individual rights

I am disappointed in Maine.

I am disappointed because, when push came to shove, they demonstrated clearly that flaw of democracy that we libertarians have long sounded the alarms about: the masses simply cannot be trusted with it.

I support gay rights for the same reason I consider myself a small-government libertarian - I cannot, in good conscience, demand that the State both stay out of my bedroom and impose my will on those with whom I disagree (and, for the record, I don't especially disagree with homosexuality).

What we see today, increasing with distressing frequency, is a tendency on the Right to want to use the mechanics of the State to impose itself upon those social elements with whom it takes grievance. This is an historical error: for a very long time, the free market was regarded as a liberating force in society, in which men of any background, any social status, could make good on their inherent potential by allowing the objective forces of the market to equalize any subjective discrepancy in their social relations.

That same principle ought to apply - but does not, in our allegedly 'free' society - to these hot-button controversial issues as well. Marriage is especially important: for marriage is, above all, a contract; and if we applied contract law equally to marriage as we do to every other exchange of material or moral worth, we would find that the State has no business in hindering the formulation of contracts whatsoever.

But, unfortunately, our society is hardly free.

I will push on as I always have, trying to right (and Right) the wrongs foisted about American conservatism by the New Right and its cronies in FOX and the National Review. And I want you to help me.

SAFE Act Supercharges Victimhood and Allegations of Domestic Violence

(WASHINGTON, DC) -- Just when we thought we had seen our share of fantastic and colorful ideas for 2009, Representatives Lucille Roybal-Allard (D-CA) and Ted Poe (R-TX) are hoping you won't mind just one more to add to the list.

H.R. 739, the SAFE Act ("Security and Financial Empowerment"), intends to promote victimhood and frivolous allegations of domestic abuse by granting lifetime job security to anyone who makes such a claim, creating powerful incentives for highly conflicted spouses and intimate partners to file false abuse charges, which would trivialize real problems associated with domestic violence, while marginalizing efforts to protect actual victims abuse that need and deserve the attention of law enforcement and the courts.

H.R. 739 seeks to prohibit employers from refusing a job to any person who claims to have suffered from domestic violence or "substantial emotional distress or psychological harm" – words that can be interpreted to mean just about anything.

And, as hard as it is to believe, no actual evidence of domestic violence is required to receive these benefits. The "victim" only has to sign a sworn statement or get a restraining order, which are notoriously easy to get because of the low standards of proof and weak definitions of domestic violence that are currently used to destroy intact families.

Furthermore, judges are reluctant to deny applications for fear of being blamed if something bad happened following the denial. An individual or entire family of the alleged "victim" is also entitled to the same benefits.

H.R. 739 also allows any person who "is, has been, or may be the subject of abuse" to qualify for lifetime health insurance coverage.

The "victim" would also be entitled to 30 days of emergency leave as well as unemployment compensation. The bill amounts to a lifetime guarantee of job security and availability of employer-subsidized health insurance for any person who claims to be a victim of domestic violence or psychological abuse, or for any family member. And the person who allegedly inflicted the abuse has no right to refute or appeal the charges.

Some readers might wonder if we're exaggerating when we say all this, but we're not – see RADAR's analysis of the bill here: http://www.mediaradar.org/docs/RADARanalysis-HR739-SAFE-Act.pdf

Suffice it to say, this bill is prime example how the feminist mantra of victimhood has spun out of control, and how even Republican lawmakers are being co-opted by them.

Over 1 million restraining orders are issued each year in which partner violence is not even alleged. This so-called "SAFE" Act is the last thing we need. Take action today!

 Our last two alerts targeted VAWA funding in the stimulus bill. Although we were not fully successful in removing it, we did succeed in eliminating $75 million from the final package – $325 million instead of $400 million. Thank you for helping expose how VAWA has spiraled out of control because of the lack of an honest debate!

Act Now!

Poe's sponsorship of this bill is clearly out of step with his party's stand on economic policy. Please contact his office and ask him to withdraw support for H.R. 739.

 

As always, please remember to be polite.

Rep. Ted Poe (R) Texas, 2nd Congressional District Phone: 202-225-6565 Fax: 202-225-5547 Webform: http://poe.house.gov/contact/contactform.htm

If you support these efforts, please be sure to forward this message to others within your personal and professional networks.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Michael Burns 

 

Syndicate content