violence around the world.
Who could ever be opposed to that?
What congress? There is no effective global policing system. Any country that makes laws can only make law that applies within it's own jurisdiction. The use of the the terms "Congress" and "VAWA" imply the US congress in Washington; but that will have no legal force outside the US. And why should the entire world be subject to the vageries of the radical feminazis in the US.
But look more closely, and you'll discover a billion-dollar manifesto that
is larded with ideological assumptions, logical non-sequiturs, and outright
falsehoods. Many women may come to believe its alarming statistics and
demand its passage - and that's what makes this bill so worrisome.
Behind its innocent-sounding name, the International Violence Against Women
Act will fund "female empowerment" programs that would serve to break up
families, vilify men as abusers, and leave millions of women dependent on
If this is to operate worldwide; where do you think third world governments are going to find the funding? Or will the US tax payers be stunping up for all the poor, lost, entitled, princess complexes around the world now?
The bill does that by defining domestic violence expansively to include
"coercion" and "psychological harm," convincing women to call the police at
sign of the first sharply-uttered word, and then slapping a restraining
order on the couple that has the effect of precluding partner counseling or
I'm not going to claim that Democrats Sen. John Kerry or Rep. Bill Delahunt
of Massachusetts truly desire to undermine the fundamental family unit. But
the fact is, their bill is awash in a sea of Orwellian half-truths that are
designed to scare women out of the protective embrace of the family.
If even half the bills' 15 findings were truthful, I might think about
supporting the International Violence Against Women Act. But it turns out to
be a sham, a scientific legerdemain that calls to mind the United Nations'
now-discredited predictions on global warming.
Take I-VAWA's leading claim that "up to 70% of women in some countries
report having being victims of domestic violence at some point in their
Two years ago University of New Hampshire researcher Murray Straus published
the results of a survey of university-student dating violence in 32
countries around the world. The results? About a quarter of the students
acknowledged a slap, a shove, or other type of partner violence in the past
year, and - get this - women were more likely to be the aggressors than men.
thirty year old information but try getting the wankers in congress (whichever congress) to get this into their heads.
The I-VAWA bill deftly omits mention of that inconvenient truth.
Then there's the indelicate qualifier, "up to." Exactly what does that mean?
In the mind the feminazi it means anywhere between 0% and 100% - pick your number.
Turns out the "up to 70%" points to two obscure studies from Nicaragua and
Papua New Guinea - and neither of the studies were peer-reviewed. That's the
mistake the United Nations global warming panel made when it warned the
Himalayan glaciers were doomed to melt by 2035.
The I-VAWA bill makes other claims that any half-intelligent person would
immediately recognize as preposterous. Like the sky-is-falling claim that
"Violence against women dramatically impedes progress in meeting all of our
global health goals."
Around the world, the leading causes of death are infectious diseases, heart
conditions, and cancer. So TB, malaria, and measles are all caused by
partner abuse? Cancer, too?
Of course they are. Didn't you know - all evil spews forth from the great satanic phallus in the sky ;-)
I know it sounds funny, but that's what Sen. Kerry and Rep. Delahunt want us
Kerry and Delahunt also declaim that domestic violence is contributing
"dramatically" to maternal mortality. Better tell that to the Pan American
Health Organization, because they're on record as saying, "It is not yet
known what proportion of maternal mortality is due to domestic violence."
Then there's the old chestnut that "1 in 4 women are abused during
pregnancy" - that one is calculated to convince all the chivalrous souls out
there to jump on the I-VAWA bandwagon. But wait! The World Health
Organization's 10-country survey of domestic violence found the real figure
is closer to 4-12%, not one in four.
Weren't liberals the ones who invented fuzzy math?
Overall, the bill contains 15 findings. Of the 15, none of them are
objective, verifiable, and truthful:
I don't think any regular on this ng will be surprised at that.
That's right, the International Violence Against Women Act, to put it
delicately, is filled with fibs. As a result of its ideologically-driven
recommendations, I-VAWA is more likely to harm than help women:
Can we at least give liberals an "E" for Effort?
- Prev by Date: Re: Women aspire to be housewives - without any of the housework.
- Next by Date: Re: RADAR Media Fact Sheet
- Previous by thread: I-VAWA: liberal lies tempt women to embrace a radical agenda
- Next by thread: RADAR Media Fact Sheet