The Agenda: Equality

John Cena really made a fantastic video here. I was overwhelmed.

"Why are you a Democrat?"

LOTS of reasons:

Like

Another milestone for full equality in America

From the Kansas City Star yesterday:

The Obama Administration on Friday called for the US Supreme Court to declare the federal government's 1996 ban on same-sex marriage benefits unconstitutional, saying that "gay and lesbian people have been subject to a significant history of discrimination in this country."

The brief marked the first time a president has endorsed same-sex marriage rights in the Supreme Court.

After all, we all remember that "All men are created equal..." part of our Constitution, right?

Right?

FDR and his "2nd Bill of Rights"

A "2nd Bill of Rights":

President Franklin Roosevelt, in 1944, for pity's sake, proposed an economic bill of rights just before he died. It was a list of rights proposed during his State of the Union Address of that year. In it, he "suggested that the nation had come to recognize, and should now implement, a second 'bill of rights.' Roosevelt's argument was that the 'political rights' guaranteed by the constitution and the Bill of Rights had 'proved inadequate to assure us equality in the pursuit of happiness.' Roosevelt's remedy was to declare an "economic bill of rights" which would guarantee:

-Employment, with a living wage
-Freedom from unfair competition and monopolies
-Housing
-Medical care
-Education
-Social security

And the thing is, I think we all agree that we are--or were--the wealthiest nation on the planet. That seems self-evident. And I think we could have done this, I think we could have given ourselves the above but instead of taking care of the nation and of ourselves, we've plowed far, far too much money and materiel into war and defense, even when it wasn't necessary.



For anyone and everyone that thinks that what he or anyone else means by proposing this is that we have "big government" and a nanny state I say stop. That is not what we're talking about at all.

If we took our nation's wealth and ability--and more nations did the same--and plowed it into the people's well-being and yes, infrastructure (roads, bridges, sewage and sewer systems, schools, transportation, etc.), instead of, again, defense and weapons of war, all people and nations of the world would benefit. There would be rising standards of living instead of falling. People would be fed, clothed, housed and have health care and so on.

Think about it.

If we had all been on this path long ago, the former Soviet Union wouldn't have collapsed and wouldn't have had to. They'd have been taking care of their people instead of squandering the nation's wealth on bombs and aircraft to carry them. All nations of the world could have spent less on war and weapons of war.

Unfortunately, the US has, since the Cold War, at least, has continued spending outrageously high sums on defense, even to this day. And it's incredibly high spending both in terms of our own Gross National Product (GDP) and that of all the other nation's spending on defense.

It's crazy. It's unfounded. It's unnecessary. It's obscene.

And it's all those things especially when you know there is so much poverty in our nation and so many go with little food and/or little or no schooling and millions go without good health care, etc.

It won't happen. At least, it won't happen anytime soon but we need to cut defense spending deeply and across the board. We--and the world--need to transfer over to a world of taking care of one another, instead of worrying about some big, ugly "bogeyman" that doesn't exist, by the way, and that may "take us over."

We, the people, need to push for this. We all need to get educated on why and how this should happen. And then we need to make it happen as soon as possible.

Here's hoping.

Links: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Bill_of_Rights

The fact is, it transcends time and nature

Click on picture for larger, better viewing:

I think it's over too many people's heads or comprehension but actually, same-sex attraction--and that's all it is--goes back to the dawn of humankind and is also in nature. Scientists have found over 400 species that exhibit this trait.

So just deal with it, folks.

Move on. There's nothing to see here.

And nothing to over-react to.

The "agenda" is merely equal rights

"On June 12, 2007, Mildred Loving issued a statement on the 40th anniversary of the Loving v. Virginia Supreme Court decision, declaring that different races have the right, the equality, to marry in America. Her statement concluded: 'My generation was bitterly divided over something that should have been so clear and right. The majority believed that what the judge said, that it was God's plan to keep people apart, and that government should discriminate against people in love. But I have lived long enough now to see big changes. The older generation's fears and prejudices have given way, and today's young people realize that if someone loves someone, they have a right to marry. Surrounded as I am now by wonderful children and grandchildren, not a day goes by that I don’t think of Richard and our love, our right to marry, and how much it meant to me to have that freedom to marry the person precious to me, even if others thought he was the 'wrong kind of person' for me to marry. I believe all Americans, no matter their race, no matter their sex, no matter their sexual orientation, should have that same freedom to marry. Government has no business imposing some people’s religious beliefs over others. Especially if it denies people's civil rights. I am still not a political person, but I am proud that Richard's and my name is on a court case that can help reinforce the love, the commitment, the fairness, and the family that so many people, black or white, young or old, gay or straight, seek in life. I support the freedom to marry for all. That’s what Loving, and loving, are all about.'

"Know your rights"

"Separate but equal" is not equal

On this day in history: The First Amendment. Remember that?

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." First Amendment in the Bill of Rights created September 25, 1789 and ratified December 15, 1791.

The ACLU vs. KCMO: Are you kidding me?

After reading the fine print in the Kansas City Star yesterday, I see I overlooked that "the local chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union said a court challenge was likely" regarding a possible curfew on the Country Club Plaza, because of the shootings. Right up front, I'll tell you, I am usually always (but not always) a supporter of the ACLU and their fight for our basic rights. On this matter, however, I have to say I come down squarely agin' 'em. I mean, come on, what's more important here, teenagers rights or their lives? If it's either letting them wander free in the city so they have their "rights" or letting them get shot at, I think I'm absolutely having them get off the streets after 9 pm rather than possibly being targets for some idiot with a gun. And it's not as though the ACLU hasn't got plenty of other, far more important and bigger issues on their collective plate, either. If they want or need something to "go after", then let them pick apart all the parts and wrongs they can of the "Patriot Act", let alone all the other goofy, probing, prodding the Right Wing of the country keeps coming up with to get into our private lives, in spite of their calls for "small" and "non-intrusive" government. If the ACLU goes ahead with this and files suit, then I say we demand they fly in everyone they can on their staff and everyone else they need, so they can guard and protect people, every weekend, ad infinitum, so everyone's safe--children, adults and otherwise. If they can't or won't do that, then I suggest they butt out and file no such lawsuit. But thanks, anyway, ACLU. Link: http://www.kansascity.com/2011/08/15/3078819/curfew-option-has-kcs-attention.html

On Bradley Manning and justice in the US

You know who Bradley Manning is, right?

He's the Army Pfc who leaked the government documents to Wikileaks about what all our government has been doing abroad that created such an uproar some months ago?  Remember?

Well, he's been arrested and thrown in jail (prison?) and he's being charged--with 22 counts as I understand it and it's said he may face the death penalty.

Sure, corporate banksters can steal billions of dollars from the country and not even get charged but this young guy leaks some easily-accessed government files and all of a sudden we get all self-righteous and want to kill somebody.

Anyway, news is out now that we are--no kidding--being told that his military jailers forced him to "sleep naked for several days last week."

Excuse me?

Why?

Is this the United States of freaking America where we treat people humanely or not?

First it was Abu Graib and the inhuman treatment we put those people through and now this?

Who are we as a country, anyway?

Who are we as a people?

Do we really believe and stand for what we used to think we stand for anymore?

I'd love to know.

And I'd love to know that we still stand for all that good stuff, too.

Remember?

All the "innocent until proven guilty" and the right of Habeus Corpus and human rights and "equal justice under the law" for everyone and everything like that?

Could we get back to that now?

Please?

Because we'd like our country back.

Links:  http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/03/11/AR2011031106542.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/mar/03/bradley-manning-may-face-death-penalty
http://www.google.com/#sclient=psy&hl=en&site=&source=hp&q=bradley+manning+news&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=98286c98e5a0f890

I just got this in an email

And what kills me about this is 1) that one guy in here sings "my creed is equality" which is all well and good but I hope he doesn't think we have that yet, here in the "Land of the Free" and 2) I dearly, dearly wish we could all separate church and state, once and for all.

What is so hard about that?

Conservatives talk about small government but then want to throw in their Bible, into the mix. To wit: "my Bible and my Bill of Rights", they sing.

Oh, really?

I wonder if everyone knows there is an organization whose sole purpose is to support the Bill of Rights and they get heck all the time, for people wanting to go against them.

Know who it is?

The ACLU.

And don't get me started on "Faith-based Initiatives".

It makes sense. It's simple:

Government out of religion; religion out of government.

It should be a Conservative mantra.

If only we could have it.