Ohio Anti-Gay Amendment Ties Prosecutor's Hands In Domestic Violence Cases

[davidinalameda]

http://www.365gay.com/Newscon06/03/032606ohio.htm

In case that has been closely watched by lawyers across the country an Ohio appeals court has ruled that domestic violence charges cannot be laid in cases where the couple is unmarried because of the state's ban on same-sex marriage.

Opponents of the ban, passed in 2004, warned that it was so poorly worded it could be used to deny rights to unmarried opposite sex couples.

Since then prosecutors in several Ohio counties have refused to lay charges in cases of domestic violence involving non married opposite-sex couples.

An appeals court on Friday reaffirmed that, ruling that the state's Ohio's 25-year-old domestic violence law is in conflict with the marriage amendment.

[redphish]

1. Talk about yer backlash.

The fundies would probably just say anyone in a sinful relationship deserves to get the shit beat out of them anyway so they really haven't done any harm at all.

[rocktivity]

2. Not unlike Bush in the runup to the Iraq invasion

it isn't as though they weren't warned.

:headbang:
rocknation

[dsc]

3. The people who brought us this referendum should rot in Hell

They were warned this might happen and sure enough it did. The first domestic violence death is on them.

[Meldread]

4. I wonder if...

...the man supported the anti-gay Amendment?

"In a case involving a woman charged with domestic violence against her boyfriend the 2nd District Court of Appeals upheld a lower court's dismissal of the charge based on the amendment."

If he did, I wonder if he thought it'd only effect the "fags"? I guess he is reaping his rewards now.

It's hard to muster sympathy for straights when it's the straights screwing us over. It's almost bitter-sweet to see that at least some of them are suffering as a result of their own bigotry.

---

This of course shouldn't cast a shadow on the female on male spousal abuse. It's a very serious thing in this country, and something that is way under reported. Studies constantly show that while men are more typically stronger than women, when women abuse their partners they typically compensate for their lack of strength by using weapons. Also there is a large portion of men who won't defend themselves against such women for fear of themselves being accused of being the abuser. There is also a large shame factor involved, the whole "you got beat up by a woman" thing. There is also the glorification of female-to-male abuse in the media. (It is perfectly accepted, for example, for a woman to slap a man and it be "funny" whereas if a man were to slap a woman it really wouldn't be seen that way.)

Of course, this doesn't even touch on male-male or female-female spousal abuse, which is just as over looked.

I remember when I was in school and a girl was threatening to beat me up. I was afraid of fighting her because I was afraid of being seen as a jerk that beat-up on girls. I remember my mother telling me, "If she's man enough to punch you, then she's man enough to be punched back. If that girl hits you, treat her just like you would anyone else." I guess in the end, equality becomes a double-edged sword. :P

I actually think that girl gave me a better positive view toward women in the long run. Instead of seeing them as possibly "breakable" things that needed to be "protected", I see them as strong, intelligent, independent people just as capable as any of their male counterparts. Of course, as a result I also have a slightly disparaging view of women who seem want to be treated as weak and inferior to men, who want to be treated as subordinate. That really irks me to no end, both because of their actions and because they sell themselves short.

A woman who is strong, fierce, independent, intelligent always commands my undying respect... and even as a gay male - I find that attractive in a woman. (In fact, if I ever were to have a relationship with a woman, it'd be the only type of female I'd even consider.)

Ahh, but I am rambling now.