Anti-Gay Law backfires eliinating prosecution for domestic violence

Solution. Don't live together before getting married. Marry 1st, move in 2nd.

That's a recipe for divorce, alby.

It sickens me to ever back up something Alby posts, even if it's slightly on a tangent, but there is at least some statistics that suggests that marriage before living together isn't the recipie for distaster that some people think.

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/series/sr_23/sr23_022.pdf

It's hardly a conclusive report, and the numbers aren't earth shattering, but statisticly, at least for the United States, there does seem to be a slight increase in divorce among couples that cohabitated prior to marriage, to the tune of about a 9% difference.

you do know that gay people aren't allowed to get married in the United States -- right?

Considering I'm a gay person that lives in the United States, yes, I'm aware

On the other hand, I don't consider the statistics irrelivant because of that. I was responding to Eggy's comment to Alby, Kendra, not the general topic of this thread.

my bad.

's'alright.

We need to do a SL Meetup at Gay Days this year! I live in Orlando (actually just a few miles away), and could work on organizing it!

That is not the solution to domestic violence. Typical simplification of a serious issue.


Oh, I love Gay Day!

Just don't make the meeting location along the path of the Country Bear Jamboree. I have a hard time making it past there without getting distracted for a while.

No Neehai, its not a solution to domestic violence. Its a solution to not have charges dropped in court if your party to domestic violence. As such, don't live together unless your married. Otherwise, don't expect recourse with the law if you bring up charges of domestic violence. Simple and clear cut. Get Married first, then call the moving company.

This would be very cool Hank - would you put me on your list?

As I said. Typical.

Dang! I would love to go, but don't have any time off until the fall.

Be sure to send me pics!

Domestic violence laws are the same kind of ruse as "hate" crimes. If someone beats another person, who cares if that person is their spouse, life partner, etc.? It's *still* wrong! It's still assualt-why does it need a special name? If a couple of low lifes drag a homosexual behind their truck, or a white kid gets beat to death for being in a black neighborhood-why bother calling it anything but what it is-MURDER?


Assualt is assualt is assault.

Murder is murder is murder.

And it's all *wrong*.

The real crime here isn't the amendment-it's the perversion of that ammendment to allow criminals to go free. But then if they didn't bother with superfluous laws like "domestic violence" and just called a duck a duck and an assault and assualt-we wouldn't be here now.

-Kiamat Dusk
Calling it like it is

Having been in an abusive relationship prone to Domestic Abuse --I can respond with a great big --Bullsh*t.

Often the victim of Domestic Abuse has no place to turn for help and is in a constant state of being traumatized by the abusive spouse. This makes it incredibly difficult (if not perilous) for the abused spouse to even contact police, let alone file charges.

Not allowing unmarried couples to file an attack as Domestic Abuse closes the door for such simple things as restraining orders, temporary safe-housing, child custody rights.
You might as well just judge an unmarried person in an abusive relationship as DEAD.

The fact that one can even consider ignoring domestic abuse in the case of unmarried couples is yet another area where the current administration is demonstrating it's lack of support for citizens that don't tow their "moral line". I hope you never wind up in an abusive situation where your life has spun out of control only to find the law will not aid you.

Kendra,

Believe it or not, I'm sorry to hear about your hardship. I do not condone such acts. Still, I say you were assualted regardless of by whom. You could still call the police, your assailant could still be arrested, you could still get a restraining order, you could still go somewhere else-none of this requires any special names.

-Kiamat Dusk
"Tolerance is the virtue of a man without conviction." -GK Chesterton

The police could be called --and then what? No domestic abuse situation to resolve, and the assailant is charged only with the immediate incident. Domestic abuse carries a stiffer penalty precisely BECAUSE of it's ongoing nature. Often it takes the victim everything he/she has to even call the police, so severe is the trauma.

So the assailant, who is finally arrested for -- what? -- assault? battery? Gets out of jail the next day and starts in again.

Victim files for a restraining order --Judge says it's not necessary --it's only an assault, not like it has the history of a domestic abuse case.

Victim tries to get in a hostile that shelters abused spouses, no room at the inn --"sorry we can't help you, the State only funds us to help those involved in domestic abuse."

Names ARE required simply because they are useful in quickly and legally describing the nature of the crime. Or do you believe that we should do away with all descriptive names of crimes such as robbery, burglary, murder, manslaughter, etc etc --and just refer to anything against the law as "The Bad Thing".

Sounds like existing laws need to be enforced more rigidly. And if the victim calls the police each time it happens-there's your history. But then-why would you sit around and wait for a "next time"?

You've obviously never lived under the same roof with someone who is abusing you, or studied the effects of such abuse on a person. This is exactly why "special" legislation and methods of dealing with domestic abuse are on the books -- to ensure that the proper (and very complex) methods needed to help get someone OUT of an abusive relationship is followed.

All I'll say on this subject is a person who is being systematically abused is in no condition to be making clear decisions about his/her own safety and REQUIRES legal, medical and emotional support.

Had I been denied that support simply because my partner in a 12yr long relationship and I were not married, I can tell you quite truly I WOULD BE DEAD NOW.

Dammit, Kendra-stop flirting with me! It would never work between us and you know it! What with you being gay and all....

-Kiamat Dusk
Compassionate Conservative

My bad. With your Stepford Wife mentality and unwavering support and worship of George Bush, I just naturally assumed you were some sort of zoloft addicted soccer mom.

Sorry to disappoint. I'm just another blind, relgious nut, house slave, lackey living in the land of the tolerant liberals who've thus labeled me. Does this mean we can't be friends?

Sorry to disappoint. I'm just another blind, relgious nut, house slave, lackey living in the land of the tolerant liberals who've thus labeled me. Does this mean we can't be friends?

I have many conservative friends --we simply refuse to talk politics with each other