GOP's version of the violence against women act

Well, it strips protection from gays

It does allow access to immigrants, who are the usual victims of human trafficking, BUT, it strips the confidentiality and the access to U-visas. That will all but guarantee that no immigrant will ask for help under that new version.

And the provisions regarding Native Americans.....

But, why bother.
Those who have read it who are somewhat of the liberal bend, will see it for the biased piece of legislation that it is. The people of a more conservative bend will, likely, see it as "just desserts" for those evil people who are killing white family values.

Of the 22 Republicans who voted VAWA down, 21 were white males and 1 black male. Figures.

As a person who works within this system, I can see where the shortcomings will be of what WAS a great program.

Well, if you find that disgusting, then you shouldn't be offended that I find your position hypocritical.

Oh, and hypocritical is when someone yells and screams about wanting to be treated as equals (as in the women in combat discussion or in the case of homosexuals and hate crimes), yet wants "speeshul" laws for them over and above the laws that cover EVERYBODY. So which is it? Do you want to be treated as an equal or special?...the two ARE conflicting, you know...

I will use one of your favorite lines to answer your insinuation.

Where did you read that. I never wrote that. I used the article
To point out where there were sticking points of why it was not
Approved.

My thoughts exactly faceman, what a crap news story meant to inflame the ignorant and lazy. ZERO mention of what was actually in the House counter proposal. More examples of the media using truth to tell lies.

How is protecting anyone (and everyone) from rape a special law? Explain please.

You did note use quotation marks, nor did you state that the paragraph you posted was quoted. Therefore it appeared to be your writing and your thoughts.

When you start categorizing crimes for gays, lesbians, women, black, brown, etc it is a special law. It's not a special law if all victims are treated the same which is what we should be trying for. After all that is part of what the US is suppose to be about.

Absolutely. Just keep in mind that far more women are beaten by their men than the converse. And far more women are raped than men. So, to a certain extent , this law has to be somewhat exclusive.

Why ? What a ridiculous position. So the one guy that is a victim of spousal abuse or rape doesnt count ? Why the heck does one group of people deserve special treatment ? What ever happened to equal protection under the law.
Whats wrong with violence against anyone legislation ?

This country has "special" laws targeting those that violate the elderly, children, minorities, women, the disabled, and infants. These laws address crimes committed against specific segments of the general population not specifically mentioned in previous laws. The victims are often targeted becuase of the specific group they belong to or identify with.
To broaden the protection of all our citizens is honorable and justified to ensure justice for all. This also provides law enforcement with greater ability to prosecute those that commit such crimes. Once again whats the problem?
The GOP is giving the Democrats ammunition for the next national election.
Domestic violence is a womens issue and any member of Congress that votes against such legislation is inviting the wrath of a large segment of voters. Shalom