Labels, Labels

I'm thinking about labels. Let's take "progressive" for instance. Why do people throw that term around like it's a bad thing? If you had cancer, wouldn't you prefer a progressive doctor? Don't you want the one who's up to date on research and treatment options? You wouldn't want the one who is stuck using outdated methods from back when America was "great," would you? If you have to have a surgery or a c-section, don't you want a progressive surgeon? One you uses anesthesia and sterilization techniques? Would you prefer an appendectomy where they open you up neck to genitals the way they did it in the good old days? Personally, I'd prefer something a little more with the times.


What if we think about education or banking communications? Should we go back to the days of one-room school houses, the great train robbery, and mail by Pony Express? Of course not. Progress is a good thing, right?

I mean, seriously. At the time the Constitution was framed, people had some great ideas to be sure. Then they went home and had the doc come over for a quick blood-letting for their headaches and bouts with pneumonia. We've learned a few things and advanced a little since that time. It seems quite foolish to me to pretend that's a bad thing.

Look. Science is real. It is the thing that brought us the abilities to buy a house on your iPhone, bomb a country from an armchair in Nebraska, make opinions about important topics based on a meme by Jenny McCarthy, and not die a slow, itchy, agonizing death from a simple vaginal yeast infection. So, no, your conspiracy theory about climate change does not equal science. Your Google search about Common Core does not make you an expert in Education, with all due respect to Mrs DeVos.
Not everything on a Facebook meme is real, and you hearing something on the Faux News Network is not equivalent to a factual understanding of history or the ability to find and understand legitimate sources for information. Not bothering to figure out what is reliable information does not mean you're dumb. It means you're lazy. If acknowledging that makes me a crazy "progressive," bring on the label.

<iframe src="https://www.facebook.com/plugins/post.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2FBeckyUnfiltered%2Fposts%2F1617102391919369&width=500" width="500" height="258" style="border:none;overflow:hidden" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowTransparency="true"></iframe>

The Truth Shall Set You Free

Murica 11/8/2016:  Elects the most openly racist president in something like a hundred years.

Murica 11/9/2016:  “How dare you suggest we are racist!”

I know I said I was going to stay off social media for a while.  I’m trying.  I’m sure sometime soon I will be a bit more conciliatory in the interest of being the better person.  Yesterday, when I learned that so many of my “friends” and neighbors think my family is valueless, was not that day.  Today is not that day.  Tomorrow isn’t looking good either.  I don’t know how to make you feel better about that.  Electing any president has consequences.  Your choice has frightened and deeply hurt many, many people of America.  This is one of the consequences of electing Trump, and you need to acknowledge it, own it.  Sadly, I doubt it’s going to be the worst of the fallout.    

I’m not sure what reaction you expected from social justice-minded people when you voted for him, but it was probably unrealistic.  For future reference, if you associate yourself with a racist, sexist xenophobe, you are likely to lend the impression you are a racist, sexist xenophobe.  I deeply apologize if this surprises you.  Here’s a thought; take all that indignation, offense, and belittlement you may be feeling about being stereotyped and misunderstood.  Now, multiply it over two or three hundred years.  You then will still understand only a fraction of how it feels to be Native American, black, Hispanic, female, Muslim, LGBT+, mentally ill, or differently-abled in Murica.  Why do I say only a fraction?  You can choose to turn me off.  You’re probably not being denied dignity, the right to protect your own land, housing, a job, clean water, a crotch safe from grabby hands, the right to walk down your own damn street without being harassed, assaulted, or murdered by the people sworn to protect you; an adequate education, equal pay, health care, the right to vote, or anything else Murica has denied others.  You don’t have to wake up tomorrow and every day knowing your country thinks you don’t matter. 

With the entire depth of my being, I hope you will ponder how you arrived at a place where these behaviors are palatable, maybe even preferable to you… especially if you consider yourself a follower of Christ.  It is a deeply disturbing dichotomy to see people who say they love Jesus rationalize the degradation of the very people He died for.   I am not one of those vapid people that thinks you can say all kinds of malicious things, then excuse it with a misappropriated Bible quote and a smiley face emoji.  I may not even be a very good Christian, but I know the Bible and what it means; I know the One it leads me to.  I know what He had to say about all this.  After talking about loving God with all our hearts, souls, minds, and strengths, He taught us to love our neighbors as much as we love ourselves.  As.  Much.  As.  We.  Love.  Ourselves.  How's that for some inconvenient truth to meditate on?  Then he told this story: 

      

A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, when he fell into the hands of robbers. They stripped him of his clothes, beat him and went away, leaving him half dead. A priest happened to be going down the same road, and when he saw the man, he passed by on the other side. So too, a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. But a Samaritan, as he traveled, came where the man was; and when he saw him, he took pity on him. He went to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he put the man on his own donkey, took him to an inn and took care of him. The next day he took out two silver coins and gave them to the innkeeper. 'Look after him,' he said, 'and when I return, I will reimburse you for any extra expense you may have.' "Which of these three do you think was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?" The expert in the law replied, "The one who had mercy on him." Jesus told him, "Go and do likewise." (NIV, Luke 10:25-37)

Trump and the unjust system he has gleefully promised to perpetuate are the robbers.  Are we going to be the stiff-necked, self-righteous Jewish leaders who think they only have to care for people exactly like themselves?  Or are we going to be like the despised, racially mixed Samaritan who understood the heart of God?  I’m done entertaining excuses by the Christian Right and those who are being misled by them.  If you want to be a right Christian, do what Christ says to do.  Take care of the people he loves, which in case you’ve missed it, includes ALL of us. 

#RedandYellowBlackandWhiteTheyArePreciousInHisSight  #nevertrump  #Murica  #notmypresident  #blacklivesmatter  #pussiesforsocialjustice

Why I Refuse to be Colorblind

It is as predictable as death and taxes.  If you try to have a conversation about race in America, you inevitably get pious comments about how we should stop pointing out skin color.  The very second someone applauds an accomplishment in the context of a person's ethnicity, you get comments like these:  “Why does race have to be important and included in every report?  She’s an amazing American athlete that brought home the gold, period.”

“Why does the ignorant media take away from her amazing accomplishment by making this about her race!?  She’s part of the human race!  And an American!!!!  Congratulations!!”

“Why throw race into it?  Why not just say American?”  Do the other countries break out the race cards?” 

I would like to point out something that should be obvious to these well-meaning folks.  Your very reluctance to even speak about skin color betrays your attitude that there’s something wrong with having skin that’s not white.  There’s just no reason not to applaud Simone Manuel for being exactly who she is—a black, American, female athlete—unless you think there’s something wrong about it.  Face it.  Historically, we're usually only supposed to avoid talking about “bad” things:  sexuality, cancer, mental illness, domestic abuse, HIV.  This list goes on, and it includes race, apparently.

Think of it this way.  If someone has amazing, bright green eyes, you would have no problem pointing them out as being so different from everyone else’s.  You wouldn’t whisper the word green while describing them.  If someone else mentioned them, you wouldn’t say, “Why are you bringing eye color into it?  Color doesn't matter.  We're all Americans!”  Quite the opposite is true.  You would have no problem openly discussing her eye color because you don’t think there’s anything wrong with having different eye colors.  Why, then, can’t we talk about skin color, especially in a positive way?  We can.  We should.

Of course, there's much more to the discussion of skin color, isn't there?  It is a loaded observation to point out a person's race, because it speaks to identity in a way that eye color does not.  Here, I believe is the crux of the problem so many whites have with discussing race.  We don't want to admit that the lived experiences of people in America can be determined by skin color.  It is preferable for us to pretend we are all treated fairly regardless of what we look like, when in reality our skin color often influences experiences.  In turn, experiences are part of what shapes identity.  How can we keep arrogantly denying white privilege, if we admit we do see the different experiences and identity that so often accompany differences in skin color?  We can't.  So we pretend to be colorblind.

How can we continue holding whiteness as the standard against which everyone is measured, if we are brave enough to acknowledge white privilege?  We can't.  So we pretend to be colorblind. Sure, there is a great need for us to recognize that we are all part of one human race.  The trouble is, many of us are living under the unconscious supposition that the one race is supposed to be white.  It sounds something like, “I’m not prejudiced.  I think people of other races are just as good as whites.”  Did you catch it?  We want to stop feeling bad about racism, but we still want the default to be whiteness.  We are so uncomfortable with a change to our default, we won’t even talk about it.  So we pretend to be colorblind. 

My friends, colorblindness is not the key to peace in this country.  It is not even possible, unless you are, in fact, blind.  What value is there, then, in pretending not to see?  It's time to debunk the myth; colorblindness is not the opposite of racism.  The antithesis of racism is admiration, or at the very least, acceptance.  What if we stopped treating the differences between us as shameful things to be spoken of in hushed tones?  What if we celebrated our differences as the flavors that make us each unique?  What if we all just decided to be honest and stop pretending? 

Photo credit:  http://abc7ny.com/sports/manuel-becomes-first-african-american-woman-to-win-swim-gold/1466927/

Same Shit, Different Day

So, I read this the other day.

http://blackcommunitynews.com/blacklivesmatter-white-guilt-and-the-marketing-of-racism/

I'm going to put it right out there that I have a certain amount of trepidation about commenting on an essay about racial injustice, written by a biracial man, found in a publication called Black Community News.  It can certainly be argued that Bomberger has more right to comment than I.  I can accept that.  What I won't accept is misinformation, especially when the context in which I saw the article stated that he is biracial, as if this one person's opinions, because of his skin color, outweighed all the data available. I have said it before, and will repeat it.  There is no single "black experience" which can speak for all black people, any more than one woman can speak for all women.  There are, however, facts that exist which should balance any one person's opinion.  

I agree with some of what he says.  There are social problems in this country that need to be solved.  I agree abortion, so called “black on black violence,” police safety, etc. all need better solutions.  I just don’t agree that those problems negate the very real issue of systemic racism in the United States.  I don’t agree that these problems justify ignoring other problems.  Nor do I agree that all other social problems need to be solved before we can address the use of excessive force by the police against African Americans.  To imply that they do is ridiculous.  Imagine if I wrote something suggesting that we couldn’t try to stop heart disease because people die of cancer.

I’m annoyed by the tired “black on black” crime thing.  Sorry.  It is just a stupid argument.  We aren't allowed to call for racial justice because of "black on black" violence?  (Or, as I like to call it, violence.)  83 percent of white murders are committed by white offenders.  90 percent of black murders are committed by black offenders.  What does that prove?  Nothing except what we already know—most murder victims know their killer.  It's probably unrealistic to expect anything better than a violent culture from a nation who solves every foreign policy problem by spending a trillion dollars to blow it up.  In any case, I am bothered by his misleading use of statistics like this.  For someone so disgusted by media misrepresentation, maybe he should not be adding to it. 

Let me put it this way.  Blacks comprise about thirteen to fifteen percent of the United States population, depending on the source.  All things being equal, one would expect, then, about thirteen percent of US doctors to be black.  One would expect about thirteen percent of the people in prison to be black.  One would expect about thirteen percent of the business owners in the US to be black.  One would expect about thirteen percent of women getting abortions to be black.  One would expect about thirteen percent of the people killed in officer-involved fatalities to be black.  Makes sense, right?

Here’s the reality (see endnotes for references):

1.     Black doctors = 4-7%

2.     Black prisoners = 37%

3.     Black business owners = 37.4%

4.     Black abortions = 30%

5.     Black police fatalities = 26%

6.     Black high school graduates = 69% of black students graduate (86% of white students graduate)

7.     Black school expulsions/suspensions = 50% (on average, 24% of students are black)

8.     Black college graduates = 26% (whites 41%)

9.     Black welfare recipients = 39% (same for whites)

10. Black unemployment rate = 8% (white 4%)

11. Black homeowners = 44% of African Americans, (73% of whites own their homes.) What’s even worse is that black-owned homes were valued at 18% less than white-owned homes, even for homeowners with equal incomes.

According to this essay, we are supposed to be appalled at the 30% of abortions in 13% of the population, but unconcerned at the 26% of police fatalities within the same 13% of the population?  That simply does not make sense.  Look, I’m pro-life too, but I strongly suspect that means something different to me than it does to this author.  I believe that safeguarding the sanctity of life is not an obligation that stops at birth.  I believe we are equally compelled to defend every child’s safety and access to opportunity, regardless of race.  Come on.  What are we trying to save our babies for?  I’m serious.  To get shot in the street without a trial or go to prison for a dime-bag while a white swimmer rapes somebody and gets a slap?  Are we really going to say the media is making it all up?  No. 

Look at the numbers, and think.  Forget about black and white.  Forget about the 300 years of government-sanctioned enslavement.  Take any people group, create a system that will for a hundred years deny them education, employment, housing, and opportunity in general; herd them into certain communities through redlining; kill and imprison the men in disproportionally high numbers; and limit access both financially and geographically to health care except abortion clinics.   Kind of sounds like a recipe for high abortion rates to me.  Here we are trying to say we want to stop abortion because we believe human lives are sacred.  I say, if we want to show that human lives are divine miracles, we have to value the homeless drug addict, and the gang member, and the black guy with the broken taillight as much as we value the soccer mom and the CEO. 

As long as we are on stereotypes and soccer moms, let’s talk about white guilt.  This guy is mad because some white people feel bad?  ARE YOU SERIOUS!?!?!  What a load of crap, and how arrogant to generalize the motivation of people he does not know.  Isn’t it thinking like this that perpetuates the mess? I am white, and I will continue to fight for police reform not out of some misplaced sense of white guilt, but for my family and loved ones.  I support the work of Black Lives Matter, despite that same, tired clip everyone keeps dredging up with the crazy bacon fryers.  Speaking of unbalanced media representation, and all—there are chapters and have been peaceful demonstrations all over the United States for the last four years, and the only media image you ever see is the bacon one.  <SMH and rolling my eyes> 

Let me put his mind at ease.  I do not feel guilty for a damn thing related to racial justice, nor does any single person of color I know want me to.  It seems to me that they just want the justice and freedom promised to all of us by that Constitution we worship.  Even though I am white, I may have clued in to something very important that his essay completely misses.  This is not about how white people feel.  GASP!   Try to stay with me here.  Despite the fact that we keep trying to make it about ourselves, this issue is not.  About.  White people.  At all.  Speaking as one, though, I can tell you that having a basic understanding of concepts like white privilege and knowing the historical context of practices like redlining have helped me understand the problem at hand.

The problem we are facing is not what people are "feeling.”  Who cares how we feel about other people, other races?  You can't control the emotions of other people, and someone else's emotions can't harm you.  The longer we keep tiptoeing around each other's feelings instead of addressing the actual problem—a discriminatory system—the more black kids are going to die needlessly.  Does it matter that it is only happening to 0.000006 percent of the black population?  Not to the mamas of the 0.000006 percent, it doesn’t.

Bomberger, like many others, makes a big point of mentioning that more whites are killed by police than blacks. I could mathematically explain how he is again using numbers to present misleading information by failing to account for the vast difference in population size, but why bother?  Why are we accepting the killing of anyone, of any skin color without a proper trial? Why?  Why are we not employing even the most rudimentary de-escalation techniques?  Don’t tell me it is because of the danger police face.  The situations around the killings of Sterling and Castile were about as dangerous a shooting fish in a barrel, and don’t even make me point out Tamir Rice.  Now, don’t lose your mind.  I know there are legitimate dangers to police.  The problem here is that the police don’t have to be in any actual danger to get away with killing people.  They only have to feel in danger, and it apparently doesn’t even matter if the police have themselves escalated the situation to the point that they feel endangered.  Well, if the police officer’s feelings of safety are such an issue, why are we not training these officers to manage unconscious bias and otherwise ensuring they can make sound tactical decisions instead of killing people because they feel an unfounded fear?

I’ll tell you why.  There is no accountability.  None.  Are you aware that police departments in the US are not even required to report police fatalities to anyone, let alone investigate them?  If they are investigated, it is done internally, with no transparency.  As if that ever really works for anything!  I am no attorney, but as I understand it, the burden of proof is much different when it comes to officer-involved fatalities, making it incredibly difficult for criminal charges to be made.  By contrast, in Australia, all police shootings are subject to national monitoring and, I can only assume, appropriate consequences.  Big surprise then, that even when adjusted for the difference in population size, Australian police kill a fraction of the people that ours do.¹²  We kill in one month, what they did in almost twenty years.  Wow.  Is the disparity explained away by media bias?  Is it any less dangerous to be a cop in Australia?  Do you think there is no prejudice or fear in Australia?  Come on.  We are smarter than that, aren’t we?

The best way I know how to say it is like this:  I do not care if someone hates my kid because he is black.  Could not care less.  Whatever.  Everyone has to learn to deal with idiots.  What I care deeply about is whether or not someone can harm my kid and get away with it because he is black.  In this country, in the year 2016, the sad reality is that yes, someone--even someone sworn to protect him--could harm my child or yours and get away with it.  That is a terrible problem which needs an immediate and concrete solution. Don’t you dare try to dismiss it.

1.  Ellyn R. Boukus, Alwyn Cassil, Ann S. O'Malley, A Snapshot of U.S. Physicians: Key Findings from the 2008 Health Tracking Physician Survey, 2009

2.  U.S. Department of Justice, 2014

3.  US Census Bureau

4.  Multiple sources

5.  Bomberger essay

6.  and 8.  US Department of Education

7.  Equal Justice Initiative, http://www.eji.org/node/1141

9.  US department of Commerce

10.  US Bureau of Labor Statistics

11.  Harvard University; Forbes http://www.forbes.com/sites/forbesleadershipforum/2012/12/10/how-home-ownership-keeps-blacks-poorer-than-whites/#62b46bf57e57

12.  https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jun/09/the-counted-police-killings-us-vs-other-countries

Not Just A Pretty Face

Context is everything. Until we can come to terms with the historical context in which blacks and other "minorities" were legislated into poverty and lack of opportunity, we will get nowhere, as far as uniting our country. GAH!  I hate the word "minorities." Nonetheless, we have generations of white folks from the 70's and 80's on, who mistakenly believe that racism has been cured and everyone has equal opportunity. Why? Because we were told about the highlights of the civil rights movement without learning the proper context.

We have been taught what's important is that we act nice to black people so we don't FEEL like bigots. With all due respect, I don't give a rat's ass about how you feel. I do not care whether people like my kids or whether they are  prejudiced dumbasses. Everyone has to learn how to deal with morons and jerks.  I care whether you, or their school administrators, or the court system can harm them or deprive them of their rights. Ask Tamir Rice if that happens.

So, what is it I'm always blathering about?  Pure evil genius. Tell people where the can live and work. Do not allow them to take out loans or own businesses and homes so they will lack financial opportunities. That's called redlining, job discrimination, and housing discrimination.

Structure the funding of schools around property values so that rich (white) areas have more and poor and minority areas have much less. Restrict access to learning, the arts, textbooks, resources because there isn't enough money. Turn out year after year of students not properly prepared for college or entrepreneurship, and without the financial buffer of family financial support. That's called educational disparity and systemic racism.  And we are still doing it, my friends. Why are we still funding education as if poor kids deserve less than rich kids?  

Tell people where they are allowed to live. Repeat. Repeat. Repeat.  Repeat. Repeat. Repeat. Repeat. Repeat. Repeat. Repeat. Every 18 years starting with the Emancipation Proclamation. That's called Generational poverty.  Does it ONLY happen to blacks and not whites?  No. Of course not. Does the fact that it does happen to whites erase the reality that it has happened disproportionally to blacks?  Nope. Further, I would argue that even the poorest of white families did not get that way because the law said they had to live inside a red line on a map.





Which brings me to this guy. Not just a pretty face--who knew?!?!?!?  Here it is in Jesse Williams' words. It's a little long, and he's is unfiltered in this video.  I especially like these excerpts, but watch it yourself.

"Generational poverty is a very real thing... You can't corral an entire segment of the population in the ghetto away from the American Dream then wonder why it doesn't look like a Norman Rockwell painting."

"Housing discrimination is the biggest [effing] secret in this country... Suburbs were created to subsidize white upward mobility, while it was against the law for black people to get a loan, illegal for black people to own the deed to their property"

Watch the video. He's making a lot of sense, even if it's tough to hear.

https://www.facebook.com/theconsciousandaware/videos/866349313457281/https://www.facebook.com/theconsciousandaware/videos/866349313457281/

Pay no attention to those men behind the curtain!

For a society that proclaims itself so advanced and forward-thinking, Americans believe an awful lot of mythology.  I write frequently about the myth of “Equal Opportunity.”  Today, I am going to talk about the myth of the “American Free Market Economy.”  Before I explain why it doesn't really exist, let’s back up and define the different possible economic systems:

• Traditional:  Reward for work and the exchange of property and services is completely shaped by the traditions of a society.  Most of the world operates under this system.  The down side to a traditional economy is that accumulation of surplus (wealth) is difficult, if not impossible. 
• Command (Communism):  The government exerts control over wages and the exchange of goods and services.  There are few countries with pure command economies (I think Cuba might be the only one) which is probably evidence that it doesn’t work well.  The obvious disadvantages to this system are greed, nepotism, and corruption.  People in power may benefit unfairly by controlling the economy.
• Market (Capitalism):  Control of industry is, at least theoretically, in the hands of the individual. It is influenced exclusively (again, theoretically) by the available supply of goods and services and the demand for those goods and services.  Government’s limited role in a market economy is to provide national infrastructure, national defense, and protection against monopolies.  There are no countries in the world with pure market economies, which could be an indication that they don’t really work that well in practice.  Despite our American love affair with the idea of a pure market economy, it is plagued with many pitfalls and disadvantages, principally greed, nepotism, and corruption.  People in power may benefit unfairly by controlling the economy.
• Mixed (Socialism):  Individuals control the economy within a framework of governmental intervention which may range from outright control of certain industries to selective control of only certain industries, or indirect control through regulation. Almost all industrialized nations fall somewhere in the spectrum of a socialized economy.  Perhaps that is an indication that it often works better than other economic systems? 

So, let’s really think about which of these economic structures we can buy into.  I’m sure we don’t have to waste much time considering Traditional or Command economies for the United States.  None of us want those. So, what about a Market economy?  Well, in order for a free Market economy to work, we have to agree on some things.  We have to decide that we are willing to give up safety nets.  What does that mean? 

Do you want to be assured that the new heart medication your doctor just prescribed for you is safe, effective and appropriate for you?  Sorry.  In a pure market there are no such assurances, because there are no regulations to protect you.  There is no FDA, and there is no licensing process to make sure physicians are properly trained.  And while we are thinking about health care, I hope we are all prepared to pay for everything out of pocket.  We would have to agree that health insurance is completely privatized and free of any regulations to protect us from getting ripped off, or else we have to pay it all ourselves.  Do you want to go out to eat at that fancy new restaurant?  What about if there is no health Department to ensure that an establishment is clean and food is prepared and stored properly?  The market will eventually decide, right?  If enough people die of improper medical treatment or food poisoning, no one will pay good money for that medicine, that doctor, or that meal. 

We have to agree that we trust human nature enough to believe that every business owner will offer a fair living wage to American adults rather than exploiting children or importing foreign workers who will work much cheaper.  After all, why would we have child labor laws or immigration laws if the government is only going to provide roads and an army?  We have to agree that we trust every employer to provide a safe working environment with no regulations or agencies for oversight.  I don’t know about you, but I am unwilling to go back to the good ole’ days of the early 1900s.  No thank you; I think it is pretty well established that’s not a good idea 

We have to agree that we are all ok with the “work or don’t eat” philosophy.  There would be no social programs to rely on when you lose a limb in the unregulated factory you used to work at, or when your company eventually goes under because the heart medicine it made killed too many people and no one will buy it anymore.  So…  What happens?  Do we have people starving in the street and urchins running around barefoot selling newspapers and matchbooks?  Either that, or we have to agree that we trust human nature enough to believe that our employers and neighbors will cheerfully and selflessly provide for us and our children , indefinitely, if tragedy strikes. 

We have to decide that we don’t believe in corruption.  We have to trust that the owner of the heart medicine factory won’t take all that money he made killing people and buy congressmen to look the other way as he creates a monopoly.  We have to expect he won't take the opportunity to build a new medicine factory empire that drives all the local apothecaries out of business, leaving him free to control supply and inflate demand.  

We would have to be OK with either homeschooling all our children or paying ourselves for private schools or tutors.  A Market system makes no allowance for educating its citizens.  We have to agree that we trust every person’s ability and budget to educate the next generation.  We have to decide we trust people never to have children they can’t really care for.  We have to believe that property owners would never discriminate in renting or selling housing, and that all our homes would be safely built and maintained with no agency to inspect or regulate building standards.

We have to think that it would never happen that an oil baron could use his money and power to engage in price gouging at the gas pump. We would have to be willing to bay $25 a gallon for gas.  Have I made my point?  Personally, I am not willing to say I trust in any of those things.  And neither are you.  We have already decided it doesn’t work to trust human nature to such a degree.  That is why we have labor laws and building codes. That is why we have public health codes and licensure of certain professions.  That is why we are already practicing Socialism.  You might as well stop panicking at the idea because we all became Socialists the minute we realized we needed legal protection from fraud, malfeasance, and good old-fashioned greed. I would submit that the most pertinent economics question is not whether some degree of Socialism may be better than pure Capitalism, but rather, why does Socialism work well in some instances and not others? 

Perhaps the deciding factor in whether Socialism is going to work well is whether the working relationship between the citizenry and the government is functional.  When Socialism is instituted through the use of force, clearly the outcome is probably not going to be good. However, when the will of the people requires common sense economic and social policies, and their political leaders listen and respond, a stronger nation results.  In other words, Socialism plus dictatorship equals failure.  Socialism plus democracy equals, if not complete success, at least a system better than corrupted Capitalism, such as we have now in the US.  

That's where we are, friends.  We are not choosing between true, glorious, everybody-has-a-chance-to-succeed Capitalism and evil Communism, despite what people may be trying to convince you. We are choosing between Democratic Socialism and a corrupted, fake Capitalism--a version which will not engender a healthy nation and economy because it is not under-girded with equality of opportunity.  American-style Capitalism is rigged to benefit the rich, the powerful and the white.  Come on; be honest.  You know it's true.   

Today, our elected officials have grown almost entirely out of touch with the people.  That is our problem.  Not food stamps or the prospects of universal health care and free college—corrupt government officials and leaders.  There is much that needs fixing in the US, but no repair is happening until we fix our political system.  As long as we, the people, continue to elect the same old politicians we are stuck with a bunch of broken, outright crappy systems. As long as we allow people who are supposed to be working for us to continue spending all of their time wheeling and dealing off-camera with big money, we are stuck.  Until we address campaign finance reform, we are stuck.  Until we institute some reasonable term limits, we are stuck. 

As long as we allow ourselves to be bamboozled by the bald men behind the curtain, distracting us with smoke and lights, we are going to be controlled by the Wizard--stuck and powerless.  We are so riled up by sensationalism we are just accepting what everyone is telling us, rather than using our own eyes to see for ourselves that the wizard is just an illusion created by political con artists.  We are so hypnotized by Fox News, Youtube, and the latest Kardashian scandal that we’ve given up our power at the ballot box. We need to wake up!

How do we fix it?  I have a few ideas. Shocker, I know.  

1. Quit watching the side show.  Left wing and right wing both belong to the same bird.  Stop supporting your political Party, and start supporting your neighbor and your community.   Stop thinking in terms of Republican and Democrat, and start using your own brain
2. Expect better.  Do you find it acceptable for you employee to refuse to do their job?  Then stop allowing Congress to shirk their duties because they don’t want to cooperate with the President.  Would you hire someone with questionable ethics at your law firm?  Then don’t send her to the White House.  Would you spend $27 million to teach people in Morocco to design pottery?  Then call out Congress for doing just that in the 2012 US budget.  Would you invite Trump to teach ethics to your kids?  Then don’t inflict his bigotry on the nation. Would you keep hiring the same plumber if he kept messing up your pipes?  Then why keep hiring the same politicians that have messed up our nation?  As far as I am concerned, if we re-elect a single Republican in Congress we deserve what we get.  And the Democrats are just as bad.  We need a brand new Congress.  These people are not looking out for you and me.  They just aren’t.
3. Educate yourself.  It’s not going to happen on Facebook; you’re going to have to read a real book. And then another one and another one after that.  Make it a point to learn about things you don’t agree with.  At the very least you’ll be able to present an informed argument.  Who knows, you may find out you are more willing to compromise than you realize.   
4. Talk to people.   Stop forming your opinions based on a sound bites via social media.  Engage in real life interactions with people who are different than you. On purpose.  Are you against raising the minimum wage?  Make it a point to talk to people who are living on minimum wage.  Do you think that there’s too much violence in law enforcement?  Engage with your local police department.  Do you think the opposite?  Talk to people who have experienced excessive police force.  How can we change anything if we don’t talk to each other and learn from one another?
5. Think globally.  I’m not against being patriotic, by any means, but in today’s world we all impact each other in ways never before seen.  We must begin to consider what’s good for all, not just what’s good for people like me, or my city, or my state.  We need to think bigger.   
6. Quit electing white men all the time!  Especially rich ones.  Is that harsh?  Absolutely.  But if we want to get something different, we have to elect someone different.  80% of both the House and Senate are male. 80% of the House and about 90% of the Senate are white.  Well, gaaawllee!  I wonder why we are still struggling with institutional racism and male dominance? Lets do better, shall we?  
7. Be willing to get uncomfortable in order to learn.  Challenging yourself is even harder than challenging “the system.”  Allowing others the same freedoms and privileges you want to enjoy may make you uncomfortable.  That’s to be expected.  Look at it this way.  At my church, we make a deliberate effort to be inclusive of many ethnicities, economic backgrounds, and faith traditions.  One of the things I’ve learned is that if I expect to be comfortable 100% of the time, I am expecting someone else to be UNcomfortable 100% of the time.  What gives me that right?  Nothing.  Not a damn thing.

Photo:  http://www.starpulse.com/Movies/Wizard_Of_Oz,_The/gallery/WIZARDOZ024/

A Voter Perspective

An Open Letter To Mr. Amash

President Barack Obama and Supreme Court nominee the Honorable Merrick Garland 

 

Good Morning.

I am one of your constituents.  I would like to take this opportunity to explain a situation I recently encountered in my job at a local hospital which I feel you may relate to.  As a clinical pharmacist, one of my many important responsibilities is to evaluate and implement medication therapies as ordered by physicians.  Recently, I received medication orders for a patient by a physician I was not in favor of hiring.  On many occasions we have had differing opinions as to how a patient should be treated, and I have had enough.  I made the calculated decision not to act on his orders.  Since a new physician would take over the case at shift change in 5 hours, I decided to wait until then.  Maybe after shift change it would be a doctor I like better, so until then I was simply not going to cooperate. 

Absurd, right?  No professional with any integrity at all would freeze patient care in such a negligent manner.  Obviously this is NOT a real scenario.  (In case my boss is reading:  Really!  I would never do such a thing!!!!)  This is simply an apt illustration to highlight for you that, in the real world, people are required to act like the adults they are and DO THEIR JOBS. I cannot emphasize it strongly enough.  I urge you and your Republican colleagues in Congress in the strongest possible terms to stop behaving like petulant children and perform your constitutional duty.  As a voter, I demand that you uphold all the responsibilities you were elected to fulfill.  Please begin confirmation proceedings for the current nominee for Supreme Court Justice, the Honorable Merrick Garland. 

Your party’s refusal to honor President Obama’s right and responsibility to nominate a candidate for a vacancy on the Supreme is a great affront to the American people—the American people who entrusted our current president with all of the duties of the office in the two fair and legal elections which put President Obama in office.  We have already spoken.  The president has been faithful to his responsibilities; now you and your fellow Republicans in Congress must be faithful to yours.  Do.  Your.  Job.    

Sincerely,

Dr. Rebecca Boyd

P.S.  I have a really big mouth and am not shy about broadcasting my views.  One of the ways I do this is with my blog, which may be found at:  http://justbeckyunfiltered.blogspot.com.  A copy of this letter will be publicly featured there later today.  Enjoy!

RWB

Photo:  http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/03/16/470643431/-i-ve-made-my-decision-on-supreme-court-nominee-president-obama-says

Would you like fries with that?

 This guy right here... SMH  Whenever I envision people who are guilty of "Americanizing" the Gospel, I see Franklin Graham in my head. In the first place, I find it very hypocritical for Graham to hold up Bill Clinton as any kind of positive object lesson, when I have absolutely no doubt that he viewed Clinton with the highest DISrespect possible while he was actually in office. The Christian Right hated Clinton.   I guess when it comes to racism, the good ole' boys can set aside party politics. I'm sure this is rude to say, but come on. You would have to be either a complete idiot or a confirmed racist not to see that we have some serious inequities in our criminal justice system.  And I don't think Mr Graham is an idiot. 

Secondly, Christianity is not white, and it is not Republican (or Democrat, for that matter.). I'm sorry to have to point this out, but the Bible simply does not support most of the economic and social priorities currently espoused by the people who have hijacked the Republican Party. Read Micah 6:8, and tell me we are not supposed to be taking care of our fellow man. It says we are required of God to act justly, love mercy, walk humbly. "Required."  It's not a suggestion. It's a requirement. 

If you think an Old Testament verse doesn't apply anymore, Christ confirmed it in John 21. If we love Him, we will take care of his sheep. He said it right out. THREE TIMES, for crying out loud.  Honestly, do you really think Christ's biggest social concern in 2016 would have been whether a Christian is supposed to make a cake for a gay wedding?  I do not. I just don't.

I love that Mr Graham shares the Gospel so clearly. I just wish he would realize the message would go a lot further toward feeding God's sheep if it were not served up with a huge side order of American-style apostasy.  So, if you find yourself in agreement with the Republican party, great.  Really.  I have no problem with you having opinions that differ from  mine.  This is America.  You have every right to think what you want, to not want to pay higher taxes, to think every hint of socialism is evil,  to think an unmediated free market economy is the solution to everything...  Whatever.  Just own it, then, because what you do not have the right to do is to claim that God is your justification for those opinions.  Keep your politics out of my Savior's Gospel.    

This Is The House That Redlining Built

A Modern Nursery Rhyme by Mother Becky














This is the house that redlining built.

This is the water
That came to the house that redlining built.

These are the people
That drank the water
That came to the house that redlining built.

These are the laws
That hated the people
That drank the water

That came to the house that redlining built.

This is the racism,

That made the laws
That hated the people
That drank the water
That came to the house that redlining built.

This is the fear with the media horn
That fed the racism

That made the laws
That hated the people
That drank the water
That came to the house that redlining built.

This is the power, ugly and strong

That spread the fear with the media horn
That fed the racism
That made the laws
That hated the people
That drank the water
That came to the house that redlining built.

These are the men, corrupt and wrong

That held all the power, ugly and strong
That spread the fear with the media horn
That fed the racism
That made the laws
That hated the people
That drank the water
That came to the house that redlining built.

This is the money

That moved the men, corrupt and wrong
That held all the power, ugly and strong
That spread the fear with the media horn
That fed the racism
That made the laws
That hated the people
That drank the water
That came to the house that redlining built.

These are the lies

That made all the money
That moved the men, corrupt and wrong
That held all the power
That spread the fear with the media horn
That fed the racism
That made the laws
That hated the people
That drank the water
That came to the house that redlining built.

This is the country reaping discord

That sowed the lies
That made all the money
That moved the men, corrupt and wrong
That held all the power
That spread the fear with the media horn
That fed the racism
That made the laws
That hated the people
That drank the water
That came to the house that redlining built.



Photo:  http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-27260073

What's A Mom To Do?

This morning I was running late.  (What’s new, right?)  I probably could have made it in time, if I bypassed the school parking lot morning mayhem and dropped him off at a more convenient spot four blocks away.  I briefly wished I could do it.  You may ask, why couldn’t I?  He’s 13 and a really responsible kid, so he is certainly capable of walking a few blocks unsupervised.  You know the one; he’s the athlete and honor student we all congratulated last week for winning a bunch of academic awards.  So why didn’t I even consider doing it? Well, I can’t bring myself to do that because to some people, my kid isn’t an honor student with a bright future.  To them, he’s just SCARY BLACK MAN.  I know this to be true because of experiences we have already had, where he has been targeted merely because of the color of his skin.  He has already, at thirteen years old, been harassed by police for walking down the street and “matching a description.”  For his own safety, he doesn’t have the freedom to do what I would have allowed my white sons to do without even thinking about it.

Did I tell him any of that? No, but should I have?  I really don’t know.  I want to teach him to expect approriate behavior from the people around him, but is that the right thing?  On one hand, if I explain to him why I don’t want him walking around amongst the general public wearing a hoodie, I’ll be accused of “teaching him to be racist.”  On the other hand, he could very predictably have bad things happen to him if I don’t teach him to be aware of how whites may perceive him.  What’s a mom to do?  It’s very easy to be opinionated about it all until you actually have a loved one facing the crap we don’t want to admit still happens. 

So, while you’re out there deciding who to vote for and (hopefully) deciding whether equal opportunity really exists in the USA, I hope you’ll think about kids like mine—the ones who can’t even walk down a street and be assured of safety.  I hope you’ll consider that a racist candidate endorsed by known KKK members is probably not going to be great at pursuing equity and justice for ALL of us, not just the rich, white ones of us.  I hope you’ll remember that the candidate who had a hand in making the imprisonment of black men a profit-generating enterprise may not be interested in the well-being of ALL Americans.  Myself, I voted for the candidate who has been fighting for peace and racial equity for 50 years.  Do I agree with everything he believes?  No.  Is he perfect? Of course not.  No candidate is perfect, but I think he has something to offer that may be more important than our fear of what’s going to happen with our money or our guns.

Photo:  http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/personal-view/6103250/Britain-needs-a-middle-class-baby-boom.html

All Y'All Made Me Unleash The Flying Monkeys

This essay has been marinating for a very long time.  I have started it on numerous occasions, then put it aside because it just wasn’t the right time.  Now, in this election season, I find myself on the cusp of a decision that causes a deep quandary for me.  This is the time.  Now is the time that people on both sides of the issue need to stop screaming at each other and listen to each other instead. In my typical fashion, I suspect I’m going to piss off people on BOTH sides.  That’s OK with me.  I doubt I will change anyone’s mind; I just hope to help start a dialogue, to increase understanding and cooperation for the good of everyone. 

I am pro-life—have been since before I even understood that people could intentionally end the life of a child before he or she can be born.  I love people.  I adore babies.  I think human lives are sacred because we are made in the image of God.  Humans have souls.  Does that mean I don’t care about other species?  No.  Does that mean I think women don’t have a right to control their own bodies? No.  It simply means I can’t think of a single reason good enough to kill any child.  It just means that while a baby is dependent upon the mother's body, the baby is a separate individual with inherent rights.  It simply means that a person’s God-given right to life starts in the womb.  It means that there are moral consequences to abortion, consequences that are damaging to women victimized by the abortion industry and to the society that allows it.  It simply means that a person is always a person regardless of his or her address. Even if a person lives inside the mother or on the wrong side of the tracks, he or she is still a miracle of God and deserving of our protection.  Obviously, I hold these beliefs because of my faith.  I don’t expect everyone to embrace them.  I do expect that every mature human being can carry on a conversation about them without being accusatory and judgmental.   

To my fellow Pro-Lifers:  Please stop judging everybody and calling them murderers.  Seriously.  Do you really think that helps?  It does not.  A Pro-Life stance must begin to mean you value all lives, respect all lives.  We seem to have a little trouble with this.  Do you value the child but hate the mother who wants the abortion?  Or the Pro-Choicer next door?  Your rhetoric might imply just that.  If you’re going to claim that you find life sacred, how about the lives of the impoverished kids that your politicians poisoned in the city of Flint?  How about the life of the most recent “thug” that just got killed in the streets without a trial by judge and jury?  How about the Muslim refugee child drowning in a boat?  Or the one we just bombed in Iraq?  What about the street kid on the other side of the wall some of us want to build?  What about the drug addict living on the streets without access to desperately-needed health care?  Do those lives matter less than the one tucked inside a mother’s body?  I don’t think so, but our social policies are telling us loud and clear that IS EXACTLY what we believe.  Those policies would not exist without the say-so of us Pro-Lifers right along with everyone else.  I can already hear the objection that we can't be Socialists who just give everything to people.  Well, I say that helping the impoverished and the refugee, providing necessities like health care and education, and feeding the hungry are not Socialist acts. They are loving my neighbor as much as I love myself. 

If I haven't already highly offended you, here’s where I’m really going to blow your mind.  I believe abortion is an important political issue.  BUT… it is not the only important issue.  Our respect for life compels us to be just as diligent in protecting quality of life.  What does that mean?  It means if we are not voting for improved access to education for all of our citizens, we are not really Pro-Life, we are Pro-Baby.  It means if we think people are deserving of only the health care they can pay for, we are Pro-Baby, not Pro-Life.  If we don’t stand up and do something when the black kid is killed in the park for having a toy gun—sorry, not Pro-Life.  If we find it acceptable to spend half of our pie on the war machine but scream about the minute sliver we spend on welfare—sorry, not Pro-Life. When we allow our congressman to earn in excess of $400,000 a year for life, but won’t pay for elderly Medicare patients’ medications while they are in the hospital—not Pro-Life. Yup, we are allowing all of that.  Look it up.  The information is there if you choose to see it.  Look, if you want credibility as an advocate for Life, you need to earn it, and it’s going to take more than that “All Lives Matter” banner on your Facebook wall. 

My Pro-Choice friends, I haven’t forgotten about you.  First of all, quit calling Pro-Lifers “Anti-Choice.”  It’s rude. You certainly don’t want Pro-Lifers running around calling you “Pro-Death.”  It’s also an inaccurate characterization.  There are almost always other “choices” besides abortion.  Abstinence, for one.  I know it’s an old-fashioned notion, but it is an option.  If a woman consents to have sex, she’s already made a choice to be responsible for her actions.  We live in a culture that wants rights without responsibility.  We want to do whatever the hell we want, whenever we want to, and then take a pill to fix it when there are problems. We want to live on Big Macs even though we know better, then sue the McDonald's when we end up fat.  It's all the same cultural problem of refusing to take responsibility for our actions.  If a woman didn’t choose to have sex… that’s a different story.  While I still don’t believe an abortion after rape or incest is really going to fix anything for the mother, I’m certainly not going to condemn her.  I’m talking about the other 98% of abortion cases.  The choice was made before the conception.  You know it; I know it. 

And speaking of conception, can we be truthful about what is being aborted?  Using the clinical term “fetus” doesn’t make it any less a child.  Before modern medicine, maybe we could have gotten away with debating about when life begins.  But now, we know better. An unborn child has a functioning brain and heartbeat before most women even realize they are pregnant.  If you are of the belief that it is OK to end the life of a human being with a heartbeat, then say so.  Do not hide behind euphemisms like “tissue” and “fetus” in a disingenuous effort to make it seem less barbaric.

Now that I have pissed you off thoroughly, I am going to ask you tough questions, but first, I am going to make a couple of disclaimers.  I already know that women of all races get abortions.  I already know that Planned Parenthood provides other needed health care services to women.  Secondly, I am going to present you with the truth that present day abortion laws and the organization Planned Parenthood find their roots in the US eugenics movement prior to WWII.  Eugenics is the selective breeding of human beings for the sole purpose of eliminating genetic “imperfections” such as poverty, mental illness, and “undesirable” racial identity.  Hitler was highly influenced by these practices and viewed his Final Solution as a natural extension of them.  You don’t have to take my word on any of this.  It is easy to find the information.  Now, here are my questions.  Is it at all possible that modern day abortion practices are fulfilling the racist, classist mission of the eugenicists, just as they were intended to do?  Is it possible that by defending a woman's right to choose, we are undermining our own intent to dismantle a corrupt system which targets the poor and the minority?

I find it entirely possible, even likely.  Especially when I consider that we are willing to restrict access to health care on the basis of who can pay for it, yet we will find a Planned Parenthood providing reproductive services and health care for women in most “urban” areas of the US.  We can’t afford health care for everyone.  Yet we can afford to plop abortion facilities in the middle of communities with the least number of white citizens and give an affordable abortion to whoever wants one.  I find it to be a really unbelievable coincidence.  Instead, why can’t we just make it possible for every woman to go to a doctor in an actual health care facility for screenings, contraception, and prenatal care?  The answer is, we could... if we wanted to do so.  If you’re reading my blog, you’re obviously a smart person.  Do the math, so to speak. 

Why is now the right time to talk about this?  Because we have an election coming up. Because the decision of who to vote for is harder than ever.  Because people seem to have left reason completely behind.  Because if we are all, Pro-Life or Pro-Choice alike, voting solely based on a candidate's supposed abortion stance, we are making some scary decisions.  Just think about it.  That's all I ask.