Archive for the ‘Politics and Leadership’ Category

Hillary Clinton 2016

Posted: April 12, 2015 in Living and Life, Politics and Leadership, Reflections, Social Activism
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
0

Running for President in 2016. Glory Hallelujah!

Or maybe I should title this post #HillaryClinton2016. That might get more people to read this. Oh well. Let’s just go simple with it.

This morning, Former Secretary of State and US Senator Hillary Clinton announced her candidacy for President of the United States. And I fully support her. Not because of her husband, that doesn’t even factor into it. Shouldn’t even factor into it (2015 after all). It’s not because she’ got a political dynasty behind her. And it’s certainly not because she has or doesn’t have style (even if I had a good grasp of that sort of thing, I wouldn’t use it to judge whether she should be President. After all, some of the people we elect every year are ugly as hell and yet we think they’re competent for office).

She’s experienced. She’s skilled. She’s respected across the country and around the world. She’s been a lawyer, an advocate for children, an advisor on education, a corporate executive, a US Senator, and Secretary of State, all in addition to being a wife and mother to one of the most famous men of our age. Secretary Clinton knows about domestic policies and she’s traveled and dueled on the world stage more than any other US Secretary in history. She’s pro-gay rights, pro-choice and pro-women. She’s stood up for minorities, and she’s stood up for those without voices, whether it be the poor or children who no one else will listen to.

Plus, she’d be the first female President of the United States. It’s not my main reason, but it’s definitely a draw.

All that and more is why I’m supporting her in this election. I even sent in an application to be a staff member on the campaign, preferably in media or communications but a few other fields as well. Heck, most of this country has basically peer-pressured her into running for President, so the least I can do is at least apply for a job and do my best to help her if I can. And how cool would it be to have a part in electing the first female United States President?

Nice logo.

Well, I’ll probably be writing more about the campaign every now and then (and if I’m somehow lucky enough to get on the campaign staff, much more frequently). You know me, I’m a bit of a political junkie. No, that’s not right. I’m a junkie for watching this messed up world and finding my own ways to fix it. And as a presidential election in this country effects that in so many ways, I’ll be paying attention to it.

Anyway, here’s to the future. To Hillary Clinton. To America. And to making a difference.

Oh, and on an unrelated note, I set up my loan repayment plan and purchased my cap and gown, specially colored tassel for my college included (and I mean purchased. I don’t think you can return these things. Maybe I’ll take it out every now and then, and try it on like a woman with her wedding dress and remembering all that had been promised on that day. God, I hope I don’t get that stuck in the past!). Graduation is less than a month away. Everything’s coming to an end. I hope it doesn’t without a job though! Wish me luck. I’ll let you know if anything else comes up of significance. I’m sure there will be.

A Year Without A School Shooting

Posted: August 26, 2014 in Living and Life, Politics and Leadership, Reflections, Social Activism
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
6

Tonight is the last night of summer break, right before the new semester starts. Later I’ll be cracking open a beer and savoring what will most likely be the end of my last summer break before heading to bed. And all around Ohio State, all around Columbus, all around Central Ohio and even farther beyond, many OSU students will be doing the same or similar things, finding ways to relax and get mentally prepared for 16 weeks of classes, studying, part-time jobs, campus events, clubs, trying to eat healthy, not fall off the wagon, maybe talk to that special person you keep seeing around campus and maybe see if a romantic relationship is in the cards.

What none of us want to have to hope for though, is something that we should all be hoping and working actively towards: a year without school shootings.

I know that’s a somewhat silly thing to hope for. According to StopTheShootings.org, since 1992 we’ve had 387 school shootings in the United States since 1992, or about 17.6 a year. Most of the shooters tend to be between the ages of 10 and 19, the same age as a majority of victims. And children ages 5-14 are apparently thirteen times more likely than children from other industrialized nations to be murdered by guns. Statistically speaking, we’re up against some tough odds.

So what can we do to minimize shootings? I do not feel that making guns easier to get hold of is a very good option. Do we fight arsonists by lighting fires ourselves? Or do we stop thieves by stealing from them? Clearly not. Improving mental health is one option that has been advocated for (and is the only one Congress has actually gotten their lazy butts up to pass). Still, mental health won’t make the problem go away. We hear reports every day from Chicago of inner-city violence being committed with guns. In fact in the past twenty-four hours 2 people died and ten wounded from guns. Clearly, not everyone in Chicago who’s fired a gun is mentally unstable or challenged, so more must be done.

Clearly, no one wants to think of a campus like this as the possible scene of a shooting. But nevertheless, reality dictates we consider the possibility for our own safety and the safety of others.

Another option is placing some limitations on what is portrayed in the media. As much as I hate to admit it, there has been correlations between amount of violent content taken in while watching TV or playing video games and aggression. However, that is only showing the correlation between violent content and aggression, not gun violence. People who get aggressive playing games don’t necessarily become killers, and violent content doesn’t always lead to thoughts of murder, if it ever does. Or in short, correlation doesn’t mean causation. Not to mention that media is often a reflection of the society it is created in, so it seems unfair to artists who are trying o create a harmless representation of their worlds because it might contribute to real world problems. And if we were to police media that could cause violent conduct, we’d have to start with the Bible, because long before guns became an issue, the Bible was encouraging people to kill in the name of God, and in far greater numbers.

A third option is placing limits on guns, where they can be sold or distributed, what sort of guns are available, and where they can be openly carried or who can carry them. Studies show that states with stricter laws of this type have lower rates of murders or suicides because of guns than states without them. And a vast majority of Americans support laws like universal background checks, even within the NRA. And in Australia, the number of mass shootings fell steeply after they initiated a ban on automatic weapons. Clearly placing restrictions such as these might be helpful in reducing gun violence.

We don’t want to see any more memorials like this one created after Sandy Hook, do we?

Sadly, there’s a huge lobby against stricter gun regulations in the United States, and more laws seem to have been passed that have eased gun restrictions rather than tightening them. I don’t want to go into the arguments these lobbies have given against tighter regulations, but it is troubling that a lobby made up of companies that sell guns are advocating for laws that will increase their sales. The best way to combat this sort of lobbying might be in cutting corporate influence in elections and lobbying, but of course that is another difficult and controversy-fraught issue altogether, so I won’t delve into that either.

Finally, some have suggested training school officials in firearms or hiring full-time security guards. While I’m sure there are teachers who would be willing to be trained in firearms and keep them in the classroom, I’m sure there are plenty of teachers who would not feel comfortable with firearms in the same building as them, let alone in the same classroom. Some would even refused to be trained. And even if there were teachers or faculty willing to be trained and keep guns in the classroom or office, there are security risks to this method, especially if students were to get their hands on the guns. And while I like the idea of a trained officer or several on campus to protect students, some school districts do not have the funds to pay for a full-time security guard. And in overcrowded school districts, particularly ones with histories of gang violence, it’d be difficult to check students each and every day for firearms.

Perhaps the best option would be a combination of all of these. Sure, implementing any ofthem would require a lot of work, cooperation, dedication, and compromise on the parts of several people and parties, but in the end, a combined approach to a problem often yields more results than a singular approach (especially if that approach features some major logic flaws). And in the end, working together might bring together this highly fractured country and make it a bit more unified than it’s been in recent years.

So let us work together. Let’s stop the partisan and ideological bickering to start working on a solution to a horrific problem. Eighteen shootings are supposed to happen this year. That’s eighteen tragedies we can avoid. Even doing minor things like teaching children about gun safety or by forming neighborhood watches can do worlds of good. Because our children, and the nation at large, deserve so much better than another Virginia Tech, Columbine, or Sandy Hook. At least, that’s what I think, as I hope and pray for a school year without a shooting.

Please note that I will be screening comments for this post, so be aware that any comments that I find insulting, unacceptable, or off-topic will be deleted immediately. Thank you for your participation in this ongoing discussion.

Why Suing And/Or Impeaching the President is a Bad Idea

Posted: July 26, 2014 in Politics and Leadership, Reflections
Tags: , , , , , , , ,
0

There’s been a lot of talk on the right end of the political spectrum in the United States about suing or impeaching President Obama. Indeed, thanks to the efforts of House Speaker John Boehner (who I’m sad to say is from my state), the former is looking like it could be a definite possibility. And although I’m nowhere near powerful enough to have influence the workings of Congress, I would like to point out some of the flaws with either approach to dealing with the President.

Is it just me, or does he look like he wants to cry?

First, considering the option to sue the President, I’ve been skeptical of this whole lawsuit thing since Boehner announced his intentions to sue the President over his alleged abuse of executive orders and working around Congress. First off, Congress isn’t working at all Most of the time you guys are either flinging accusations at one another or sitting on your asses. And that’s when you’re actually working (which isn’t often enough, in my opinion): the rest of the time you’re courting super PACs or making sure the next election keeps you in office. Are you surprised the President is taking executive actions? Someone in Washington has to be doing their job. Second, President Obama has been actually rather conservative with his executive orders, with less of them than most Presidents who have been in office as long as he has. Only 183, compared to George W. Bush’s 291 and Ronald Reagan’s 381 executive orders. If you’re going to accuse a President of being abusive with executive orders, try Franklin Roosevelt, with a whopping 3,522.

And now that Boehner has specified which order he’s upset about, which delays certain provisions of Obamacare. Okay, this is a law he hates. Why does he want to sue to force the President to enforce those mandates? And even if the House agrees to sue the President, I doubt the Supreme Court will hear it. First off, Boehner would have to prove he’s been hurt by the delay in the mandates. Last I checked, he hasn’t. And the whole strange logic of this lawsuit would be enough to make Justice Scalia go “Say what??” It’s probably going to be thrown out of court.

And even if it does go through, I can’t see this case going in favor of Boehner. In any case, he’s likely to be humiliated even more over this case. And even if he does win the case, what’s the worst that could happen? The President’s reputation could be bruised, but he’d still be in office. And would it really make a difference? Obamacare’s delayed provisions would be put into action, and isn’t that the exact opposite of what you’d want?

My reaction as well.

And now for the whole impeachment issue. For years people have been calling for President Obama’s impeachment, most of them political pundits and citizens from red states or conservative neighborhoods. But the number of folks on the federal level calling for it, including Michele Bachmann, Sarah Palin, and Representative Randy Weber, whom Jon Stewart made some very good jokes about the other day. However, some of these same people calling for the President’s impeachment are also saying that they shouldn’t do it now. Why? As senior Republicans have actually admitted, pursuing impeachment might actually turn off independents leaning towards the GOP and excite the Democratic base. All before November’s midterm elections.

Look, we can quibble all we want about the definiton of a tyrant, but I don’t see the President as a tyrant, and clearly he’s not as big a tyrant as some in the GOP claim he is if you don’t want to depose him because you’re worried it might do more harm than good with GOP electoral prospects. And assuming that the House does actually get around to impeaching the President, the Senate has to try it, and in a Democrat-controlled Senate, that is far from likely to go the House’s way. And that’s assuming the House can actually find something that can be construed as “Treason, Bribery, or other High Crimes and Misdemeanors”, as the Constitution is written. And I’m pretty sure that would mean actual evidence, not just accusations or feelings of being persecuted. After all, an impeachment is basically the politician’s indictment, and indictments get thrown out when the judge determines there’s no evidence to support a case. Can the GOP support a case?

I’m not sure, but the last two impeachment hearings for a President (Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton) went absolutely nowhere. I don’t see this one being any different.

You guys sure you want to unleash him on your party?

Besides, assuming the President could be impeached, that would make Joe Biden the President. You think Biden’s going to be more cooperative to a GOP that ousted his predecessor, with whom he’s worked with for almost six years in the White House? No, he and the Democrats are going to be just as obstinate about working with the Republicans as the Republicans are about working with the Democrats! So there will be more gridlock, which may actually do both parties a disservice. In fact, I can imagine that sort of situation leading to many third party groups rising in power and upsetting the current two-party system leading to a multi-party system at all levels of government. I’m pretty sure at this point there are plenty of people who would prefer that, especially if it got something done.

So is suing or impeaching the President a good idea? I don’t think so. In fact, it’ll be just another headache for the American people. We would much rather the Democrats and GOP go and pass bills together for the President to sign. In fact, we’d foot the bill for the various parties to see a therapist if we thought that might help end this gridlock. So please, do the smart thing, Mr. Boehner. End this crusade and go back to work. The American people would be so happy if you did.

Oh, and while I’m on the subject of politics, I’d like to throw out an endorsement for Ed Fitzgerald in the Ohio gubernatorial race this year. I feel he’s the best person to represent me and the rest of Ohio in the governor’s office, and I hope the rest of Ohio agrees with me in the coming months leading up to November. With 100 days to go, I’m hopeful.

My Own Take on the Hobby Lobby Case

Posted: July 15, 2014 in Politics and Leadership, Social Activism
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,
5

I know I’m a little late to this conversation (though I did post a lengthy message on my Facebook page when it first happened) and I would’ve written a blog post about this sooner, but I’ve been busy with other work. Well, better late than never. Besides, Jon Stewart managed to make some jokes on it last night, so I can do it tonight.

There used to be a time when religious liberty meant that you could go to church ro synagogue in peace and without fear of ridicule or attack. Where your religion didn’t bar you from certain neighborhoods or trades. Where you didn’t have to wear a yellow star, and you didn’t suddenly have to leave country or convert in order to avoid death and suffering.

When the hell did it change that a couple of people could make decisions about the health of thousands of women?

As noted above, a lot has already been said about the Hobby Lobby case. However, I’m going to go over it because I find the majority ruling of the Supreme Court simply infuriating.

First off, Hobby Lobby says that it doesn’t want the federal government to force them to hand women employees birth control. Um, the people who will be handing birth control over will be the pharmacist. The insurance company your company uses will actually be paying for it, drawing on the money every employee puts into the company insurance policy to pay for the birth control. So basically everyone who’s on Hobby Lobby’s health insurance policy would be paying for the birth control. The fact that only a few people at the top can decide what everyone is paying for in their health insurance worries me somewhat.

Second, the owners of Hobby Lobby are objecting to contraceptive pills that “cause abortion”. Most fertilized eggs actually self-abort and don’t embed themselves in the uterine wall, so maybe you want to protest whatever mechanism causes that? Also, the pills that “cause abortion” actually a bit of a mystery, as scientists aren’t sure how they prevent pregnancies. So maybe you might want to figure that out before you start a lawsuit? Especially since you still cover Viagra and vasectomies, the latter of which basically makes the testicles useless and gives seed nowhere to go to procreate. I think the Biblical term for that is “spilling seed”.

Continuing on with this, I’m not so sure Hobby Lobby actually objects to birth control pills, as some of the companies, trust funds, and other financial mechanisms its owners have fingers in actually hold stakes in pharmaceutical companies that produce these very pills that are being protested. Is it really protesting on religious grounds to provide abortion pills? Or is it something about not having to pay for a product you already own?

And I’m really worried about this decision, which opens up some serious floodgates for lawsuits. The term “closely-held corporation” is a pretty loose definition. Already we’ve seen evangelical colleges asking to be exempt, and other companies as well that one wouldn’t normally think of as “closely-held companies”. Under the loose definition though, they might.

And if religious liberty can be used as an excuse to get out of covering contraception or other “objectionable” medical practices, what’s next? Catholics are against all forms of contraception. Jehovah’s Witnesses are against blood transfusions. Scientologists are against psychiatry. Christian Scientists generally don’t like traditional medicine. And what about objecting to other things based on religious belief? Other laws? What if a family bakery that got incorporated decides not to make a wedding cake for a gay couple because they believe it’s a decadent lifestyle? What if a print shop refuses to print flyers for an event hosted by the local Wiccan community because they won’t “help witches and Satanists”? As Justice Ginsburg said in her dissent, it’s a slippery slope.

All in all, I’m really troubled by the implications of this decision, besides the fact that a few people, mostly older white men, are getting away with making medical decisions for thousands and thousands of women and thinking that is okay. It’s already hard enough to purchase safe, affordable birth control, and some people need the help of an insurance company to afford it. Some of these women aren’t even taking birth control medications to avoid getting pregnant! Birth control medication is good for regulating menstrual cycles, prevent endometriosis, reduce the pain of cramps or migraines, and even fight acne! Most women actually take the pill for multiple reasons, studies find.

And they can’t just go looking for another job that offers birth control on the insurance plan. Some women can’t afford to leave a job because it’s all they have. The job market is still rather difficult these days, and leaving a job to look for one that might offer the right insurance isn’t exactly like walking through a park. In fact, it could lead some families to financial ruin.

Now that I think about it, most of the women who will be most affected by this decision will be women in the lower-middle, working, and poverty-stricken classes. Meanwhile, the rich can still easily afford birth control should they desire it, or own the companies that produce birth control. This si not just starting to resemble a new battle in the war on women, but also a form of class warfare and keeping the lower classes in their place. And I’m sure I’m not the only person who’s thought this.

What say you on the Hobby Lobby case? Where do you see this going in terms of consequences?

(Be aware I will be screening comments. So if I get the kind of comments from people who can’t bear any opinion but their own, it won’t show up on this blog)

Another Shooting Happens. When Will Change Happen Too?

Posted: June 5, 2014 in Living and Life, Politics and Leadership, Reflections, Social Activism
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
6

This afternoon I found on my news feed that another college, this time Seattle Pacific University, was hit by a gunman. Details at this point are still few, but what is known at this time is that one person has died, three more are in the hospital, and that the gunman was disarmed by students while reloading his gun.

While I’m glad that nobody was hurt, I have one question: is it enough yet? Because it’s only been a couple of weeks since Elliot Rodger went on a shooting spree in his black BMW, killing 7 people around UC Santa Barbara because, as he said in a very creepy YouTube video, “girls aren’t interested in me”. And these are just the most recent: Sandy Hook, Aurora, Virginia Tech, the Sikh Temple, and even more that I may have missed. The point is, we have a serious gun problem here in the United States, as well as a serious opposition to seeing any sort of change to try and stem the bloodshed. In fact, only a couple of states have enacted any sort of gun legislation, such as background check and limitations on ammunition or automatic rifle bans. Other states have actually made it easier to get and carry guns around, and the federal government has bowed to the pressure of gun lobbies so that no legislation has gone through on that part.

Look, I know that as a nation the United States is slow to do things that are vital to protecting the health of its current and future citizens. Our healthcare is still tied for 37th place worldwide, our welfare system loses funding every year as well as our education system, and the road to environmental reforms designed to stop climate change is like climbing a mountain sometimes. But honestly, we’ve lost so many lives to gun violence in so many years, and every time, everything from the media to lack of God to making gun pictures in school is blamed, but guns are not. Legislation dies, the news moves elsewhere. And every time the event repeats, more people shout “Enough is enough! We’re tired of this!”

Indeed we are. And we’re tired of the rhetoric against gun control. “Guns don’t kill people, people do.” If that’s so, do toasters not toast toast, but toast toasts toast? “Gun laws don’t work, because people will still break the law to get guns.” And people will still buy meth even against drug laws or run red lights against traffic laws. Maybe we should get rid of law altogether. “We have a Second Amendment right to guns.” That amendment was written when the worst you had was a hunting rifle, that rifle could get your family food for the week, and the state might call upon you at any time for a militia. Not to mention that a handgun does just as much damage to an intruder in your home as an automatic rifle, which is actually worse for hunting than just a regular rifle. And you know what else is a right to us as Americans? Freedom of speech, but the Secret Service will still arrest people who say they will kill the President or anyone else in high office.

Look, I’m not saying that we should lock away every gun in the United States and only let the military, police, or the government handle them. But I think some common sense laws would do a world of good. Several other developed nations have gun control laws, and remarkably, their levels of homicides and suicides with guns are much lower than that of the United States. Surely we can do the same and be even better at it, if the USA really is the greatest nation in the world?

Or are we going to let some more shootings happen? Where will they happen next, I wonder? Perhaps one will happen in my backyard, near where I live and go to school. Or one will happen on Capitol Hill and scare the bejesus out of every senator around. Or maybe at another elementary school! The point is, the way things are it’s very easy for these shootings to happen at all these locations and more! Airports, grocery stores, office buildings, subway systems, libraries, apartment buildings–stop me anytime!

None of us want this to happen again. But unless we enact some long-term change, gun violence will continue to be a constant problem in our nation, and will claim the lives of so many more. And that’s something we just can’t keep allowing if we’re to continue on as a country, especially one that the rest of the world looks to a lot as an example of what it means to be a superpower.

Oh, and I just want to mention one more thing: two girls, much more influenced in their crime by violent media than any other killer I’ve seen so far, nearly murdered their friend after stabbing her 19 times in the name of Slender Man. I garauntee you, if she was shot with a gun even once, she probably wouldn’t have survived. And the man who attacked a bunch of children in China with a knife around the same time as the Sandy Hook massacre? All of those kids survived too. Just something to chew on.

Rape Is NOT Funny

Posted: May 3, 2014 in Living and Life, Politics and Leadership, Reflections, Social Activism
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
4

I’m going to share something that happened to me this morning with you all. I woke up much later than I’d planned to, made myself breakfast, and turned on my laptop to see my messages. In my inbox, I found that someone had replied to a comment I’d made to a YouTube video. The video in question was a Tibetan bowl singing meditation video that I listened to yesterday in order to relax after a long day. When it was over, I had commented, “Whoa, what did that just do to me?” (I was really relaxed afterwards). Between commenting on that video and checking my messages, some merry prankster had replied to my comment with this: “it raped you…with Tibetan singing bowls :)”.

Of course, you can guess how I replied: “not funny”.

And it’s true, rape is not funny, especially when you look at the realities of the problem. It’s estimated that every two minutes, an American is sexually assaulted. One in five female college students will be sexually assaulted before they graduate, usually by someone they know. Often their rapists are not punished as thoroughly as they should be by the university, receiving academic probation or being banned from campus for a year. Imagine having to be on the same campus as your rapist every day until one or both of you have graduated. It’s enough to drive you insane. And rapists who are let off easy like this are likely to repeat and rape again, averaging six assaults before graduation. It’s even likelier for rapists who include violent acts like strangulation in their assaults. Because of these statistics and several colleges apparently mishandling sexual assaults, 55 universities, my own included, are being investigated for mishandling sexual assault cases by the federal government. For some victims, they wish this investigation would’ve come sooner.

And that’s not the worst part about it. In some countries women are jailed or killed if they are raped, sometimes with the permission of the governments that are supposed to protect them. These “honor killings” or jail sentences are supposed to punish the woman for making herself sexually desirable to her rapist and causing him to commit adultery. Sometimes they are even married off to their rapists in order to preserve family honor! For many women, anxiety, depression, PTSD, and other psychological disorders can arise from being sexually assaulted, so imagine having to be punished by law or married to your rapist in order to preserve some silly notion of honor.

Even in countries where women aren’t punished or married off on their rapists, sometimes things are little better. Assault victims are shamed or intimidated into keeping silent for a variety of reasons. They may believe that their assault was their fault, or that they’ll be humiliated or disbelieved if they come forward, or that coming forward will forever change how they’re viewed by people. In cases of pregnancy, some won’t be able to get abortions because laws make it difficult or impossible to do so.

Even in the United States, supposedly a progressive country where all are equal, most are seriously misinformed about sexual assault. They believe it only happens to others, that all rapists are strangers to the victim, that it’s a rare occurrence. In reality, rape is all too common, as well as pregnancies that result from rape, most rapists are someone the victims know, and it could happen to just about anyone. And when we do not blame the rapists but find ways to blame or hurt the victims or create reasons why we shouldn’t believe them, we only make things worse.

And so do the comedians who make fun of rape. Whether they make one single joke or an entire act out of rape and sexual assault, they are doing as much damage as some rapists. They tell people that rape isn’t a serious problem, that you can make fun of it and the victims who are assaulted every two minutes in America (there was a great Law & Order: SVU episode about this recently). And some people, like my commenter above, will take these comedians seriously. One or two may actually rape themselves, believing it’s no big deal.

I’m here saying that rape is a very big deal, and it is not something that should be made fun of or turned into comedy club stand-up. Rape is a serious problem people all over the world must face, and that unless we seriously try to change our culture, things will not improve. They’ll stay the same, or get worse.

So if you ever find yourself confronted with a rape joke or you think about making a rape joke, imagine that making such a joke makes someone as horrible as a rapist. And then ask yourself if you should really laugh at or make that joke, or if you should try and change things so that those jokes are never made again. You might get thanked down the road for that.

The Legal Woes of the Haves and the Have-Nots

Posted: April 1, 2014 in Journalism, Living and Life, Politics and Leadership, Social Activism
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
0

You know, I think it is appalling when that there is such a huge gap between the wealthy and the poor in this country. And depending on which side you find yourself on, you can find that your treatment varies considerably. And you know what? It sucks.

Just today, I found this article about a man who molested his children and was convicted of it. How much jail time is he serving? None, actually. Why, you may be screaming at your computer? Look:

A Delaware man convicted of raping his three-year-old daughter only faced probation after a state Superior Court judge ruled he “will not fare well” in prison.

In her decision, Judge Jan Jurden suggested Robert H. Richards IV would benefit more from treatment. Richards, who was charged with fourth-degree rape in 2009, is an unemployed heir living off his trust fund. The light sentence has only became public as the result of a subsequent lawsuit filed by his ex-wife, which charges that he penetrated his daughter with his fingers while masturbating, and subsequently assaulted his son as well.

Richards is the great grandson of du Pont family patriarch Irenee du Pont, a chemical baron.

Okay, first off, nobody is supposed to fare well in jail. It’s meant to be miserable on purpose. The whole point is that people will be persuaded not to commit crimes after serving a prison sentence. And sending this guy to a sex offenders rehab program isn’t going to change him or protect his and other people’s children, which is what child molestation laws are for. Instead, Mr. Richards has been taught that with money and a high-powered legal team, you can get away with the worst and get a slap on the wrist. And I wonder, would the judge give this same sort of sentence to another man? One that might be middle class or lower? Maybe even had a public defense lawyer? I seriously doubt it.

This comes only a few months after the case of the “affluenza teenager”, a teenager named Ethan Couch who was driving drunk and killed four people. Normally you’d expect jail time for this example of vehicular manslaughter, but the psychologist called by the defense said that Couch had been so coddled and spoiled by his parents that it had led to irresponsibility, a pseud0-condition of pop psychology known as affluenza. Couch is being ordered to go to a $450K/year rehab facility to attend alcohol and drug rehab and to remain on probation for the foreseeable future.

Maybe I’m no lawyer, but I know there are plenty of kids who are probably just as coddled or not coddled at all and who don’t go doing what Couch did. And there are plenty of people across the nation who have been Couch’s age and in similar situations, or have been charged with crimes of greater or lesser nature. They’ve been given lengthy prison sentences. Do they get psychologists saying that they have conditions that were directly related to the actions they undertook? I don’t think so.

And you know what the biggest difference between Couch and these teens I just mentioned? The latter group are often from poorer backgrounds and are often black, which in our fractured legal system puts them at a greater disadvantage.

Now contrast this with the case of Shanesha Taylor, a homeless mother who is facing jail time for leaving her children in her car while going to a job interview:

A homeless single mother in Arizona who struggled to make ends meet is in jail after she allegedly left her children in her car while she went on a job interview.

Shanesha Taylor was arrested on felony child abuse charges after Scottsdale police discovered her two kids, aged 2 years old and 6 months old, in a locked car.

Scottsdale police responded after a witness reported a child crying from inside a Dodge Durango parked at an office complex on March 20. Police said that two children were left alone in the car with the engine off and the windows slightly cracked. The car was left parked in the sun and all the doors were closed.

AZFamily reports that the kids had already been in the car for 30 minutes when police arrived. Police said 35-year-old Taylor returned from her job interview about 45 minutes after officers came to the scene. She said she didn’t have anyone else to care for the kids while she was on an interview at an insurance company.

“She was upset. This is a sad situation all around. She said she was homeless. She needed the job,” Scottsdale Police Sergeant Mark Clark told KPHO. “Obviously not getting the job. So it’s just a sad situation.”

Yes, it’s a sad situation! Our system constantly rewards the rich and punishes the poor. Ms. Taylor didn’t want to leave her kids in the car, but what choice did she have? She’s living out of her car! She can’t afford childcare. Yes, what she did put her children in danger, but I bet that if she had a choice her kids would be in a preschool watched over by licensed early childhood educators while she went to that interview. Now she’s facing jail time for wanting to provide food and maybe a better shelter for her kids.

Luckily there are good people out there who are raising money for Ms. Taylor’s legal defense, and they’ve already received three times the original goal. But that doesn’t change the fact that Ms. Taylor is living in terrible conditions, that unless there’s some serious intervention her kids will most likely live in a similar situation and be told by others that if they actually applied themselves and tried to pull themselves up by their bootstraps instead of living lives of crime or mooching off the system they could live a way better life. I’m calling BS here, because it’s definitely not that simple. If that was the case, every person who watched me and my sisters growing up while our parents worked would be living in nice suburbs and sending their own kids to wonderful schools with college opportunities (last I checked, that wasn’t the case).

I seriously hope that one of Ms. Taylor’s supporters gives her a job after she is hopefully exonerated, because otherwise she’ll be back to where she started. And I hope the whole nation takes a look at our legal system, because as these and so many other cases have pointed out, our legal system is broken. People who should go to jail are set free or get very light sentences while those who just need a helping hand are sent to jail and vilified before they even get there.

This is what we need to do to our justice system.

This isn’t America. It shouldn’t be America. And while it is America, we can’t call this nation a true land of opportunity or equality. So what we need to do is change it. Make the laws apply to everyone, and not cut deals or give rulings that reward people who are likely to re-offend. Also, childcare should not be so expensive! There has to be options for women like Ms. Taylor, and the lack of options is disturbing, because it led directly to this situation.

And unless we act, things will never change.

Coming Out

Posted: March 25, 2014 in Living and Life, Politics and Leadership, Reflections, Social Activism
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
8

This year in Ohio, same-sex marriage is on the ballot. As someone who supports LGBT rights, I’m throwing my support in for anyone who wants to marry someone regardless of their sex. It’s only just right.

But besides that, there’s something else I want to share with you all. I’m bisexual. I’ve been bisexual for nearly 21 years (though I’ve only just recently realized it) and I’ll be bisexual for the rest of my life. And there is absolutely nothing wrong with that.

For those of you who aren’t very well-versed in bisexuality (or in the LGBT community at all, for that matter), this only means that I am attracted to men as well as women. I don’t really have a preference or a set type. All I care about is that I’m happy with the person I’m with and if they’re happy with me. I’m not confused or unsure of which one I really like, as some–even members of the LGBT community–might think. I also am not confused, living a horrid lifestyle, or have the Devil whispering in my ear (I think he’d rather whisper in the ears of Assad or Putin than in mine). It’s a biological trait based on a combination of several genes, and there could be a good argument that it runs in my family.

Also, I’m not oversexed or always looking at guys and girls in a sexual way. If I’m oversexed it’s because I’m a healthy young man in college, and we’re all oversexed to some degree. Also, don’t flatter yourself. I don’t look at every person hoping and praying for a hook-up, including you. I’m not even sure what my type is, so don’t assume you’re it. And I’m also not looking to molest kids or brainwash kids. The monsters who molest kids are only looking for power over victims or because they can’t rise to the occasion (so to speak) with adults, so they target kids. And you can’t brainwash kids to be LGBT: like I said before, it’s genetic. If you’re kid is LGBT, it’s because they were that way at conception. And the more you try to prove me wrong or pray away the gay or whatever, the more you’ll find I’m right.

And the LGBT community is not a cabal or a bunch of bullies. If there’s a cabal, gay marriage would already be legal in every nation on earth and anti-gay rhetoric would result in prison sentences. Also, calling us bullies is saying that a small minority, maybe 10-20% of the population at the most, is more powerful than the heterosexual majority and is able to beat up straight people on the streets. I really don’t think that’s the reality. Do you?

I also don’t let my sexuality define me. I’m not that kid from Glee who everybody identifies as “the gay guy” or “the gay guy with the really high voice”. I identify more with the fact that I’m a horror writer or that I’m Jewish than I do with my sexuality. So if you start calling me “the bisexual horror writer”, I’ll counter that with “I’m a writer that just happens to be attracted to both men and women.” And most people wouldn’t realize my sexuality if they looked at me. They might realize I’m eccentric or not your ordinary college student. But my sexuality? I’d need to reveal it or be detected by an actual gaydar for people to realize it.

How did this post become a testimony for the fallacies with most anti-gay arguments and how people should treat me? I’m not sure, but I want to say that I’m happy to let people know finally about who I am and not have to keep it to myself like a disgusting burp. It’s just who I am, like my being a writer or Jewish or that I can make a conversation amusing and strange with just one sentence. Just one part of being me.

And if you don’t like what I am, if you believe differently about my sexuality, then that’s your choice. Just don’t leave hateful comments or try to tell me I can be cured or that I’m going to Hell. I don’t even believe in Hell! Judaism has no set definition of the afterlife. We’re more likely to be plagued by acid reflux than by an afterlife of fire and brimstone for our transgressions, and I’m already on antacids. But if you want to try to change me or make me feel bad for being who I am, then I don’t think we should associate too much, online or offline.

Finally, I would like to close this post with a big, hearty thank you for all of you who’ve supported me and continue to support me. The love I’ve received and the acceptance of who I am is overwhelming, and I’m happy to be surrounded by so many understanding and loving people. It’s great to be who I am and not punished for it. So I bid you adieu till next time, my Followers of Fear (which might be later today, who knows?). And let me say to all those who are suffering from bigotry, it gets better. Don’t despair, because there are so many people like you and we all love you regardless of who you’re attracted to. All you have to do is reach out, and we’ll be there for you.

In the meantime, please enjoy this awesome video: Same Love by Macklemore and Ryan Lewis. It repeats a lot of what I’ve been saying here, and it is an anthem of love, truth, and hope for so many people out there. Please watch it with me. Thank you.

One Year Since Newtown

Posted: December 14, 2013 in Living and Life, Politics and Leadership, Reflections, Social Activism
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
6

I’m not sure there’s a single American in the country today who opened a newspaper, got on their smartphone, or connected to the Internet who doesn’t realize that today is exactly a year since the horrific tragedy at Sandy Hook Elementary School. Even now, the memories of that terrible day are resurfacing in my mind’s eye: sitting in bed, seeing that a school has been shot up by a gunman. Fatalities, fear, fingers already being pointed, conspiracy nuts shouting their insanity. But for a little while, the American people, a people so prone to heat and rage and division, were united in a way that hadn’t been seen since 9/11. We cried and memorialized the dead. There was grief for the 20 children and six adults who died, grief from people who’d never heard of Newtown until that day. There were numerous memorials and tributes, online and on TV and across the nation by everyone from children to the most powerful of politicians.

However in the days, weeks and months since Newtown, as we learned about the gunman Adam Lanza and we heard stories about the dearly departed. that unity broke up. We looked for solutions to prevent this tragedy from ever happening again. In a year full of monstrous mass shootings in Aurora, Wisconsin, and now in Newtown, advocates for stricter gun safety laws hoped that Congress would pass sensible gun control laws. And with ninety percent of Americans behind measures such as a ban on automatic rifles and expanded background checks, it looked like there might actually be some change this time. Second Amendment advocates meanwhile balked at these proposed measures, and instead said gun control laws didn’t work and called for administrators to be trained in firearm use and to hire security guards for schools. In the end, some states such as Colorado, New York, and Maryland passed their own restrictions, while President Obama passed 23 executive mandates and Congress failed to pass any laws that would truly satisfy either side.

Normally I would use a post such as this to advocate for stricter gun laws, but I’m tempted to not do so in order to keep the dead in mind on this horrible day. However, I read articles that show that the gun maker for the rifles used in the massacre actually had an increase in sales after Sandy Hook, and I feel a little sick to think anyone could profit off a tragedy such as this. Not to mention that nearly a year after Sandy Hook, there was a shooting at a school eight miles from Columbine High School, as if to remind us how little has been accomplished since then.

So I’ll speak and say, a year later, parents are gathering around dinner tables with a vacant seat. They wish to hold their kids close to them, but they can’t. And across the nations, parents and children, siblings and cousins, friends and families, lovers and colleagues, lose someone dear to them because of gun violence. In fact, approximately 30,000 people each year are lost to gun violence, the equivalent of nearly 1154 Sandy Hooks.

We need to do something about this tragedy, but is throwing more gasoline on a fire really going to help? No, it will not! We need to choke out the fire, not give it more fuel. So if you can, call or email your legislators. Support gun control groups if you can afford to. And if you own firearms of any sort, make sure it is in a safe place where it won’t hurt anyone who might accidentally stumble upon it. And I know any Second Amendment advocates will be furious with what I’ve written here, but let me tell you, I’m not advocating for taking away all guns from your homes. Even freedom of speech is regulated when that speech is used to incite violence or is used in a malicious manner. Shouldn’t guns be treated the same way?

And besides, do you really need a military grade automatic rifle? There are no zombies or enemy armies waiting to attack, you can’t go hunting with that kind of gun, and a simple handgun is enough to ward off any burglar or rapist. Just saying, is all.

I’m going to leave you with this video I found. It describes all the grief I feel for the victims of Sandy Hook, and I think it’ll resonate with you too on this most horrid day.

Stop Being Overdramatic!

Posted: December 12, 2013 in Politics and Leadership, Reflections
Tags: , , , , , , ,
0

I’m hearing a lot of comments on political news shows about how certain programs the government is doing or how certain actions being taken are being considered as slavery/apartheid/the Holocaust/genocide/etc. by certain people. I’ve just got one thing to say: quit the melodrama! Obamacare is not apartheid or slavery, abortion is not the Holocaust, shaking hands with Raul Castro is not the same as shaking hands with Adolf Hitler!

You see, there are certain groups here in America–African Americans, South African immigrants, Jews, etc.–who get really upset every time their national/ethnic/religious persecutions and injustices are used flippantly in political speech. It belittles the tragedy, makes it seems trivial. I mean, take slavery for example. It seems absurd if I compare myself to a slave if I complain about my homework every day, doesn’t it? How about being told to go to bed by your parents? Does that make you a slave? No it does not!

And actually, not only are these statements trivializing the tragedies in question, they are terribly inaccurate. Obamacare is not forcing people to work in horrid conditions and receive little or no benefits for it and are actually mistreated by overseers. Nor is Obamacare forcing people who are not enrolled in its programs to live in separate areas of towns or even of the country and putting strict legal restrictions on interactions between those enrolled and those not enrolled in the program. And unless abortion has become the state-sponsored deportation of fetuses to ghettos or work camps where they are subjected to conditions meant to either kill off or turn them into human beasts while my back was turned, I think it’s a little much to start comparing your local Planned Parenthood clinic to Auschwitz!

Of course, you’re free to disagree with me. That’s the lovely part of America: we can all have our own opinions, and as long as they don’t lead to violence, becoming socially ostracized, or aren’t a symptom of some mental illness,  we can express them as we wish and expect little or no backlash. However, I urge you to be cognizant of your words when you make a comparison between something you disagree with and a terrible tragedy or an unspeakable act. You may offend somebody with such an interpretation of events or a comparison. And if you don’t care who you offend in making these statements–my, how callous can you get!

And if my point hasn’t gotten across how gross these comparisons are, let my friend Dr. Sheldon Cooper show you how ridiculous these comparisons are.


Get the picture?

Oh, no comments that are offensive or trying to convince me that Obama is out to get Americans or whatever. I don’t want to hear it and I’ll delete those comments should they show up here. I’m just saying, be careful what comparisons you’re using, because many find them upsetting and terribly inaccurate.

Older Entries
Newer Entries