Democrat Joseph Crowley of New York and Republican Mary Bono of California, on April 26, 2010, introduced legislation, Girls Protection Act of 2010, H.R. 5137, on 4/26/2010 that would make it illegal to transport a minor girl living in the United States out of the country for the purpose of female genital mutilation.
The Girls Protection Act of 2010 amends the federal criminal code to impose a fine or five-year prison term, or both, on any U.S. citizen or alien admitted for permanent residence who knowingly transports in foreign commerce a girl under the age of 18 for the purposes of female genital mutilation.
The bill reads:
H.R. 5137
Girls Protection Act of 2010
To amend title 18, United States Code, to provide penalties for transporting minors in foreign commerce for the purposes of female genital mutilation.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the `Girls Protection Act of 2010'.
SEC. 2. TRANSPORT FOR FEMALE GENITAL MUTILATION.
Section 116 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
`(d) Whoever, being a United States citizen or alien admitted for permanent residence in the United States, knowingly transports a person in foreign commerce for the purpose of conduct with regard to that person that would be a violation of subsection (a) if the conduct occurred within the United States, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.'.
END
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_bills&docid=f:h5137ih.txt.pdf
PLEASE EMAIL, or CALL YOUR REPRESENTATIVE AND TELL THEM TO IMMEDIATELY VOTE TO PASS H.R.5137 - Girls Protection Act of 2010'
Monday, May 17, 2010
Sunday, May 16, 2010
American Association of Pediatricians amend opposition to Female Genital Mutilation
I was listening to the House Judiciary Committee question Attorney General Holder this past week. One of the Representatives questioning him brought up the one common thing shared by the Christmas bomber in Detroit, the Fort Hood mass murderer, and the Times Square bomber. The Rep said in all three terrorist attempts in the last year, one of which was successful, the individuals had ties to radical Islam. Did Holder think that was a factor?
AG Holder stumbled around for an answer as the Representative asked him another 4 or 5 times if that connection with Islam might have been the reason, or one of the reasons, these terrorist did what they did.
All Holder could form as an answer was to say he thought those people who espouse a ... a version of Islam... you say radical Islam... .
The representative finally ended with "You uncomfortable attributing any actions to Islam? Because it sounds like it.”
After 9/11 we, the American people of the U.S, began getting crash courses on Islam and its followers. We had a basic idea of the religion, and as we are generally tolerant of most religions in this country, we bought into thinking we could tolerate Islam. Big mistake. We were lead around by our noses to think that only the radical form of Islam would allow such horrific actions.
In 9 short years we have seen what we thought was just another religion in the World be shown to manifesting itself as something quite different. When are we going to see that the horrific acts commited in country after country that follow Islam are santioned by the teachings and practice of Islam? While the President is working to improve and promote relations with Muslim countries, the Muslim nations want that a global silence on denouncing Islam become law. If the theocracy of countries espousing Islam as their politcal, religious and mundane life hasn't shown us the true reachings of Islam; then how dumb are we?
We really, really need to wake up quick. Their reach has become so wide that the American Association of Pediatricians is suggesting a change in U.S. law to allow Female Genital Mutilation. There is no healthy or medical reason for it. Quite the reverse; it can cause death. Have we become so tolerant that we would lawfully allow girls to be severely mutilated to appease a religion?
The practice of Female Genital Mutilation (FGM), or Clitoridectomies openly continues today in Africa, the Middle East, Indochina, and communities in Asia. Immigrants from these countries have brought the practice with them to Europe and North America. While some romanticize it as a 'rite of passage'; it is mutilation, no matter how you try to spin it. However, it is now being recommended that we extend culturally sensitivity and call it female genital cutting (FGC), This culturally sensitivity recommendation comes from the American Association of Pediatricians. On April 26, the AAP even suggested that laws be changed to allow pediatricians to mutilate girls. They’re not yet advocating full-scale clitoridectomies: just a milder form of child abuse or a less-severe ritual cutting they term as 'nicking'.
http://withfairnessandwithjusticeforall.aimoo.com/url.cfm?link=pttjAt7z/hk/MLf9CVKU6pKhuS$9xqffreiSU5bqegwavdJn9rH0xrf9y3w2FH054x6Z4t71PRLvCLlqq6qpqiMCK9brI6Xu
Full text with graphics download (mature material graphics)- http://withfairnessandwithjusticeforall.aimoo.com/url.cfm?link=pttjAt7z/hk/MLf9CVKU6pKhuS$9xqffreiSU5bqegwVIgJTx9LbCC4lZjU3MJzpga7RHHUlW50iGS9kh7hpkQ==
http://withfairnessandwithjusticeforall.aimoo.com/url.cfm?link=fzc$ssuuf/8ndJ3iOaEo20e61oV0gx4DIrZRKbCUC0Nl2m7X0fc5ehG1Kh6nR9EV0uXliVe616I=
From the AAP:
AG Holder stumbled around for an answer as the Representative asked him another 4 or 5 times if that connection with Islam might have been the reason, or one of the reasons, these terrorist did what they did.
All Holder could form as an answer was to say he thought those people who espouse a ... a version of Islam... you say radical Islam... .
The representative finally ended with "You uncomfortable attributing any actions to Islam? Because it sounds like it.”
After 9/11 we, the American people of the U.S, began getting crash courses on Islam and its followers. We had a basic idea of the religion, and as we are generally tolerant of most religions in this country, we bought into thinking we could tolerate Islam. Big mistake. We were lead around by our noses to think that only the radical form of Islam would allow such horrific actions.
In 9 short years we have seen what we thought was just another religion in the World be shown to manifesting itself as something quite different. When are we going to see that the horrific acts commited in country after country that follow Islam are santioned by the teachings and practice of Islam? While the President is working to improve and promote relations with Muslim countries, the Muslim nations want that a global silence on denouncing Islam become law. If the theocracy of countries espousing Islam as their politcal, religious and mundane life hasn't shown us the true reachings of Islam; then how dumb are we?
We really, really need to wake up quick. Their reach has become so wide that the American Association of Pediatricians is suggesting a change in U.S. law to allow Female Genital Mutilation. There is no healthy or medical reason for it. Quite the reverse; it can cause death. Have we become so tolerant that we would lawfully allow girls to be severely mutilated to appease a religion?
The practice of Female Genital Mutilation (FGM), or Clitoridectomies openly continues today in Africa, the Middle East, Indochina, and communities in Asia. Immigrants from these countries have brought the practice with them to Europe and North America. While some romanticize it as a 'rite of passage'; it is mutilation, no matter how you try to spin it. However, it is now being recommended that we extend culturally sensitivity and call it female genital cutting (FGC), This culturally sensitivity recommendation comes from the American Association of Pediatricians. On April 26, the AAP even suggested that laws be changed to allow pediatricians to mutilate girls. They’re not yet advocating full-scale clitoridectomies: just a milder form of child abuse or a less-severe ritual cutting they term as 'nicking'.
http://withfairnessandwithjusticeforall.aimoo.com/url.cfm?link=pttjAt7z/hk/MLf9CVKU6pKhuS$9xqffreiSU5bqegwavdJn9rH0xrf9y3w2FH054x6Z4t71PRLvCLlqq6qpqiMCK9brI6Xu
Full text with graphics download (mature material graphics)- http://withfairnessandwithjusticeforall.aimoo.com/url.cfm?link=pttjAt7z/hk/MLf9CVKU6pKhuS$9xqffreiSU5bqegwVIgJTx9LbCC4lZjU3MJzpga7RHHUlW50iGS9kh7hpkQ==
http://withfairnessandwithjusticeforall.aimoo.com/url.cfm?link=fzc$ssuuf/8ndJ3iOaEo20e61oV0gx4DIrZRKbCUC0Nl2m7X0fc5ehG1Kh6nR9EV0uXliVe616I=
From the AAP:
Female Genital Mutilation (FGM - let's call it what it really is) is illegal and subject to criminal prosecution in several countries, including Sweden, Norway, Australia, and the United Kingdom. In the United States, federal legislation in 1996 criminalized the performance of FGC by practitioners on female infants and children or adolescents younger than 18 years and mandated development of educational programs at the community level and for physicians about the harmful consequences of the practice. Various state laws exist as well.
Some physicians, including pediatricians who work closely with immigrant populations in which FGC is the norm, have voiced concern about the adverse effects of criminalization of the practice on educational efforts.32 These physicians emphasize the significance of a ceremonial ritual in the initiation of the girl or adolescent as a community member and advocate only pricking or incising the clitoral skin as sufficient to satisfy cultural requirements. This is no more of an alteration than ear piercing. A legitimate concern is that parents who are denied the cooperation of a physician will send their girls back to their home country for a much more severe and dangerous procedure or use the services of a non–medically trained person in North America. In some countries in which FGC is common, some progress toward eradication or amelioration has been made by substituting ritual “nicks” for more severe forms.2 In contrast, there is also evidence that medicalizing FGC can prolong the custom among middle-class families (eg, in Egypt)
The option of offering a “ritual nick” is currently precluded by US federal law, which makes criminal any nonmedical procedure performed on the genitals of a female minor.
Most forms of FGC are decidedly harmful, and pediatricians should decline to perform them, even in the absence of any legal constraints. However, the ritual nick suggested by some pediatricians is not physically harmful and is much less extensive than routine newborn male genital cutting. There is reason to believe that offering such a compromise may build trust between hospitals and immigrant communities, save some girls from undergoing disfiguring and lifethreatening procedures in their native countries, and play a role in the eventual eradication of FGC. It might be more effective if federal and state laws enabled pediatricians to reach out to families by offering a ritual nick as a possible compromise to avoid greater harm.
Efforts should be made to use all available educational and counseling resources to dissuade parents from seeking a ritual genital procedure for their daughter. For circumstances in which an infant, child, or adolescent seems to be at risk of FGC, the American Academy of Pediatrics recommends that its members educate and counsel the family about the detrimental health effects of FGC. Parents should be reminded that performing FGC is illegal and constitutes child abuse in the United States.
It might be more effective if federal and state laws enabled pediatricians to reach out to families by offering a ritual nick as a possible compromise to avoid greater harm.
Thursday, March 4, 2010
What happened to the Bunning Amendment
I watched as Senator Bunning spoke on the Senate floor on Tuesday. He repeatedly presented a way to pay for the Temporary Extension Act. He also had in the amendment a longer extension time. As it is, the Senate will be back in the same place in about a month - having to authorize, and borrow more money for the same extensions again.
Bunning's amendment was not voted on. It was shoved under the rug when Mrs. Boxer said, "I raise a point of order that the pending Bunning amendment violates section 311 of the Congressional Budget Act."
It was Bunning's motion to to waive the applicable section of the Budget Act that was voted on. Motion to waive the Budget Act with respect to amendment SA 3355
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi?dbname=2010_record&page=S955&position=all
rejected in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 43 - 53.; that put Bunning's amendment out of order and off the floor.
Temporary Extension Act: By 78 yeas to 19 nays (Vote No. 32), Senate agreed to H.R. 4691, to provide a temporary extension of certain programs, after taking action on the following amendment proposed thereto, clearing the measure for the President:
H.R. 4691
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.+4691:
Pages S926-34
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgiposition=all&page=S926&dbname=2010_record
During consideration of this measure today, Senate also took the following action:
By 43 yeas to 53 nays (Vote No. 31), three-fifths of those Senators duly chosen and sworn, not having voted in the affirmative, Senate rejected the motion to waive pursuant to section 311 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, with respect to Bunning Amendment No. 3355, in the nature of a substitute. Subsequently, the point of order that the amendment was in violation of section 311 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, was sustained, and the amendment was ruled out of order.
The yeas and nays resulted--yeas 43, nays 53
Pages S933
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgiposition=all&page=S933&dbname=2010_record
The record states:
SIGNATURE AUTHORIZATION
Mr. BEGICH. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the majority leader be authorized to sign duly enrolled bills and joint resolutions during today’s session.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The Senator from California.
Mrs. BOXER. How much time remains?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is 55 seconds remaining.
Mrs. BOXER. I want to say, on behalf of many of us on this side of the aisle, how glad we are that Senator BUNNING has changed his mind and taken the option he was presented with on Thursday; that is, to offer an amendment and then for us to get this done. Too much pain is out there with the unemployed.
A lot of workers in my State and in States all across this Nation who are unemployed suffered a great deal of anxiety over this long weekend.
Mr. President, 2,000 Department of Transportation inspectors were furloughed. That led to stoppage of work on bridge and highway construction in 17 States, because Senator BUNNING didn’t take the deal he is taking now.
I am glad he is taking it.
I raise a point of order that the pending Bunning amendment violates section 311 of the Congressional Budget Act.
Mr. BUNNING. Mr. President, I am sorry. I wasn’t on the floor. Could the Senator make her point of order.
Mrs. BOXER. I raise a point of order that the pending Bunning amendment violates section 311 of the Congressional Budget Act.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kentucky.
Mr. BUNNING. Mr. President, I move to waive the applicable section of the Budget Act, and I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There is a sufficient second.
The question is on agreeing to the motion.
The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. BYRD) and the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. LAUTENBERG) are necessarily absent.
Mr. KYL. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Texas (Mrs. HUTCHISON) and the Senator from Oklahoma (Mr. INHOFE).
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber desiring to vote?
The yeas and nays resulted—yeas 43, nays 53, as follows:
[Rollcall Vote No. 31 Leg.]
YEAS—43
Alexander
Barrasso
Bennett
Bond
Brown (MA)
Brownback
Bunning
Burr
Chambliss
Coburn
Cochran
Collins
Corker
Cornyn
Crapo
DeMint
Ensign
Enzi
Feingold
Graham
Grassley
Gregg
Hatch
Isakson
Johanns
Kyl
LeMieux
Lieberman
Lincoln
Lugar
McCain
McConnell
Murkowski
Nelson (NE)
Risch
Roberts
Sessions
Shelby
Snowe
Thune
Vitter
Voinovich
Wicker
NAYS—53
Akaka
Baucus
Bayh
Begich
Bennet
Bingaman
Boxer
Brown (OH)
Burris
Cantwell
Cardin
Carper
Casey
Conrad
Dodd
Dorgan
Durbin
Feinstein
Franken
Gillibrand
Hagan
Harkin
Inouye
Johnson
Kaufman
Kerry
Klobuchar
Kohl
Landrieu
Leahy
Levin
McCaskill
Menendez
Merkley
Mikulski
Murray
Nelson (FL)
Pryor
Reed
Reid
Rockefeller
Sanders
Schumer
Shaheen
Specter
Stabenow
Tester
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Warner
Webb
Whitehouse
Wyden
NOT VOTING—4
Byrd
Hutchison
Inhofe
Lautenberg
The PRESIDING OFFICER. On this vote, the yeas are 43, the nays are 53. Three-fifths of the Senators duly chosen and sworn not having voted in the affirmative, the motion is not agreed to.
Bunning's amendment was not voted on. It was shoved under the rug when Mrs. Boxer said, "I raise a point of order that the pending Bunning amendment violates section 311 of the Congressional Budget Act."
It was Bunning's motion to to waive the applicable section of the Budget Act that was voted on. Motion to waive the Budget Act with respect to amendment SA 3355
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi?dbname=2010_record&page=S955&position=all
rejected in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 43 - 53.; that put Bunning's amendment out of order and off the floor.
Temporary Extension Act: By 78 yeas to 19 nays (Vote No. 32), Senate agreed to H.R. 4691, to provide a temporary extension of certain programs, after taking action on the following amendment proposed thereto, clearing the measure for the President:
H.R. 4691
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.+4691:
Pages S926-34
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgiposition=all&page=S926&dbname=2010_record
During consideration of this measure today, Senate also took the following action:
By 43 yeas to 53 nays (Vote No. 31), three-fifths of those Senators duly chosen and sworn, not having voted in the affirmative, Senate rejected the motion to waive pursuant to section 311 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, with respect to Bunning Amendment No. 3355, in the nature of a substitute. Subsequently, the point of order that the amendment was in violation of section 311 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, was sustained, and the amendment was ruled out of order.
The yeas and nays resulted--yeas 43, nays 53
Pages S933
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgiposition=all&page=S933&dbname=2010_record
The record states:
SIGNATURE AUTHORIZATION
Mr. BEGICH. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the majority leader be authorized to sign duly enrolled bills and joint resolutions during today’s session.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The Senator from California.
Mrs. BOXER. How much time remains?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is 55 seconds remaining.
Mrs. BOXER. I want to say, on behalf of many of us on this side of the aisle, how glad we are that Senator BUNNING has changed his mind and taken the option he was presented with on Thursday; that is, to offer an amendment and then for us to get this done. Too much pain is out there with the unemployed.
A lot of workers in my State and in States all across this Nation who are unemployed suffered a great deal of anxiety over this long weekend.
Mr. President, 2,000 Department of Transportation inspectors were furloughed. That led to stoppage of work on bridge and highway construction in 17 States, because Senator BUNNING didn’t take the deal he is taking now.
I am glad he is taking it.
I raise a point of order that the pending Bunning amendment violates section 311 of the Congressional Budget Act.
Mr. BUNNING. Mr. President, I am sorry. I wasn’t on the floor. Could the Senator make her point of order.
Mrs. BOXER. I raise a point of order that the pending Bunning amendment violates section 311 of the Congressional Budget Act.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kentucky.
Mr. BUNNING. Mr. President, I move to waive the applicable section of the Budget Act, and I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There is a sufficient second.
The question is on agreeing to the motion.
The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. BYRD) and the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. LAUTENBERG) are necessarily absent.
Mr. KYL. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Texas (Mrs. HUTCHISON) and the Senator from Oklahoma (Mr. INHOFE).
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber desiring to vote?
The yeas and nays resulted—yeas 43, nays 53, as follows:
[Rollcall Vote No. 31 Leg.]
YEAS—43
Alexander
Barrasso
Bennett
Bond
Brown (MA)
Brownback
Bunning
Burr
Chambliss
Coburn
Cochran
Collins
Corker
Cornyn
Crapo
DeMint
Ensign
Enzi
Feingold
Graham
Grassley
Gregg
Hatch
Isakson
Johanns
Kyl
LeMieux
Lieberman
Lincoln
Lugar
McCain
McConnell
Murkowski
Nelson (NE)
Risch
Roberts
Sessions
Shelby
Snowe
Thune
Vitter
Voinovich
Wicker
NAYS—53
Akaka
Baucus
Bayh
Begich
Bennet
Bingaman
Boxer
Brown (OH)
Burris
Cantwell
Cardin
Carper
Casey
Conrad
Dodd
Dorgan
Durbin
Feinstein
Franken
Gillibrand
Hagan
Harkin
Inouye
Johnson
Kaufman
Kerry
Klobuchar
Kohl
Landrieu
Leahy
Levin
McCaskill
Menendez
Merkley
Mikulski
Murray
Nelson (FL)
Pryor
Reed
Reid
Rockefeller
Sanders
Schumer
Shaheen
Specter
Stabenow
Tester
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Warner
Webb
Whitehouse
Wyden
NOT VOTING—4
Byrd
Hutchison
Inhofe
Lautenberg
The PRESIDING OFFICER. On this vote, the yeas are 43, the nays are 53. Three-fifths of the Senators duly chosen and sworn not having voted in the affirmative, the motion is not agreed to.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)