Sometimes I like to challenge my opinions by forcing myself to think “from the other side.” Usually, it either helps me solidify my views or it helps me see the gaps in my thinking or decisions.
Either way, for the sake of debate, one should at least know what the opposing side’s argument is. Being aware of and understanding a variety of viewpoints can help policymakers make more informed decisions, and aid in negotiations, compromise or persuasion.
Recently, I read this article from the Washington Times by Penny Young Nance, who is the CEO of Concerned Women for America.
Nance argues that VAWA should not be passed through Congress because it is ineffective, a waste of taxpayer dollars, and diverts away from real women’s issues by adding feminist values of “gender identity” and “sexual orientation.”
She also states that if policymakers and feminist liberals were really concerned about reducing violence against women then they would encourage marriage between a man and a woman. She says that women are less likely to be abused if they’re married as opposed to living with their partners. She also says that VAWA “demonizes” men. Nance states that there’s a better alternative, the SAFER Act, which is the Sexual Assault Forensic Evidence Registry Act.
What are your thoughts on this?
Is SAFER better than VAWA?
Is there evidence to support Nance’s assertions?
Is she just as biased as VAWA supporters?
How could VAWA’s sponsors in Congress use differing opinions like Nance’s in their decision-making process?
Let me know what you think, readers! And stay tuned for a follow up post analyzing the different perspectives on how violence against women should be approached.
VAWA Update: VAWA is on the Senate floor today!! Contact your legislators!