The Violence Against Women Act

[Phantasmal]

I hope you dont' actually believe that list of delusions?

I hope someone ridicules, and stalks him for his statements about you like he stalked poet for his statement about hitting a woman.

Freedumpy is a victim of his own delusions. He makes me laugh.

 

[BRUTALITOPS]

Who said they didn't have to abide by US laws?

you are treating them as a sovereign nation (i.e. comparing them to france) when that is not the case. A country establishes laws that reflect the will of the community at large. Tribal lands are able to have nominal control but they are still considered part of the U.S. (obv..)

As such, we aren't talking about a country making their own laws, but sometimes literally 50 acres in some remote area being able to strip you of your constitutional rights.

 

[BRUTALITOPS]

White man no want live by indain law, stay off of indian land.
Go gamble elsewhere and buy cheap cigerettes.

Idiots agreeed with rubio saying it too too much local control away and then complained about having to be prosecuted by indians in their Nations.

yeah we'll go to vegas and the natives can go bankrupt. All the luck to them.

 

[Cancel 2016.11]

you are treating them as a sovereign nation (i.e. comparing them to france) when that is not the case. A country establishes laws that reflect the will of the community at large. Tribal lands are able to have nominal control but they are still considered part of the U.S. (obv..)

As such, we aren't talking about a country making their own laws, but sometimes literally 50 acres in some remote area being able to strip you of your constitutional rights.

I'll post some information tomorrow on why this was necessary and why it's a good thing. I have to book now. Good night!

 

[Damocles]

That's awesome. Uh, where did I apply the fallacy and who are you quoting bold?

Quoting a common phrase read on the interwebs. And you apply it backhandedly, in the post I quoted, and explained.

Strange that not a single Senator is quoted in a story about why Senators voted the way they did.

Yet, the story is about them and the reasons that people didn't support the law. Strange that you are incapable of reading comprehension, but only partisanly.

Uh, you just keep on making shit up. I didn't say they support women beating. Your appeals to emotion and strawman tactics are really weak. I mean, its OK to criticize Republicans for doing stupid shit. No need to go to these lengths to defend them.

Your applied logic is: She wrote a story about Senators not voting for it and wanted to find reasons why, yet the story isn't about the Senators. Therefore Damocles is only pretending that stories like this exist: (you know, the very article the image came from, wasn't hard to find, Dungheap) the title of which is following the bracket) Republican senators bravely stand up for the rights of rapists and abusers, therefore suggesting that people are saying that they support the abuse of women is "an appeal to emotion"...

However, asking Dung if he believes stupidity like that, based on the appeal to emotion in the article from which the image was pulled, means that Damocles is the one who is "appealing to emotion"...

Now, here's a bit of reality for you, Dung: A non-rhetorical question is not an assertion, it is not an argument, it is an appeal for information, not emotion.

One more time, Dung; Do you really believe, like the person who wrote that story, or as implied in the OP by posting from the story, that these men really support the abuse of women? <- This is not rhetorical, the question is based on the headline of the story from which the image was pulled.

Are you capable of seeing past the stupid partisan politics inherent in the inane appeal to emotion suggesting that these men want to see more women beaten? Will you in fact be capable of simply stating that the article is stupid, that you are smarter than that?

Somehow, my guess is, you will simply try defending the stance originated in the article from which the image was pulled, and you will do it because you won't want to criticize anybody on the left for appealing to emotion in such an obviously stupid way.

 

[Cancel 2016.11]

I hope someone ridicules, and stalks him for his statements about you like he stalked poet for his statement about hitting a woman.

Freedumpy is a victim of his own delusions. He makes me laugh.

He's a hate-filled mental case. And really a filthy old man. I don't see about 90% of what he posts, and I'd like to keep it that way. Almost no one here talks to him (other than to call him a creep) so he's pretty easy to avoid.

 

[Bonestorm]

you are treating them as a sovereign nation (i.e. comparing them to france) when that is not the case. A country establishes laws that reflect the will of the community at large. Tribal lands are able to have nominal control but they are still considered part of the U.S. (obv..)

As such, we aren't talking about a country making their own laws, but sometimes literally 50 acres in some remote area being able to strip you of your constitutional rights.

What rights are you stripped of by being subject to a court system authorized by Congress?

 

[BRUTALITOPS]

I hope someone ridicules, and stalks him for his statements about you like he stalked poet for his statement about hitting a woman.

Freedumpy is a victim of his own delusions. He makes me laugh.

To be fair, poet envisioned himself as having the moral highground. Always talking about being oppressed etc, so it was doubly ironic when he talks about beating women. That's why he got the attention he did. He was a hypocrite.

 

[BRUTALITOPS]

What rights are you stripped of by being subject to a court system authorized by Congress?

Maybe it doesn't amount to much, I just figured if they have to put it in then there are obviously some differences, or they wouldn't have had to add that provision. I don't like deviating from the constitution.

 

[Bonestorm]

Quoting a common phrase read on the interwebs. And you apply it backhandedly, in the post I quoted, and explained.


Yet, the story is about them and the reasons that people didn't support the law. Strange that you are incapable of reading comprehension, but only partisanly.



Your applied logic is: She wrote a story about Senators not voting for it and wanted to find reasons why, yet the story isn't about the Senators. Therefore Damocles is only pretending that stories like this exist: Republican senators bravely stand up for the rights of rapists and abusers, therefore suggesting that people are saying that they support the abuse of women is "an appeal to emotion"...

However, asking Dung if he believes stupidity like that, based on the appeal to emotion, means that Damocles is the one who is "appealing to emotion"...

A non-rhetorical question is not an assertion, it is not an argument, it is an appeal for information, not emotion.

One more time Dung, do you really believe, like the person who wrote that story, or as implied in the OP, that these men really support the abuse of women?

Are you capable of seeing past the stupid partisan politics inherent in the inane appeal to emotion suggesting that these men want to see more women beaten? Will you in fact be capable of simply stating that the article is stupid, that you are smarter than that?

What in God's name are you babbling about? Seriously.

I have no clue whether these men support the abuse of women. Neither do you. Frankly, I don't see the relevance. What matters is that they don't care to do anything to combat it.

 

[Bonestorm]

Maybe it doesn't amount to much, I just figured if they have to put it in then there are obviously some differences, or they wouldn't have had to add that provision. I don't like deviating from the constitution.

As it stands now, a non-tribe member who beats his tribe-member girlfriend cannot be prosecuted in tribal couts and would instead have to be investigated by the FBI and prosecuted by a US Attorney in federal court, which will never happen. The law expands the jurisdiction of tribal courts to cover non-tribe members so that these crimes are actually investigated and prosecuted by someone.

There is no consititional issue. The tribal courts are authorized by Congress and must follow due process requirements like any other Court authorized by Congress.

 

[Banned]

This pertains to men raping Indian women on reservations. It's one of the best parts of the act. Especially considering the history of white male sexual violence towards minority women. No more free passes. Great news for anyone who cares about women, and not just about white women. That's me. I celebrate this. Nail the fuckers.

it is clear that someone is racially prejudiced against Native americans.
I think this bill might just target those like him.

teepe court indeed.

 

[USFREEDOM911]

First you are making this personal and it's totally unneccesary

and also way to blame someone for being assaulted as if it were there fault?

If a women gets assaulted by a guy, it's the guy's fault, not the women's.

If you would reread my post and stop trying to defend Darla, you would realize that what you've accused me of isn't in my post.

 

[Phantasmal]

To be fair, poet envisioned himself as having the moral highground. Always talking about being oppressed etc, so it was doubly ironic when he talks about beating women. That's why he got the attention he did. He was a hypocrite.

No, it is Just the Pitbull mentality of Dumpy, he finds what he perceives as your weakness and he badgers you with it hoping to chase you from the forum by stalking you and repeating the same crap ad nauseum.

 

[USFREEDOM911]

As it stands now, a non-tribe member who beats his tribe-member girlfriend cannot be prosecuted in tribal couts and would instead have to be investigated by the FBI and prosecuted by a US Attorney in federal court, which will never happen. The law expands the jurisdiction of tribal courts to cover non-tribe members so that these crimes are actually investigated and prosecuted by someone.

There is no consititional issue. The tribal courts are authorized by Congress and must follow due process requirements like any other Court authorized by Congress.

So instead of enforcing the laws that are already on the books, let's just keep passing more laws.
How about everyone just enforce the exsisting laws.

 

[BRUTALITOPS]

As it stands now, a non-tribe member who beats his tribe-member girlfriend cannot be prosecuted in tribal couts and would instead have to be investigated by the FBI and prosecuted by a US Attorney in federal court, which will never happen. The law expands the jurisdiction of tribal courts to cover non-tribe members so that these crimes are actually investigated and prosecuted by someone.

There is no consititional issue. The tribal courts are authorized by Congress and must follow due process requirements like any other Court authorized by Congress.

So now everyone that isn't a member of a tribe is under jurisdiction of that tribe?

Why wouldn't the U.S. normally handle it? Something doesn't seem right.

 

[Phantasmal]

Wow, I have him on IA, I didn't see that. His mind is in dire need of a bath.

He has no life, so he fantasizes about yours! It is truly sad.

 

[Damocles]

What in God's name are you babbling about? Seriously.

The image in the OP was taken from this story:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/...tand-up-for-the-rights-of-rapists-and-abusers

Again, it is not an "appeal to emotion" to repeat the assertion in the story from the OP that these men support more abuse to women.

I have no clue whether these men support the abuse of women. Neither do you. Frankly, I don't see the relevance. What matters is that they don't care to do anything to combat it.

Which is again an appeal to emotion. It is nonsense, it is partisan, and it is weak rhetoric designed for the politically uninformed.

It, like the original article and the OP, suggests an evil intent which does not exist, and you and I both know it. I do not believe you are really capable of that stupidity, any more than I believe that Dixie doesn't see why Kerry voted for it before he voted against it....

We spend too much time in politics land to pretend to the professional level of stupid it takes to believe that these men want more women beaten and "don't care to do anything about it" if they are.

 

[zappasguitar]

This pertains to men raping Indian women on reservations. It's one of the best parts of the act. Especially considering the history of white male sexual violence towards minority women. No more free passes. Great news for anyone who cares about women, and not just about white women. That's me. I celebrate this. Nail the fuckers.

You didn't seriously expect a well thought out response from the guy who just whined about not wanting to go to "teepee court" did you?

 

[SmarterthanYou]

Here's a great site that explains some of what the VAWA does.

As far as arguing with men here about this, I wouldn't bother myself. They always have an excuse for why Republican anti-woman policies aren't really anti-woman. And as we know, there is no war on women.

It doesn't matter. They keep losing women and are determined to continue pursuing the same anti-woman policies and mansplaining to the dumb bitches why these polices aren't really anti-women. How has this worked for them so far? Yeah. And it's gonna get worse. I encourage them to keep it up. Good work fellas!

your link if full of flowery words and useless phrases. I don't see anything in there that couldn't be done by the DOJ just suing whichever state/city that didn't pursue prosecutions for crimes against women that weren't up to par, but since you hate men anyway, your wants and needs are not important.