Green Book

This afternoon, I went to see the movie Green Book.  It was a very good movie, on many different levels.  I would highly recommend it.  If you are not familiar with the story it is about Don Shirley, a Black pianist who takes his trio South on tour in 1962.  The rest of his trio is Anglo, and he hires an Anglo driver Tony Vallelonga.  The story is about the transformation of Shirley and Vallelonga.   

I have not yet been a Nike customer.  I am a 65 year old Anglo woman who likes football, civil rights, and comfortable shoes, among other things.  I am so pleased to learn the Nike has included  Colin Kaepernick in their latest ad campaign.  I believe in the US Constitution, however imperfect a document it is.  I believe in the Bill of Rights, with the First Amendment in place where it should be:  First, protecting freedom of speech.  I believe that Colin Kaepernick was well within his right to freedom of speech in calling attention to racism, social injustice and police brutality to people of color. His kneeling during the "Star Spangled Banner"  was a respectful act of protest, and whether you are for or against his actions, he propelled this nation to a much needed dialogue about how we treat people in this country who are different from "the white privileged."  I applaud Mr. Kaepernick for his courage, and now I applaud Nike for their courage, and their awareness that Freedom of Speech, is still alive and well in the United States.

Hate vs. Peace

I condemn the violence that occurred last weekend in Charlottesville, Va. https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2017/local/charlottesville-timeline/?utm_term=.53126ef6d1a7 when white supremacists and nationalists gathered and march, and were met by counter protesters, and violence ensued, including death. 

In the mix was the discussion of taking down a statue of Robert E. Lee.  I understand the honoring Confederate leaders is repugnant to people of color.  It commemorates the War Between the North and South which, as we know was very much about the issue of slavery. Many of these monuments were erected during the Jim Crow era in the early part of the 20th Century. 

I think that these statues and monuments should be kept in a historically appropriate place, not as decoration for public places including parks.  There should be historical context for keeping the statues and monuments, because we cannot change history, and we need to learn from it. I think of a movement in Germany by white supremacists who denied that the Holocaust over occurred. We can never deny the history of  racism and bigotry in our country.

We have to keep our history alive and teach it because that is the only way we can learn from our past, and frankly, we have a lot to learn.

I think one of the good things that has come out of this is that the dialogue about racism in this country is more open and realistic, and many people who did not realize that racism is still out there are becoming more aware. 

I grew up with "White Privilege" and could not begin to know what someone of color or minority experienced in their lives.  But I do know that we have an obligation to speak out against hate and violence. 

Today, the white supremacists and nationalists had a "Free Speech Rally" in Boston, and the counter protesters came out  in huge numbers http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/thousands-march-boston-counter-protest-free-speech-rally-n794156.  There was some tension and a few problems leading to arrests, but not the massive violence that occurred in Charlottesville, Va.  I think that the authorities in Boston learned from Charlotteville and took the possibilities seriously and prepared appropriately.  

I think we will see more marches and protests and rallies, because people are being energized to be more active.  Sadly, a lot of that is coming from the controversial comments by President Trump http://www.cnn.com/2017/08/19/politics/trump-remarks-alt-right/index.html.  He has just inflamed the people of this country who believe in peace, not violence, and want to work on improving conditions for all.  

Get With the Program or Go

There is a mechanism in the State Department to allow staff members to express their dissent of official decisions and policy, in place since the Viet Nam War era http://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2017/01/30/512494230/at-state-department-dissent-channel-in-high-gear-with-refugee-ban-protests.  The Dissent Channel is still in effect, and has been recently used by State Department employees who disagree with President Trump's decisions on Immigration. 

White House spokesman Sean Spicer said:  "I think they should get with the program or they can go." I understand that mentality, but he does not understand the intent of the Dissent Channel, which was specifically set up to allow State Department employees to express their opinions.  These state department employees are the experienced professionals who understand how to enact State Department diplomacy. They are not the untried appointees of the Trump Administration, most of whom do not have diplomatic experience or knowledge.

Why is President Trump willing to put our government in the hands of rank, untried, and inexperienced people, when there are tried and true professionals out there who can help him?

The other thing that concerns me about this attitude is that there is a mentality of Trump staffers that people should not be protesting their decisions and actions. Just because Donald Trump was elected President of the United States of America, does not mean that every citizen in this country has to agree with all of his actions, executive orders, and edicts.  The United States of America allows its citizens to dissent against the government, protest, and express dissenting opinions. 

President Trump and his staff need to be prepared for the fact many citizens in this country will be contesting their actions and executive orders. There will be law suits. There will be protests. And hopefully, there will be government employees who know that their allegiance is not to President Trump but to the Constitution of the United States of America. 

Speaking Out

I am unhappy with many of the things that are happening out of the office of the President of the United States of America.   Today, I sent messages to the President, my Representative, and both Senators.  I am the grandchild of immigrants who came to this country because they did not agree with the political actions of their country. I do not, today, agree, with the political actions of my country because the Transportation Safety Administration https://www.tsa.gov/ and the Department of Homeland Security https://www.dhs.gov/ and the Office of Immigration Enforcement https://www.ice.gov/. are being required to follow the executive order of the President of the Untied States of America. 

I have sent this message to the office of the President:

To President Trump:

Mr. President,  I believe your executive order on immigration may have some unintended consequences on green-carded legitimate residents of this country that are unconstitutional.  While I appreciate your concern for the safety of our country, I feel that if I do not register my concerns about the unconstitutionality of your actions, I am consenting to this unconstitutional behavior.  I feel strongly that the United States of America has a moral high ground and our government actions should reflect that moral high ground. Thank you for your consideration.

I have sent this message to Congressman Arrington, Senator Cornyn, and Senator Cruz:

I believe Mr. Trump's executive order on immigration may have some unintended consequences on green-carded legitimate residents of this country that are unconstitutional.  While I appreciate the President's concern for the safety of our country, I feel that if I do not register my concerns about the unconstitutionality of his actions, I am consenting to this unconstitutional behavior.  I feel strongly that the United States of America has a moral high ground and our government actions should reflect that moral high ground.  I have studied the inaction of the United States of America during World War II, when the Germans used "the final solution" against the Jews.  That inaction was unconscionable.  Not helping refugee Muslims is also unconscionable. If there are legitimate green-carded Muslims who are not allowed into our country because of President Trump's executive action, that blood is on our hands.  I understand that you cannot do much about an executive order, but even if you do a non-bonding resolution that says the elected branch of the government of the United States does not agree with that action, it will be something.  Thank you for your consideration.

If I do not speak up, I am complicit with the official actions of our President who is issuing executive orders that may be unconstitutional.

Election Results

I was so distressed by the results of the Presidential election on 11/8/16, I went to bed early.  I could see that my preferred candidate, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, was not going to win.  I was not as flabbergasted as I thought I might be.  I was very distressed.

So, today, when I thought about it, I decided I had to put my best foot forward, and do what was right.  Both Secretary of State and President Obama acknowledged that our heritage and hallmark as a nation is orderly transition of power.  And that will occur with the results of this election of Donald Trump as President of the United States of America.

Speaker of the House Paul Ryan described it well when he said that Donald Trump heard something in the voices of our citizens and resonated with those voices.  And it is true, if there are voices that are disaffected in this country, by the rights granted in the Constitution of the United States of America, they should be heard.

My role, as a citizen, is to be ever vigilant.  If there is any erosion of civil rights, if there is any deviation from the rule of law, if there is any abandonment of due process, if there is decreases of freedom, if there is any persecution of any group or individuals my job is to protest to the full extent of the law, and perhaps, beyond the full extent of the law.

This means I will need to make the necessary sacrifices if these thing occur.

A colleague told me that his thought to put a silver lining on this election result is that the House of Representatives and Senate are controlled by the Republicans, and a Democratic President would not be able to be very effective.  He is right. What remains to be seen, is how effective President-elect Trump will be, and what direction he will take our country. 

The Community Engagement Task Force

I went to the Community Engagement Task Force meeting tonight http://lubbockonline.com/filed-online/2016-09-01/lubbock-mayor-police-chief-face-tough-questions-community-forum#.V8j19o-cFxI.  I met some nice people, saw a few people I know, and listened to the comments of others. I made no comment.  I was just honored to be able to participate in such a forum. I want to watch for more.

Is This Treason?

Okay, so I am not sure what the legal definition of treason is for our country.  The Merriam - Webster Online Dictionary  http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/treason provides this definition:

1 :  the betrayal of a trust :  treachery

2 :  the offense of attempting by overt acts to overthrow the government of the state to which the offender owes allegiance or to kill or personally injure the sovereign or the sovereign's family

So, today, when I heard that Donald Trump, Republican Party nominee for the President of the United States, advocated for Russia to hack into and publish the "missing emails" of Hillary Clinton http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/28/us/politics/donald-trump-russia-clinton-emails.html, I had to ask myself if this was treason.  I am not hearing that in the news. So probably, it is not. 

But I find this kind of rhetoric not just offensive, but frightening, full of hate mongering, and bereft of the human rights values that the United States strives to achieve. Is this the face of the United States that I want to represent our country to the world?  Of course not!  Really, would any thinking, caring, compassionate human being want this man to represent us in the world?  Would anyone who cares about our place in the world want this man to represent us in the world?

I am frightened by the possibility that Donald Trump would be elected as President. I have visions of Nazi Germany with the hatred of the leaders of the country for those unlike them, their grasp for power and greed, and the way the citizens of the country did not revolt, no matter what they thought of the policies of the government. 

We have had those years in our country:  Witness the Jim Crow laws https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Crow_laws after the War Between the States. But we have learned, continue to learn, and are in conversation about continuing to need to learn that we are better than that. 

I have to believe that a hate mongering President would take us back 200 years or more in our human rights, civil rights, and moral rights. 

I am for peace. I am for human rights. I am for love.

Movie Day

I went to see the movie, "The Free State of Jones" http://stxmovies.com/freestateofjones/ today. It was a good story, but it was a sad story, because in the end, Newt Knight could only help a few people to freedom.  And he did not really impact racism in a big way. But he did impact it.  But it was a noble story, because he was  a man that had principles and stuck to them.

As I was driving, after having seen the movie, I heard the NPR interview with the writer and director Gary Ross http://www.npr.org/2016/06/25/483537325/telling-the-story-of-a-confederate-deserter-in-free-state-of-jones.  I thought it interesting that he said he could have ended the story when they raised the American flag, but the story of conditions and Newt Knight's fight after the war were not so "feel good."  But noble.


This link will lead you to the "true story." An interesting story.  Based on fact.
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/true-story-free-state-jones-180958111/?no-ist

Jackie Robinson Day

Friday, April 15 is Jackie Robinson Day https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jackie_Robinson_Day. http://web.mlbcommunity.org/index.jsp?content=programs&program=jackie_robinson_foundation

I am a Jackie Robinson fan.  I saw the movie 42 http://www.warnerbros.com/42 twice in the movie theater (I rarely see a movie once in the theater.)  That inspired me to read that book Jackie Robinson: A Biography by Arnold Rampersad. The movie really followed the first part of the book very closely.  I was impressed.

Monday and Tuesday of this week, I watched Jackie Robinson on PBS, produced by Ken Burns.  It very much reiterated what the movie 42 and the book Jackie Robinson: A Biography depicted, but it added some parts that were not in either. And having first person comments from Mrs. Rachel Robinson, and the two surviving Robinson children, Sharon and David made it that much more interesting.

I wish I had thought to order a Jackie Robinson shirt to wear to work this Friday, but it was too late when I thought about it.  I can go around wishing people a Happy Jackie Robinson Day!  Maybe you can, too.

Reading "Hanging Curve"

I am now reading Hanging Curve, by Troy Soos. The East St. Louis race riots of 1917 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_St._Louis_riot   http://www.blackpast.org/aah/east-st-louis-race-riot-july-2-1917  were neglected in my education about American history.  In general, I have known about the racial violence between Afro Americans and Northern and Mid-Western whites, and about Jim Crow laws. The acute awareness of race riots 100 years ago certainly gives an additional perspective on the events in St. Louis the past year or more. Personalizing it makes it so much more horrific.

It is sad that I have to say thank you to Troy Soos for increasing my awareness and giving me much more sensitivity to the history of race relations in St. Louis.

I am enjoying the book for its entertainment value, but appreciate the social value.

9-11

I did not intentionally do much to commemorate the 14th anniversary of the 9/11/2001 terrorist attacks. http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/on-sept-11-anniversary-appeals-to-remember-as-time-passes/ar-AAeap4l?li=AAa0dzB?ocid=ansmsnnews11  I started the day very conscious of the anniversary, and did put my flag out. At the football game the team's uniforms honored the living and dead first responders, veterans, and military members.  But that was it.

But I often think about how 9/11 changed us.  Our nation's citizens had rights curtailed by virtue of the Patriot Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriot_Act which allowed The Department of Homeland Security http://www.dhs.gov/ and other government agencies extensive liberties in surveillance, wiretapping, data mining, and invasions of privacy in the name of looking for terrorists or terroristic activity.

Our language has change: 9/11; ground zero; first responders (which was used previous to that attack, but not as prevalently as after); Homeland Security, to mention a few.

Our way of looking at things has changed.  First responders are more recognized as heroes.  Or at least, people who put their life on the line.  The members of the military are honored, and it is not uncommon for someone to approach a person in uniform, and to say "Thank you for your service."

In my way of thinking, we as a country are more leery about immigrants and refugees. Yet, I think some people have gone out of their way to be more aware of diversity and learn about different cultures, countries, religions.   

I also wonder if some of the police on citizen violence does not hearken back to the changes caused by 9/11.  First responders were given more authority by virtue of the need to seek out terrorists.  But when someone is given more authority, it is easy to generalize that to any or every situation. And, minority profiling, whether intentional, by policy, or unintentional, does occur.  So it became easier for someone so inclined to abuse their authority in certain situations.  We know this has happened for years.  I don't know if it has become worse recently, or we are just more aware of it, attuned to it, and seeing more unbiased evidentiary reports about it.

Of course, security at airports and the borders, even with our neighbor to the north, Canada, and to the south, Mexico, has increased. 

I wonder what exactly Al Qaeda https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Qaeda hoped to accomplish by these attacks.  To bring the United States down, in some way, shape, or form.  To my thinking, these attacks made our country stronger.  It started with Flight 93, when people did what they could.  Instead of being helpless victims on a skyjacked plane, they fought back, realizing they might not live, anyway. I think in many ways even though we have a lot of divisiveness in the country, we as a citizenry will rally together against any outside attach.

I think the public response to the Boston Marathon bombers, Boston Strong https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston_Strong, was a symbol of how the people of this country come together against outside attacks.

I personally am not sure how 9/11 changed me.  I have reflected that in the last few years, I am more conscious of thanking members of the military and first responders. I attend memorial services, and find myself tearing up when I hear patriotic music. I have passively accepted "security measures" while wondering if I should oppose the infringements on my rights. I feel stronger about wanting to defend my country. I feel stronger about wanting the wrongs in my country to be righted.

I fly very little, but do not find the impositions of searches and security measures that intrusive, partly, I think, because I work on a prison and search and investigation of personal effects is a regular experience. Except that the searches add so much time to the flight. But, I would rather drive so I can throw whatever into the car, even if I end up not needing it. Internet security is a problem, but it always was.

I think we have just settled into the "new normal" without realizing what we have lost or gained.   And that is the worst outcome of 9/11. Not being aware of what he have lost or gained.

The History of the United States

I am so sad tonight.  I know about all of the discriminatory and duplicity in history of the United States of America: the poor treatment of the First Americans, including the failure to abide by treaties made with these peoples and the other abysmal treatments of these peoples.  Slavery.  Jim Crow Laws. The incarceration of Japanese in camps during World War II. I had not heard about this one: The Deportation of Mexicans and Mexcian-Americans who were US citizens during the Great Depression http://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2015/09/08/437579834/mass-deportation-may-sound-unlikely-but-its-happened-before.  Segregation, which was separate and not equal. The violation of rights in the Patriot Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriot_Act. The incarcerations at Guantanamo Bay Detention Camp https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guantanamo_Bay_detention_camp.

I believe I am missing some other grievous human rights violations. I am not touching on the violations by private industry over the years. 

So, this is so sad that the United States has such a checkered past, yet sets itself out in the international community as a "holier than thou" nation.  It is not wrong that we are, as a nation, helping other peoples and other nations to improve their human rights records. But shouldn't we be doing it from a "learn from us" stance in learn from our mistakes? vs. This is how good a nation we are.  Because, frankly, we are not. 

The current unrest and animosity between citizens and  police is a perfect example of that:  People are being killed when in the custody or in contention with law enforcement professionals under questionable circumstances. Law enforcement officials are being ambushed simply because they are law enforcement officials.  I think this country is embroiled in a war of right vs. might. No clearly defined lines. No us against them, because the lines change depending upon the circumstances.  Who is right? Who has the might?  Who is Us? Who is Them?

Marriage License? vs Criminal Record?

I have been following the struggle of Kentucky Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis and her refusal to issue marriage licenses to gay couples http://www.huffingtonpost.com/james-peron/stupidity-not-religion-pu_b_8086824.html?ncid=fcbklnkushpmg00000063.  For me, this article is a good description of what she has done.

Her mother was county clerk before her, and she knew the duties of the job when she was elected http://www.usnews.com/news/us/articles/2015/09/03/judge-clerk-in-marriage-case-dealt-with-nepotism-charges.  Frankly, if I was a voter in Rowan County, I would be calling for her impeachment.  As a voter, I would have elected her to do her job, and spending time in jail,  and preventing her staff from doing their jobs is not the reason she was elected. If she is earning wages while she is not doing her job, frankly, that is theft from the State of Kentucky, and the taxpayers of Kentucky. 

I know that it is said that for every quote we recite from the Bible, in favor of our perspective, someone else will find a verse that supports their perspective. But I think Jesus was pretty clear in  Mark 12:17 when he said "Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's and to God the things that are God's."  To me, this is a directive from the Bible to Ms. Davis that if she is the County Clerk of Rowan County, she has an obligation to comply with the laws that Rowan County are compelled to follow, even if and especially if, handed down from the Supreme Court of the United States. If she wants to serve God, then she should go to work for her church. Or, at the very least, she should not take money from an entity that has tenets and values that differ from her religion, saying she is working for the entity, when she is not.  That is very deceitful!  And very unchristian.

I understand that very religious people are often called upon to reconcile their religious beliefs with laws and government.  I applaud someone who maintains the courage of their convictions, and does the right thing.  In this case, the right thing for Ms. Davis is to acknowledge that her religious beliefs are in conflict with the instructions of her employer, and she should not in good conscience continue to be employed by that employer, and take money for a job she cannot fulfill.  This then frees her up to campaign against same sex marriage freely, on her own time, and on her own dime, not that of the taxpayer.

Indeed, ultimately by fighting this law as a government employee, she has shattered the separation between church and state that our forefathers guaranteed us http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html in the Bill of Rights, or the First Ten Amendments to the United States Constitution http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html. Because, as a government employee, she is forcing her religious beliefs upon others in Rowan County, and the first amendment basically says the government cannot do that.

Well, I am not a religious scholar, a legal scholar, and most certainly, not a Constitutional scholar. This is my humble opinion.

Open Carry, Concealed Carry, and My Safety

So, I am not against people owning guns that are reasonable. I do not think private citizens need assault weapons, however.

Think people should have to take gun safety courses before they can carry a gun, whether for hunting, skeet shooting, target practice or self protection.  Texas requires people to have a concealed hand gun license if you want to carry a concealed gun.

Texas just passed some laws about open carry, guns on college campuses, making both legal.

I know how I feel about this.

I think if people are carrying concealed weapons, they are probably doing so for protection. I dislike the carrying of concealed weapons, because we do not know who has a gun, and I guess we should act as if anyone around us could have a gun.

I know how I feel about open carry. There are those who are for it because they say you know what you are dealing with that way.  That is not so, because open carry does not require people with concealed guns to expose them.  It does, however, become a public statement about having a gun at the ready, to flourish and use, if their situation is to their disliking.

I think open carrying of weapons is what amounts to a threat, or a dare.  It declares the wearer ready to fight in a violent way.  I think Texas is going to see some horrible gun fights before someone gets smart and repeals the law.  Because we know that having a gun at the ready makes it that much more likely that someone will use it without thinking through the consequences and other options.

http://www.statesman.com/news/news/state-regional-govt-politics/whataburger-takes-stand-against-texas-new-open-car/nmxf6/

So, do I like the announcement from Whataburger?  Yes.  So much so that I am going to go to Whataburger, a place I do not normally frequent, and tell them I am there just because I support their banning of open carry.

This is the other sad thing.  I did not use the term gun or firearms in the title. I wonder how many of you knew it pertained to guns and firearms, and not something else.  If you are from Texas, you probably did not think twice about what it referred to.

Yeah! For South Carolina

Today, the State of South Carolina showed itself as a state looking to the future. After emotional and somewhat heated debate, the bill was passed that allowed for the Confederate Flag "Stars and Bars" to be taken down from the capitol property in Columbia,  SC, and placed in a museum on the capitol property http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/south-carolina-confederate-flag_559e0307e4b05b1d028fb690?ir=Politics&section=politics&utm_campaign=070915&utm_medium=email&utm_source=Alert-politics&utm_content=FullStory&ncid=newsltushpmg00000003.  Governor Nikki Haley had promised to sign the bill quickly.  And, she did.  http://www.kcbd.com/story/29510871/south-carolina-governor-confederate-flag-comes-down-friday.  The best thing, in my mind, that although the flag is going to be relegated to a Civil War "relic room," there will be a ceremony that will treat the flag with dignity and honor. 

Why is this good?  Because although the flag's symbolism is mixed: "hatred vs. heritage" a ceremony to lay it to rest honors all:  It honors those for whom the flag symbolizes the heritage and the history of their family.  A ceremony also can be a rite of passage for those who view the flag as a symbol of hatred: A rite of passage ending an era of hate and racism, and starting a new era of forward thinking, future looking, respect and dignity embracing, inclusive and accepting people. 

It is symbolic that South Carolina leads the way: it lead the way into the Civil War.  It can now lead the way into a new era of compassion, acceptance and unity.  South Carolina has a burden to bear: to continue to move forward with inclusion, acceptance, equality, dignity, respect. 

What an outcome from an act of hate.

Texas Attorney General and the Supreme Court Ruling on Same Sex Marriage

I was waiting for something like this:  The Texas Attorney General, Ken Paxton has said the county clerks can refuse to issue  a marriage license for same sex couples, and judges and justices of the peace can refuse to marry same sex couples http://www.chron.com/news/politics/texas/article/Texas-AG-tells-clerks-judges-to-flout-Supreme-6354467.php.  I am not surprised that AG Paxton took the chicken shit (pardon my language) route of saying clerks may be fined or sued, and there are attorneys willing to provide legal services for them, on a pro-bono basis, if need be.  Chicken shit, because he did not even have the guts to say "And the Texas Attorney General's office will provide you with legal representation." 

Paxton also used the lame excuse that there are others, deputies and clergy, who can perform same sex marriages.  So, he knows the Supreme Court ruling is binding, he is just looking for a way to thumb his nose at the decision (and be disrespectful to the United States Supreme Court.) However, I think he is just showing his stupidity and small-mindedness.

To my way of thinking, the Travis County Clerk, Dana Debeauvoir, has a better understanding of the Untied States Constitution.  And she certainly has a better understanding of her role as county clerk than AG Paxton.

Rainbow Pride

So, I was a little slow to click to this, but I realized that Facebook had a way for people to celebrate Rainbow Pride https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rainbow_flag_(LGBT_movement), in honor of the Supreme Court's decision to make same sex marriage recognized as legal, nationwide http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/supreme-courts-landmark-ruling-legalizes-gay-marriage-nationwide/ar-AAcaBM5?ocid=ansnewsap11.  I finally figured out how to do this! Sorry I am so slow!

I have had discussions with folks I know that this is against their religion.  Sadly, these are very Christian, kind people. Some are even health care or mental health care professionals who have a professional obligation to be ethically and culturally competent in matters such as this. So, they tell me they can treat these people as they always have, with love, and respect.  But they cannot accept their right to be protected in marriage and the civil rights that marriage implies:  benefits, recognitions, legal parenthood, insurance coverage, for example. I am sorry, I do not believe they can treat homosexuals or other culturally affected people with the dignity and respect they deserve, because by denying their right to be protected civilly, you are disrespecting them, even if you think you are not.. 

I had this discussion with a colleague today. I am not good at thinking on my feet, but thinking about it now, how can "loving these people" include excluding them from the protections of civil rights, excluding them from equality of protection in employment, equality of protection of benefits like Social Security and Health Insurance, preventing one of a gay couple from being able to adopt a child. It cannot.  I am sorry.  We cannot love homosexual people unless we give them equal standing as human beings.

I understand that many religions feel that they cannot accept homosexuals because of "Biblical Teachings." Pardon me, we hide behind "Biblical Teachings" that have nothing to do with real teachings from Christ like "love one another," "treat others as you would want to be treated." "ask for forgiveness and you will be forgiven." 

If you cannot accept homosexuals as they are, with all that implies, then you cannot love them and accept them, no matter how much you protest otherwise.

This is not a gray decision.  This is a black and white decision. You either love and accept people who are gay, or you withhold your love and acceptance.  Because, really love is acceptance, and unconditional.

Candlelight Ceremony

 
I went to the Candlelight Vigil for Victims of the South Carolina Church Shooting sponsored by the Division of Institutional Diversity, Equity, & Community Engagement at Texas Tech. It was organized by students, but open to the faculty, staff and community.  I sent the announcement out to the social work network.  I saw 2 other social workers there.
The organizers told me they started planning Tuesday. The crowd was small: I thought it would be very large.  I am sorry more people did not turn out. I cry easily at situations like this, and when I spoke, I was sometimes near tears.

The wind was stout, so the candles did not stay lit. It was not dark, anyway.

It was a brief ceremony, with a variety of tones:  education, anger, and reconciliation.  I think it is time in my life to somehow get more involved in community development and improvement in equality in Lubbock.  I am not sure how.  But I am sure God will lead me on the way.



























 

 

 

 

 

The Confederate Flag Controversy

The shooting of 9 black people at Emanuel AME Church https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charleston_church_shooting last week has awoken a controversy about the Confederate Flag "Stars and Bars" flying at the Capitol in South Carolina. The history of the flag and its use at the state capitol in South Carolina is well documented by NPR http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/06/22/416548613/the-complicated-political-history-of-the-confederate-flag.  Gov. Nikki Haley has changed her mind about removing the flag from the Capitol http://www.salon.com/2014/10/15/nikki_haley_its_ok_to_have_the
_confederate_flag_at_the_statehouse_because_not_a_single_ceo_has_complained/.

The symbolism of the flag is conflicting:  some see it as a symbol of history, heritage, ancestry and pride.  Many see it a symbol of hatred, racism, segregation, and discrimination. I saw a post on Facebook by someone who said he saw the flag as a symbol of bikers, country and western music, and rebellion. This may be his take on the flag, but for many more people it is a hurtful symbol associated with such things as the Ku Klux Klan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ku_Klux_Klan, white supremacy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_supremacy, and Jim Crow laws https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Crow_laws. 


I heard, loud and clear when Norman Brannon http://www.scstatehouse.gov/member.php?code=0184659069, a  representative of South Carolina, from a very conservative part of the state, say he would sponsor a bill to have the Confederate Flag removed from the state Capitol.  He said he did not do his job:  http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/21/politics/south-carolina-confederate-flag-debate/.

Wal-Mart has announced it will removed Confederate Flag products http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-06-23/wal-mart-to-remove-confederate-flag-products-in-wake-of-shooting.

Living in the South, loving people who have pride in their Southern Heritage, I understand the feelings of identity to the heritage.  But the flag is a lie, and only became widely celebrated as a symbol against the Civil Rights movement in the 1960s.  Its symbolism has been glorified, but the symbolism of hatred it portrays has been ignored or glossed over.

It is history.  On a private basis, we cannot ban the Confederate Flag. And if there are people out there who do believe it speaks of pride and glory, they can tout the flag. But I do not have to agree with that. And governments in the United States do not need to support that.

I choose Peace.  I choose the symbols of Peace.