![]() |
|
| *Home>>>Civil Rights Law |
What do you radical feminists have to say about this? |
Read the links. In particular, look at the top one, third page, where it states in the middle that 40 to 50 percent of restraining orders are strategic ploys. In the fight against domestic violence, we have denied men constitutional rights of due process and presumption of innocence. Do feminists think that it is justified to strip half of the population of civil rights to combat domestic violence? Oh okay, Susie, I get it. It's okay to strip men of constitutional rights if you've seen abuse. Exactly the feminist pile of crap that I expected. There is this one thing called the Constitution that would say otherwise. After all, there's all sorts of violent crimes, and we don't cross the line to stop them. Don't you care about those wrongly accused? What if it were your father or brother, or friend? Yes. If you could do worse, believe me they would. I am not a "feminist" per say - but I will say this, I think those figures are skewed to meet the needs of the writer, and until you have either been abused or seen the product of abuse then I really don't think you get to talk too much about men's constitutional rights. Susie D: So because a few assholes (population wise I mean) beat their wives, the rest of us men have no right to make sure that the pendulum doesn't swing too far against us? Unjustly far, that is. Think about how you would feel if every night you came home to abuse. Someone threatening your life and safety and not being able to do much about it except get a restraining order to get time to run away before they kill you. Ever been punched in the face by a man? Imagine living with him!!!!! In order to get a restraining order there is a court date and a judge decides whether it is necessary or not. (At least in Chicago) Screw your statistics and live it for one day. You might change your mind. The articles seem skewed to the writers opinion. |
| Tags |
| Collections Law Consumer Law Construction Law Constitutional Law Computer Law Child Custody Civil Rights Law Business Law Bankruptcy Law Banking Law Aviation Law Appeals and Writs |
| Related information |
the EEOC was formed and falls solely under Title VII of the civil rights act of 1964 as amended 1991. were is it that you see affirmative action as part of title VII. i have been unable to find an... If you are a solo defendant, then how can it be a multi-million dollar civil rights lawsuit against you -- and if you are the defendant, then how can you claim to be protecting individual citizen... This is a case warranting public attention but not the way most have portrayed it here. I have attached a link to the SNOPES news story on the incident. If you read it you will see the Jena 6 are n... What the DFCS can and can not do is spelled out in the agency's authorizing legislation and its regulations, which vary by state. Since you didn't include the name of your state, it'... Do you really want an uneducated, ignorant man like Al Sharpton to help you? Even Jesse Jackson is more intelligent and a much better speaker and preacher! ...'Hate', in the context of "hate crime", is a subjective term. It's something being pushed by the usual suspects, the Jewish ADL, the Jewish ACLU, etc. There's no way o... The ACLU recently filed suit against the Federal Government. Why? Because the Federal Government finally decided to start enforcing its own laws, after it was pointed out that one of the biggest ... i also would have liked to have seen the bill before commenting ...................... thank you to John Stolworthy... i don't see any support for your alarmist point of view...unless i... |
Categories--Copyright/IP Policy--Contact Webmaster |