Category Archives: Women’s Rights

Delusional Democrats.

Posted on by

The midterm electoral ass-kicking should be a wake-up call for Democrats. Yet, in the hours following the debacle, all I’ve seen and heard are the same old lame excuses. “Democrats only turn out for presidential elections.” “Our candidates were swamped by a tsunami of dark money.” “It’s the result of Obama’s unfavorable numbers.” “With the growing number of minorities, it’s inevitable that Democrats will win in the future.” And, my favorite, “We don’t belong to an organized political party. We’re Democrats.”

Although I hate it, that last excuse is more true than I’d like to admit. The Party is disorganized. It has no real leadership. It fails to communicate what it stands for, other than getting elected. Its messaging is pathetic. And its consultants are a joke!

More important, the Party and many of its candidates are gutless. Even though they had real accomplishments to promote – accomplishments that are popular with voters – they seemed afraid to stand up for them lest they be criticized by Teapublicans and their comments featured in a Teapublican attack ad. For example, during this election cycle, few Democratic candidates were willing to take credit for the Affordable Care Act that gave millions access to health insurance for the first time. Few would stand up for environmental issues. Few stood against climate change. Few would stand up for labor unions. Few would stand up for universal background checks for gun purchases. Few took credit for voting for the 2009 economic stimulus that kept the nation from sliding into the Great Depression II. Few stood behind Democratic economic policies that have the stock markets at historic highs and unemployment numbers at their lowest level in more than a decade. Few would take credit for getting our troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan. Few would stand behind their Democratic president. And one even refused to acknowledge whether or not she voted for a Democrat for president!

To make matters worse, Democratic consultants begged the president not to take a stand on immigration reform in order to help red state Democrats who were almost certainly doomed to lose anyway. But that advice did have an effect. It cost several blue state Democrats their seats and it may have cost the Party the support of Latinos in the future. Yet their worst advice was to tell candidates to run away from the president and the Party’s accomplishments. Their only real strategy seemed to be, “a Republican said something stupid, send us money.” (I, for one, will not send the Democratic Party another dime until it gets its house in order and miraculously grows a spine.)

In truth, the Democratic candidates who took the advice of their Party got what they deserved.

But why would political consultants care if their advice is awful, anyway? Most will still be around for the next election, even if their candidates aren’t. And they will still be able to cash their rather substantial checks.

In my (hopefully temporary) home state of Arizona, the consultants advised Democratic candidates to base their campaigns on support for public education, including increased funding. But most Arizona voters don’t seem to care about public education. Many are too old to care and others simply don’t vote. As a result, every Democrat running for statewide office lost. Indeed, the voters showed how they really feel about education by rejecting numerous school bonds and apparently electing a Teapublican with absolutely no background or understanding of education to the position of Superintendent of Public Instruction. Her platform consisted of a single plank…stopping Common Core, the program created by Republican and Democratic governors that sets standards for schools across the nation. (It’s just as well, Arizona schools are so under-funded, few of the state schools could meet those standards anyway.)

And, rather than turning the state purple as the Party hoped, the far-right-wing Arizona voters passed yet another “sovereignty” bill designed to raise a collective middle finger to the federal government. The bill will encourage our very right-wing state government to challenge the federal government on any federal law with which our nincompoop-driven legislature disagrees. The result will be millions of Arizona taxpayer funds spent on lawsuits against the federal government that sends $1.50 to Arizona in federal spending for every $1.00 the state contributes in federal taxes.

Clearly, in this election, few Democrats went to the polls. Why would they? The Party gave them few reasons to vote. In hopes of attracting more women and more Latino voters, the Party essentially abandoned its core voters…its base. After all, if the Democratic Party won’t stand up for its own president and its own accomplishments, how can we trust that its candidates will stand up for us?

Why Democratic Candidates Keep Fighting An Uphill Battle.

Posted on by

The answer is Democratic leadership…or, more precisely, the lack of it. The only discernible strategies of the Democratic Party are to wait for minorities to become the majority and to send a constant barrage of fund-raising emails to registered Democrats in hopes of countering the massive amounts of money from corporations, PACs, Super PACs, and 501c4s aligned against them.

There has been no attempt to brand the Party (a new logo does not constitute a brand). No attempt to communicate the Party’s principles. No attempt to tout its accomplishments (Obamacare has been a great success, yet many Democrats are afraid to claim it). Instead, the Democratic Party’s entire emphasis seems to be focusing on the stupidity of Teapublican opponents (the candidates are extreme, but the Republican Party relies on sound marketing principles).

While there is abundant evidence of Teapublican failures, such as the Republican Party’s denigration of women, its simultaneous attack on abortion, contraception and education (contraception and education have long been proven to be the most effective means of preventing abortions), its attack on minorities and immigrants, its attack on safety net programs, and its penchant for war, pointing to these things is not, in of itself, a strategy.

A real strategy is to clearly and succinctly state what the Party believes. A real strategy is to have the courage to promote and stand up for those beliefs. A real strategy is to draw clear distinctions from your opponents in a positive way. A real strategy is to proudly run on your record, not from it. A real strategy is to educate voters about your candidates, not the opponents. A real strategy is to demonstrate that you serve the voters instead of the special interests.

On almost every count, the Democratic leadership fails.

That’s too bad, because the Democratic Party continues to field some great candidates. For the most part, those candidates deserve better.

The Home Of Radical Islam.

Posted on by

ISIS (aka ISIL and the Islamic State), al-Qaeda, the Taliban and the radical Islamic madrassas in Pakistan all have something in common aside from Islam. They have all been funded by Saudi Arabia.

The Saudi Arabia that is sitting on an ocean of oil which has turned a family of desert tribesmen into billionaires; the Saudi Arabia whose ruling family consists of nearly 15,000 members; the Saudi Arabia that is home to Mecca and radical Wahhabi Islam; the Saudi Arabia that has a dismal record for women’s rights and human rights; the Saudi Arabia that has a government based on nepotism and corruption; the Saudi Arabia that still beheads criminals and dissidents; the Saudi Arabia that has close ties with both former Presidents Bush; the Saudi Arabia that was held harmless for 9/11 even though the plot was mostly financed and carried out by Saudis.

Yes, that Saudi Arabia!

Considering all of this, you may wonder why we continue to treat Saudi Arabia as a close ally. The answer can be summed up in a single word. It begins with “o”, ends with “l” and has an “i” in the middle.

If we are ever to bring peace to the Middle East, we can’t do it militarily. Our invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan have proven that. Radical Islamists must be defeated from within…by moderate Muslims. We can only remove the Saudi’s sources of arms and funding. Of course, that means ending the sale of arms from our defense industries. It means ending our reliance on Saudi Arabian oil. It means committing to sustainable forms of energy. It means developing alternative sources for plastic, such as the process that makes plastics by drawing carbon from the atmosphere.

It means ending support for Saudi Arabia as long as it continues to fund extremist groups.

Why Does The Right Feel Free To Interpret Science But Not The Constitution And The Bible?

Posted on by

If anything, it should be the other way around. The Bible is not only full of contradictions. Most of it was written hundreds of years after the events it portrays, and it has lost meaning with each translation. As for the Constitution, not even its authors thought it was infallible. Indeed, the Founders expected it to be modified regularly. Jefferson even suggested that it be revisited every generation. And the Constitution addressed the principles and issues of the time. The Founders could not have imagined the issues of today.

As a result, both the Bible and the Constitution may be interpreted in a myriad of ways.

Science, on the other hand, is based entirely on evidence. Science takes a hypothesis and tests it in order to determine if the principle is correct. Only when the results have been repeated on multiple occasions does science accept the hypothesis as fact. For example, gravity was once considered a theory, but every experiment and observation proved it to be true, so it is now accepted as fact. The same is true of evolution and human-caused climate change. In each case, there is an abundance of evidence. Yet conservatives continue to challenge the principles with a few anecdotal experiences based on personal opinion.

In other words, on these issues and many others, conservatives have things backward.

Conservatives continually want to replace science and other evidence with opinion to suit their own ideologies. For instance, they deny the positive impact of Keynesian economics which has been proven by economists on multiple occasions. Instead, they want to rely on Reaganomics which has never proven to work. Even the two architects of Reagan’s trickle down theory have abandoned the concept as a failure and a fraud.

Conservatives actually believe that the poor are lazy despite the fact that most work full-time jobs. Conservatives believe that giving tax breaks and subsidies to large corporations will actually increase federal revenue and create jobs. Conservatives believe that using contraceptives makes women sluts. They believe that preaching abstinence to teens prevents unwanted pregancies despite all evidence to the contrary. They believe that defunding abortion, denying food stamps and school lunch programs for children and declaring war halfway around the world makes them “pro-life.”

Conservatives deny that our national obsession with coal, gas and oil is destroying our planet despite the findings of the world’s most respected climatoligists and evidence of the rapid melting of the planet’s largest glaciers. Conservatives believe that allowing industries to police themselves will maintain our environment. Conservatives believe that allowing the wealthy and large corporations to influence elections is protecting freedom of speech.

There’s a word for such people…and it’s not conservative. It’s delusional!

What Is Patriotism?

Posted on by

On this Independence Day weekend, movoto.com published a map showing the most and the least patriotic states in America. I might not have paid it any heed except for the fact that it ranked my former state of Minnesota at #49. The criteria used included the number of National Historic Landmarks per capita (WTF?), the number of veterans per capita, money spent to fund veterans, percentage of residents who voted in the last presidential election, people who use Google to buy American flags (double WTF?) and people who list America as an interest on Facebook (triple WTF?).

Obviously, the realtors who constructed the map have no clue of the true meaning of patriotism.

My ancestors fought in all of America’s wars going back to the Revolution. Many could be considered war heroes. Yet there were no showy displays of flags. They paid tribute to other veterans and to the nation, but to my knowledge, they never received nor expected special treatment for their own courage. Most were also religious, but they never made a show of their faith nor tried to force their beliefs onto others.

In short, they were true patriots.

All of this reminds me of an essay contest I was asked to judge a few years ago. It consisted of judging essays on patriotism written by a middle school class. Despite the many grammatical errors and spelling errors, the worst aspect of the competition was the fact that the children seemed to equate patriotism with flag-waving and our military might. The essays focused on war…on defending our freedom from outside interests. But there was no mention of defending our freedom from those inside our nation who would try to take away our rights. There was no mention of devotion to our nation, its principles and its Constitution. There was no mention of our responsibility to vote; to pay our fair share of taxes; to conserve our nation’s beauty; to conserve our environment. No mention of ensuring equal rights for all of our citizens.

Knowing then what I know now, I shouldn’t have been surprised. On movoto.com’s list, Arizona ranked #10 for patriotism. But, in my view, what passes for patriotism in Arizona today is far too much about show…displaying flags and military toys…than substance. By itself, a flag is just a few scraps of colored cloth. It’s what the flag stands for that is really important. Unfortunately, that fact is lost on far too many people. Some of the people who wave the flag the most and shout USA the loudest disavow our federal government. Some would deny others the right to vote, the right to control their own body and the right to marry whom they love. Some destroy signs of their political opponents. Some vandalize property of those who display election materials for the “wrong” candidates. Some shout angry epithets at members of other political parties. Some threaten and bully those who display political stickers with which they disagree. Some carry the Gadsen flag and openly carry guns in order to intimidate their fellow citizens. Some fly the battle flag of the Confederacy and make racist threats. Some cheat or refuse to pay taxes in order to deny funding for the government. All the while, like most of the South, the State of Arizona receives far more in federal funds than it pays in taxes.

Minnesota, on the other hand…the state that ranked #49 in patriotism on movoto.com’s list…leads the nation in voting. It pays a far larger share of income taxes than it receives in federal funding. Indeed, Minnesotans create a disproportionate number of jobs nationally and pay a disproportionate amount in taxes. Minnesotans played a key role for the North in the Civil War. On the other hand, the state that was ranked most patriotic by movoto.com is South Carolona…the first state to secede from the Union and to declare war on the United States.

Now tell me, which state is really more patriotic?

Why Religion Is Failing.

Posted on by

In many European nations, churches and cathedrals stand empty, saved from the wrecking ball only because of their historic value. In some cities, the buildings are occupied by tourist information centers; by clothing stores; by shopping malls; by nightclubs; even by strip clubs. Given the current sad state of affairs exhibited by many religions, this should come as no surprise to anyone.

Contrary to the numbskulls on Fox News Channel, it has nothing to do with any perceived “attack on religion.” Rather it is the consequence of self-destruction; of religions actively causing harm to themselves.

In many countries once dominated by the Roman Catholic Church, people have left the Church, horrified by the Vatican having turned a blind eye to sexual predators who have worn the trappings of priests. Many young people have abandoned other denominations due to a lack of relevance in their lives. Many accurately see churches as little more than tax-free social clubs. And many are disturbed by the tendancy of church leaders to engage in politics and to promote misguided, often provably false beliefs. The recent speech by James Dobson at what was billed as a nonpartisan, nondenominational National Prayer Breakfast is a perfect case in point. During his speech, Dobson labeled President Obama “the abortion president,” calling him responsible for the deaths of thousands of innocent, unborn children. As a result, a Democratic Congresswoman understandably spoke up and walked out.

She should have known better than to have attended in the first place.

Dobson has long been a shill for political conservatives. He views himself as a kingmaker amongst conservatives. He has immersed himself in organizations devoted to passing legislation that discriminates against those he dislikes. Indeed, one of his groups was behind the discriminatory bill known as Arizona SB 1062…a bill that has been signed into law in Mississippi and elsewhere. Dobson is one of the evangelicals whose primary message is believe as I do…or else.

Dobson is but one of the many church leaders who regularly cross the line and use their status as “spiritual leaders” to sway politics. Many “pastors” have turned their pulpits into venues for political action. They have proselytized as much about politics as Biblical concepts. They have urged their followers to vote for candidates who meet their own narrow-minded views. They have rallied their flocks to support violence. They have turned military interventions into holy wars. They reject science and secular education. They cynically use natural disasters as examples of the failings of our society. They obscure the real teachings of Christ and selectively choose passages from Biblical texts to attack homosexuality and the poor.

And that’s just the Christians. Muslims and Jews have done much of the same and worse!

Given how far many religions have degenerated, it’s little wonder that more and more people, especially educated young adults, describe themselves as not being attached to any religion. It’s why traditional churches are shrinking. And, although some evangelical churches have seen growth based on a strong anti-abortion, anti-gay message, the overall trend is downward. Enlightened leaders such as Pope Francis may be able to reverse that trend, but it’s doubtful. Those leaders are outnumbered and out-shouted by Dobson and his ilk.

Shoddy…er…Hobby Lobby.

Posted on by

As you may know, the Supreme Court of the United States recently heard Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby Inc., a case brought against the Department of Health and Human Services by a few Christian zealots led by the founders of Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood. In their lawsuit, they are challenging the Affordable Care Act’s requirement that for-profit corporations must include contraceptives as part of their employee health plans. They based their argument on their religious objection to paying for many types of contraceptives that they believe, despite scientific evidence to the contrary, are forms of abortion.

Apparently, Hobby Lobby has no such concerns about breaking one of the Ten Commandments…”You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.”

You see, in an astonishing example of hypocrisy, Hobby Lobby has long invested in companies that make the very contraceptives to which they claim to object. According to an article by Mother Jones, “Documents filed with the Department of Labor and dated December 2012—three months after the company’s owners filed their lawsuit—show that the Hobby Lobby 401(k) employee retirement plan held more than $73 million in mutual funds with investments in companies that produce emergency contraceptive pills, intrauterine devices, and drugs commonly used in abortions. Hobby Lobby makes large matching contributions to this company-sponsored 401(k).”

In fact, it appears that the court case was not even started by Hobby Lobby. It seems The Beckett Fund for Religious Liberty, a right wing Washington, DC stink tank, dreamed up the lawsuit then went in search of a plaintiff. Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood are merely willing participants.

In other words, Hobby Lobby shouldn’t be able to object to paying for contraceptives on religious or any other grounds. It’s difficult to argue a case on principle if you apparently have none.

All Men Are Created Equal?

Posted on by

That’s what our Declaration of Independence stated. But it wasn’t true. In fact, African-Americans were considered three-fifths of a person and held in slavery for nearly a hundred years longer. Native Americans were slaughtered and herded onto reservations in order to steal their land. Chinese-Americans were virtually enslaved to build our railroads. And women were denied the right to vote for nearly 150 years.

Even today equality still does not exist.

People of color are many times more likely to live in poverty and to be imprisoned. Gay and lesbians are only now beginning to win equal rights to marry those they love. Women are paid less for doing the same work as men. And, according to some, the plight of the wealthy is even worse. They claim to be victims of their own success and good fortune – that they are victims of class warfare. Some have even likened their plight to the Jews prior to the Holocaust.

Hmmm….

The wealthiest one percent of our population owns an overwhelming percentage of the wealth in the US yet, thanks to loopholes, they pay a smaller percentage of their income in taxes. They invest large portions of their wealth in offshore tax havens. They use their wealth to buy influence and access to government. They are even treated differently by our courts. The Supreme Court ruled that money equals free speech, so they can speak more loudly than anyone else. (In fact, the Koch brothers are now using their money to drown out the voices of ordinary citizens.) And if they break the law, they are seldom punished.

You may remember the case of the Texas teen found to be suffering from “Affluenza.” Despite the fact that he killed four people as the result of drunk driving, he was “sentenced” to an exclusive, and expensive, rehab facility.

Now there is the case of a duPont heir who was given probation for raping his three-year-old daughter because the judge decided that he “wouldn’t do well in prison.” Wouldn’t do well? Who does? When have you ever heard of a case in which a court was concerned that a poor person might not do well in prison? Some celebrate Sheriff Joe’s “Tent City” which imprisons ordinary citizens in tents without heat or air conditioning; with no toilets or running water; with punishments of bread and water; with two vegetarian meals a day (Sheriff Joe recently decided that even his notorious green baloney sandwiches are too expensive and cutting into the profit margins of his wife’s food service business). Has any court ever voiced concern that a convicted felon might not do well there? No…more like HELL NO!

Prisoners in Tent City have died from the heat without repercussions to Sheriff Joe or the facility. Yet no court has worried that other prisoners in the facility “wouldn’t do well.” Such concern is only voiced for the very wealthy on the rare occasions their highly-paid attorneys fail to get them acquitted.

All men created equal? It was a nice sentiment by Jefferson and the Founding Fathers. But it’s still only a dream.

Do Religious Beliefs Trump Scientific Facts And The Common Good?

Posted on by

Can a for-profit corporation have religious beliefs? If so, who defines the corporation’s beliefs? Is it the CEO? The Board of Directors? The shareholders? Do the corporation’s religious beliefs out-weigh those of its employees? If so, are there any limits on those beliefs? May the corporation cite those beliefs in denying service to customers? What constitutes a religion? What constitutes a sincerely held religious belief?

These are just a few of the questions at stake in the case now being considered by the Supreme Court of the United States.

As you most certainly know, Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood have filed suit claiming that their religious beliefs should exempt them from complying with the Affordable Care Act’s mandate that employer-provided insurance policies provide access to contraceptives. Both corporations claim that, despite scientific evidence to the contrary, IUDs, Plan B and several other types of female contraceptives are not mere preventatives. They consider them forms of abortion, which is forbidden by their religions.

The purpose of government – any government – is to solve conflicts of individual rights. When these rights are in conflict, it is left to the government and its courts to decide where one’s rights stop and another’s begin. For example, I enjoy the peace and quiet of the forest. You enjoy driving your loud ATV in the forest. We both have a right to our happiness, so whose rights prevail? It is precisely because of such conflicts that we have laws and regulations.

But, what if, instead of conflicting rights, we have conflicting beliefs? For example, I believe that science can prove our world and all its creatures are the products of evolution taking place over millions of years. Others believe that God created the world in six days. We can each hold to our beliefs without causing harm to the other. To paraphrase Thomas Jefferson, in this case, your beliefs neither break my arm nor pick my pocket.

But in the Hobby Lobby case, the female employees can legitimately claim damages if the corporation refuses to include contraceptives as part of the health insurance plan. The women’s health needs will be treated differently than other employees’. They will have to pay out of pocket to purchase contraceptives, even if those pharmaceuticals are needed for medical purposes, not pregnancy prevention. Does the application of the drug and the need factor into the religious beliefs of the corporation? If so, does the corporation get to decide when it will and won’t pay for the pharmaceuticals? Can the corporation demand a review of its employees’ medical records?

And what if a corporation founded by Christian Scientists decides that none of its employees should have health care at all…that they should simply pray, instead? What if that corporation considers the resulting tax is an infringement on its beliefs? What if a corporation cites religious beliefs in order to deny employment or service to women, gays, Jews, African-Americans, Latinos, tall people, short people, or fat people? What if a hospital or clinic decides to subject patients to a religious test before acting to save their lives? It has taken centuries for our nation to extend the rights guaranteed by our Founders in the Constitution to all of our citizens, and there are still many inequities.

If the Court allows people and corporations to treat others differently based on mere beliefs, the disparities and conflicts will never end.

Are Women Mere Hosts?

Posted on by

Are they the property of men to do with as they wish? Are they mere vessels designed to do little more than nurture the male seed? Are they organisms good only for child-bearing and child-rearing? Do they not enjoy any civil rights of their own? That, in fact is the view of fundamentalist Muslims. It’s also, apparently, the view of fundamentalist Christians and many Teapublicans as expressed by Virginia State Sen. Stephen H. Martin in a recent Facebook post.

“You can count on me never to get in the way of you ‘preventing an unintentional pregnancy.’ I’m not exactly sure what that means, because if it’s ‘unintentional,’ you must have been trying to prevent it.  And I don’t expect to be in the room or [sic] will I do anything to prevent you from obtaining a contraceptive,” wrote Martin. “However, once a child does exist in your womb, I’m not going to assume a right to kill it just because the child’s host (some refer to them as mothers) doesn’t want it.”

Martin may have been trying to mimic the comedian by the same name and trying to bring some levity to the subject of abortion. But even if that were true, taken in context with the many disgusting and demeaning comments by Teapublican men about “legitimate” rape and “sluts,” his statement reveals a problem with accepting women as equals.

In fact, there are many other indicators of anti-woman bias byTeapublican politicians. For example, they voted against the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act which amended the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to allow women more opportunity to sue for discrimination. They voted to allow employers to exclude contraceptives from employer-provided health insurance. They voted against a bill to ensure equal pay for equal work that would eliminate the disparity between pay for women and men. They voted against a bill designed to reduce the number of sexual assaults in the military. They voted to defund women’s health clinics operated by Planned Parenthood. And they have asserted their rights to control a woman’s body by repeatedly voting against a woman’s right to choose whether or not she wants to carry an embryo to full term.

All of this makes one wonder: Why are we spending trillions to fight the Taliban in Afghanistan when we have so many here?