The intent of this blog is to promote human equality, human progress, human peace and justice, and optimism. To accomplish this, to encourage the discussion of ideas after identifying and discovering problems, and then creating positive solutions for "we the people," in order to provide for the "general welfare" and "domestic tranquility" of America now and its "posterity" into the future. To encourage an emphasis on separation of religion and state for all, no matter if this is for those "of faith" in a Maker / Creator (Deists, God-loving people, Christians, various people of spirituality) and atheists or agnostics.

Posts tagged ‘Supreme Court’

Amanpour & Company, May 4-5, 2022

Dear Amanpour & Company:

Where do I begin? In viewing this program tonight, I begin with some of the last words spoken by Ms. Amanpour:  “human rights.”  With the issue before the SCOTUS tonight, “human rights” is important. But the Democrat who wishes to challenge Kemp of Georgia has said this one other thing, which was not mentioned. We cannot have peace without justice. The SCOTUS is SUPPOSED to be about doing the job of JUSTICES in order to assure justice and domestic tranquility. The dolts who are sitting in the current day majority, appointed by men who DID NOT win the popular vote in presidential elections, are possibly making some lousy decisions which move America away from “human justice.”

Democracy can provide peace AND justice and do so far beyond the consideration of “human rights.” We should have learned this from the American Civil War and the subsequent lousy crap which happened when a Democrat won only one term for president and then came back for a second term and we overturned what Republican Reconstruction had done and ushered in Jim Crow. But too much stupidity and lack of reasoning demonstrates too many have not learned from history. The woman from Georgia is correct. The Human rights are part of this is important, but “peace without justice” is what is truly appropriate and that is not being said. I don’t know how I can get across what I am trying to say in all of this.  Ms. Amanpour is correct, but I still do not believe we are going far enough.

I have female friends who have sent me disparaging remarks about Ayn Rand and her “virtue of selfishness” ideals.  Ayn Rand came here from Russia where they have never learned what democracy and capitalism is TRULY about. But out of feeling sorry for her, people came to her side in all things. I had females who sent me information challenging this atheist from Russia who had such a profound influence on America with the ideas of “selfish” individualism.

At the same time, these females who have expressed disdain over Ayn Rand also express very deep support of the ideas for PRO CHOICE and the woman’s right to an abortion. That is the SAME THING AYN RAND SUPPORTED. The right of a woman to have an abortion.  Ayn Rand.  But we are still stuck on Ayn Rand and her principle of the “virtue of selfishness.” Gloria Steinem speaking last night plus the other woman on the opposite side of the picture BOTH represented the thoughts about individual selfishness. Some of my female friends might like Steinem, but how about considering this junk and vicious behavior in America – the POLARIZATION OF AMERICA – due to individualism and selfishness.  The issue is about human rights, but more importantly about HUMAN JUSTICE, as Stacey Abrams of Georgia has said. 

Theocracies, fascist autocracies like Hitler and Mussolini, communist regimes like Joseph Stalin, and now with Putin’s plutocracy all have one thing in common. Establish “peace” by means of execution of enemies, just like any Mafia of ANY culture would do (and I am not just singling out Italians, so let me make that very clear) and by means of genocide.  By putting sunder their opposition, they then can say “they establish peace.” The Confederate bastards of the 19th Century had the same motive. Murder all the black people and we can have peace. They carried it forward after Grover Cleveland and other Democrats of the late 1800s pushed this crap upon the American public, like “gerrymanderers” in Dixie are doing today.  Another lesson from history which is ignored. 

Those who spoke tonight, besides Chris Christie, spoke about many things, but ignored anything I am trying to say.  The best part this evening was listening, for a short time, to author, Margaret Atwood. It was too short of a time because she made some very good points about LEARNING FROM HISTORY.  But it was cut short and that was disappointing.

Related to Canadian author, Atwood, is something which I relate to all of this. It may have no relationship at all. But one thing is this. I am related to another Canadian author, now deceased.  His name was Hugh MacLennan.  My great-grandmother was Angeline MacLennan. She hailed from central Pennsylvania in a town called Orwigsburg (Schuylkill County).  Angie MacLennan married my great-grandfather who lived on the New Jersey side of the Philadelphia metropolitan area.  That was Rev. Joseph Smith Eldridge, a pastor in the Methodist Church for many years.

Rev. Joseph and Angeline “Angie” MacLennan, had a daughter they named Clara Permelia Eldridge. When Clara was barely four years of age, she lost her mother, Angie (MacLennan) Eldridge.  Why? Because in 1903, abortions were NOT ALLOWED. Angie died in childbirth, along with that child which was due to be born in 1903. This lack of abortion snuffed out the life of a mom. That mom was unable to celebrate Mother’s Day with her one child. She was not able to celebrate Mother’s Day with any other POSSIBLE children, had she been able to have an abortion.  It was a legitimate marriage and legitimate children.  But the complications snuffed out the life of a MacLennan woman, related to Canadian author, Hugh MacLennan.  And to think the stupidity of those on the current day SCOTUS might just leave the door open for states (in Dixie, particularly) to ban abortion of ANY KIND, even if the life of a mother is threatened or there has been rape involved. It is a move backward. It is interesting that Atwood, author of The Handmaid’s Tale, relates to what the theocracy in Cambridge, MA, once did to other Americans. More recent Cambridge, she explained, was used for her setting in the book, due to the legacy from the past in which puritanical folks treated other people with s**t (my word, not Atwood’s word).  But Atwood was cut short and we never heard more from her an that is sad.  For the example is about “peace without justice” which prevailed in 17th Century New England and things like the Salem Witch Trials and other modes of execution.

Ezra Cornell, founder (co-leader, whatever) of Cornell University, can trace his lineage back to 17th Century Rhode Island and the wrongful execution of his ancestor named Thomas Cornell, Jr, at the hands of such puritanical s**t.  Read all about it in a book published by the Cornell University Press and titled, Killed Strangely. It is about the murder of Thomas, Jr’s mother, Rebecca (Briggs) Cornell. Rebecca (Briggs) Cornell also happens to be my ancestor, too. 

Ezra Cornell was one of many founders of the REPUBLICAN PARTY in central New York, due to his standing up for the abolition of slavery in Dixie. 

What about Clara Eldridge? She married my grandfather, Floyd B. Schoonmaker, after completing her music degree at what is now Ithaca College, but was, at the time, called Ithaca Conservatory of Music. That was during the era of Jim Crow. In spite of that, Simon and Bertha (Palmer) Haley were students in Ithaca. Simon at Cornell University and Bertha at Ithaca Conservatory of Music, apparently graduating in the class of 1925 with Clara Eldridge. Clara.

My grandmother. Daughter of Angie MacLennan who lost her life due to childbirth.  My grandmother who, when we stayed with her on Saturday evenings, never allowed us to view Mannix or Mission:Impossible, and other violent programs. As she would say, “you are not watching any violence.”

My reply would sometimes be, “but Nana, your friend, Gertie, watches Gunsmoke.” She would say, “I don’t care what she does, these are the rules in my house.” No guns. No violence. Nana, too, was a Republican.  She would be absolutely appalled at the Republicans today like Trump, Ron DeSantis, Rick Scott, McConnell, and yes, even Chris Christie of the state where she lived a good portion of her life, New Jersey.  Her mother, Angie MacLennan died in New Jersey when Nana was only about four years of age.  She had a cousin who was tortured in a Confederate prison, too, in Dixie. She had been born only about 30 years after the end of the American Civil War. So when Nana visited her (half) sister in Florida, she came back disgusted with Florida being the place where “everyone is going to find the fountain of youth and they don’t find it there.”  She NEVER returned to Dixie for the rest of her life, dying in 1982.  Her mother, my great-grandmother, could have lived longer and given birth to more children, had the option for an abortion been present in 1903.  It is disgusting to think there are really lousy people in America who don’t want to solve our problems and move forward, but to go back to those days. If you don’t want to do that, then they likely would take the lives of those who don’t wish to go along – like a “theocracy.” Atwood used this word tonight. A theocracy is autocratic and dictatorial. Does not anyone think our Founding Fathers were so intelligent, they attempted to avoid having a “theocracy” in America with words about religious freedom, “domestic tranquility” and so forth, in the U.S. Constitution.

Any lawyers who don’t point this out to the SCOTUS should have their license revoked.  That is how strongly I feel about this.   

Anyone serving on the SCOTUS who does not think and consider STRONGLY aspects such as this (plus more) and perhaps they need to be executed, as Hitler did to his opposition. I say this to make a point, but I don’t advocate it. 

Beyond that, the media needs to be stronger with the ideas which I have expressed here. 

Thanks to Margaret Atwood. When I attempted to view the dramatization of her book, The Handmaid’s Tale, I was so shaken by it, I had the chills, and was not able to continue to watch it. I still get chills thinking bout it.  Just as with today’s polarization by idiots who believe they are Christians, I still get chills, whether it is from these idiots or what is described in the book.  Should I apologize for not being a “man” because I get chills from the book? OK. I am a human being. How about that? I am a human seeking human justice, human rights, human equality.  Liberty and justice for all. Don’t patronize me by twisting things to make it look like doing away with Roe v. Wade fits into this framework of human justice. Such people really do sicken me and make me want to vomit. 

Amazing. 70% of the population DOES NOT WANT THE DESTRUCTION OF ROE v. WADE? Where is this 70% when it comes to elections and the Democrats speak out against such destruction? Where are they?

“Silence like a cancer grows.”

Pro-life and pro-choice in a SECULAR society (New York Times Commentary)

If we are looking towards the Supreme Court to make a decision on Roe v. Wade and pro-life, what, then is this about?  Writing the book of Judges for the scriptures?  Those scriptures were not written for a secular society as we know society today.  The American society is made up of many denominations, whether Roman Catholic ones who follow the right wing LeFevre (are they around today) or other Roman Catholics.  It is a society of Jews, both orthodox and “liberal.”  It is a society of mainline Protestant and evangelical puritanical fundies of the Protestant type.  Also the various sects of the Islamic, Hindu, and other religions.  That is America today.
Do we think that because someone is Roman Catholic or Protestant, there is only ONE belief and only ONE way to think, as if this is a Hitler, Mussolini, or Stalinist society?  We are not, so it is not up to a Supreme Court to decide to rid us of abortions, but to judge in an overall humanistic way, not catering to ANY religious belief. 

In 2007, I heard Roman Catholic Bobby Kennedy, Jr., speak.  He brought up the topic of abortion.  As with most Roman Catholics, he did not discuss the aspect of life beginning at conception or at some other time in a trimester of pregnancy.  He expressed his values, though, against abortions.  For this Protestant sitting in the audience, there was agreement.  At all costs, one should avoid abortion.  However, Kennedy brought up the idea about the actions of a secular society which can best limit abortions.  He had statistics about how states like Massachusetts where abortion is legal but regulated, abortions had declined.  He then compared statistics of abortions in a Southern state like Mississippi and how, with opposition and working to keep it illegal, abortions had NOT declined.  He asked the question.  Do we wish to reduce the number of abortions or do we think we can make it illegal and eliminate abortions entirely?  Tha answer to this question is based on past practices when, even with the illegality of abortions, there has never been an elimination of it. 

Aded to this concept are several other aspects regarding abortions.  How many Roman Catholics (and Protestants, too) who have followed church doctrines against contraception, but quietly and silently do it anyway?  How many have I heard say, “we do it, but don’t say anything,”  To quote scripture from the Gospels, how many times did Jesus Christ call the chief priests and other leaders “hypocrites?”  Perhaps it was not over the issue of contraception, but the concept of being a hypocrite is the same. 

Another aspect to this issue which should be considered through the lenses of justice in a secular society.  Many people discuss this, but take it lightly.  Rape.  Some girl is raped.  What happened in days gone by?  Embarrassment by parents who then became hypocrites in order to hide the fact that there was a baby born to a teenager.  Mother and baby are shipped off to a relative to have the baby and then the child comes back home as a “sister” to the one who gave birth.  Hypocrisy, once again.  Why? 

In days gone by, too, there were the instances of “shotgun weddings.”  Real pretty picture.

Then there is the “unexpected” results of pregnancy when two teenagers fall in love.  During these times of abortion and the parents of the girl carrying child are so embarrassed they FORCE the girl (and boy, too) into a position of abortion, just to “save face.”  In this case, pro-choice is a pertinent expression to apply, in case the mother and father DO wish to keep the child and NOT have an abortion.  Do they get to override the vanity of the parents who don’t want a child with a child, at too young an age?
If a Supreme Court needs to consider this question in a secular society, it also needs to consider the fact that so many outside the womb also have no choices in life in an America which is one of the wealthiest on earth but treats the lower classes with such disdain it figures it gives them so much with an option to go to war and die.  There are many who are just as helpless as a babe in the womb and no one gives no damn about this aspect in America.  I witnessed homeless folks in Palm Beach County where there are the wealthy like Donald Trump and many who have nothing, watching as they starved on the streets because they had no options.  If the Supreme Court determines there is “justice” for a fetus, then what about justice for these young folks or for those who are given a choice to go die for country, as being the ONLY choice.  And Republican jackasses like Trump and other wealthy can go to hell thinking that it is the fault of these people, lacking any understanding or consideration by putting themselves in the feet of such people.  I am sure there are other examples similar to what I describe in Palm Beach.  Thank God that I have helped some homeless who DID serve their nation, but came back to nothing, in tutoring them to get through college and save their lives.  Does anyone care?  Nah! 

Then there is my great-grandmother whom my family was never able to meet because she died in childbirth in 1903.  Both baby and mother died at the same time. Had my great-grandmother had the option to abort the child, she could have survived and given the world OTHER children, only because there was a problem with the development of the child in the womb which killed both mother and child.  Makes no sense to make abortion illegal when it is such a circumstance.  Thank God my mother, who went through nine months carrying a baby and the baby died, survived after the stillbirth.  That was a time before abortions were legal, but what would have happened if my mother’s life had been threatened? 

Stop the BS bull manure of this crap within a secular society and simply regulate abortions in a rational and reasonable way.  Yes, I am opposed to abortions, but I am also reasonable when there are circumstances in which more than just the fetus is hurt.  I do not think it is necessary to get into some kind of argument about “when life begins” because the result is a very nebulous answer not worth pursuing.  Just let us all live life with peace and justice, especially stopping those with guns who shoot up abortion clinics.  They murder people who are OUT of the womb and that is just as bad, with their GD guns, rifles, and auotmatic weapons.   

Tag Cloud