townhall.com/columnists/phyllisschlafly/ps20050718.shtml -> www.townhall.com/columnists/phyllisschlafly/ps20050718.shtml
If Republicans are looking for a way to return to their principles of lim ited government and reduced federal spending, a good place to start woul d be rejection of the coming reauthorization of the Violence Against Wom en Act sponsored by Sen. It's a mystery why Republican s continue to put a billion dollars a year of taxpayers' money into the hands of radical feminists who use it to preach their anti-marriage and anti-male ideology, promote divorce, corrupt the family court system, an d engage in liberal political advocacy. Accountability is supposed to be the watchword of the Bush administration , but there's been no accountability or oversight for the act's spending of many billions of dollars. There is no evidence that the Violence Aga inst Women Act has benefited anyone except the radical feminists on its payroll. The Senate Judiciary Committee, which is gearing up for a battle royal ov er the Supreme Court vacancy, has scheduled a hearing on the act for mid -July. It's apparently designed as a be-nice-to-Biden-before-the court-f ight event, since no critic has been invited to speak. The Violence Against Women Act's gender-speci fic title is pejorative: it's based on the false, unscientific, unjust a nd blatantly offensive premise that men are innately violent and abusive toward women, making all women victims of men. The president of Harvard University was publicly pilloried for months ear lier this year for implying innate differences between men and women. Bu t the act is spending a billion dollars a year to inculcate that very no tion in the minds of men and women who are having marital difficulties, as well as police, prosecutors, psychologists and family court judges. Feminists staged tantrums at the suggestion of innate math-aptitude diffe rences between men and women, but the whole premise of the Violence Agai nst Women Act is that men have an innate propensity to violence against women. It's not because some are bad individuals or drunks or psychologi cally troubled, but because men want to keep women subservient in an opp ressive patriarchal society. The Violence Against Women Act was passed using such bogus statistics as "a woman is beaten every 15 seconds" and "80 percent of fathers who seek custody of their children fit the profile of a batterer." Remember the Super Bowl hoax, the ridiculous claim that "the biggest day of the year for violence against women" is Super Bowl Sunday? The Violence Against Women Act comes out of Andrea Dworkin's tirades of h ate such as, "Under patriarchy, every woman's son is her betrayer and al so the inevitable rapist or exploiter of another woman." The act comes o ut of Gloria Steinem's nonsense, such as "the patriarchy requires violen ce or the subliminal threat of violence in order to maintain itself." Here is some mischief in act-funded activities that should be investigate d in the coming Senate Judiciary Committee hearing. The act refuses to provide any help whatsoever for male victims of domest ic violence. Let's hear from professor Martin Fiebert of California Stat e University at Long Beach who compiled a bibliography of 170 scholarly investigations, 134 empirical studies and 36 analyses, which demonstrate that women are almost as physically abusive toward their partners as me n The act encourages women to make false allegations, and then petition for full child custody and a denial of all fathers' rights to see their own children. The act promotes the unrestrained use of restraining orders, which family courts issue on the woman's say-so. This powerful weapon (according to the Illinois Bar Journal) is "part of the gamesmanship of divorce" and v irtually guarantees that fathers are expelled from the lives of their ow n children. A woman seeking help from an act-funded center is not offered any options except to leave her husband, divorce him, accuse him of being a crimina l and have her sons targeted as suspects in future crimes. The Violence Against Women Act ideology rejects joint counseling, reconciliation and saving marriages. The act denies that alcohol and illegal drugs are a cause of domestic vio lence, a peculiar assumption contrary to all human experience. In fact, most domestic violence incidents involve those components. The act uses a definition of domestic violence that blurs the difference between violent action and run-of-the-mill marital tiffs and arguments. Definitions of abuse can even include minor insults and refusing to help with child care or housework. The act funds the re-education of judges and all law enforcement personne l to teach them feminist stereotypes about male abusers and female victi ms, how to game the system to empower women, and how to ride roughshod o ver the constitutional rights of men. The act forces Soviet-style psychological re-education on men. The accuse d men are not given treatment for real problems, but are assigned to cla sses where feminists teach shame and guilt because of a vast male conspi racy to subjugate women. The Violence Against Women Act-funded centers engage in political advocac y for feminist legislation such as the "must-arrest" laws even if there is no sign of violence and even if the woman doesn't want the man arrest ed, and political advocacy against non-feminist legislation such as shar ed parental rights. It's time to stop the act from spending any more taxpayers' money to prom ote family dissolution and fatherless children.
The Supremacists: The Tyranny Of Judges And How To Stop It The gravest threat to American democracy is the supreme power of judges o ver political, social, and economic policy. In this bracing indictment, Phyllis Schlafly exposes the courts 50-year conquest of legislative aut hority, made possible by presidents, congressmen, and voters who surrend ered without a fight. The Supremacists is both a warning that self-gover nment is in peril and a battle plan for overthrowing the tyranny of judg es. But Schlaflys most startling revelation is the origin of judicial s upremacy...
Then write a letter to your Members of Congress or your local newspapers, who you can find by entering your ZIP code in the boxes below. Also mak e sure to tell your newspaper editors that they should carry your favori te conservative columnists! NOTE: Columns will not be automatically attached to the emails you send t hrough this tool.
|
http://csua.com/feed/