Welcome to 2012, when marvelous things can be achieved—just watch how we go back in time, and back on the great strides women have made.
A few days ago, the inquiry into the Obama administration’s decision to guarantee access to contraception services and other preventative health care free of charge began. Yet, all of the people testifying at the hearing were men. When the issue was raised, the Chairman refused to include a female witness.
Shouldn’t women be making decisions about their own bodies? What century are we in, where we don’t let women speak about their own rights? How can men speak for our problems?
Yes, they ultimately did let two women testify. But that doesn’t change the fact that women were excluded in the first place. Moreover, they excluded from those testifying a Catholic woman who represents the view of most Catholics, which is that Obama’s compromise was reasonable.
What does Santorum’s chief financial backer have to say on the matter? Cross your legs!
What else? I’m glad you asked. Apparently, the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) is now a partisan issue. First authorized in 1994 by Clinton, it has since been reauthorized with overwhelming support, that is, until this year. The legislation received no GOP support, though it was sponsored and cosponsored by senators from both parties.
The legislation aims to improve the response to violence against women, including domestic violence, dating violence, and sexual assault. According to the National Domestic Violence Hotline, more than three women are murdered by boyfriends and husbands each day.
This issue is still relevant, and should have the full support of those representing the people of this country. The main objection: victims can’t be discriminated against based on sexual orientation or background.
So, violence against women is O.K. for certain individuals, but not others? Please explain this to me, because as a human being, I can’t make the same distinction.
Do YOU think there can be too many victims???