The Catholic Church doesn’t have Human Rights

February 5, 2013

The Catholic Church does not have Human Rights. Individual Catholics have Human Rights! The Catholic Church’s persistence in attempting to influence the political course of the United States reminds me the latest bogey man in America, the drive for Sharia Law in Muslim countries. What is the substantive difference between Islamist extremists attempting to force their religious views on others and the positions being foisted upon Americans regardless of their religious views? This smells like an “established” religion to me. It has been established that a significant number of Catholics disagree with their Church’s position on birth control. So, granting their religion’s hierarchy their wish in reality denies any Catholic with a dissenting view their Human Right to decide for themself.

For me, this is a logical extension of the argument that corporations are people. Of course they are not.

Human beings have Human Rights.

I recognize this is a very difficult concept for most Americans to grasp. For most of the history of the United States, the dedicated effort has been the denial of Human Rights. So, arguing in their behalf, will be an uphill fight. However, the basis of my argument is, human beings have Human Rights. Organizations, corporations, religious organizations, etc. do not. The government must not kowtow to any entity which denies the full participation in Human Rights by an individual citizen.

Why I don’t celebrate the 4th of July

July 4, 2012

Another 4th of July to endure platitudes about the founding of the United States. No speaker will note it is an anniversary of the founding of a slave state. There will be talk about democracy. And, absolutely no mention of the slave trade so important to the economy. Establishing a norm in this country which places Human Rights secondary to economic privilege. No talk of the degradation of one race by the founding fathers and the planned elimination of another race of people. There will be statements that the founding was ordained by god. I hope that god is dead. Any god that would ordain such abominations should be banned from the hall of gods.  Two centuries of deprivation, struggle, and degradation, initiated by the failures of the founders, will be ignored.

There is a good and logical reason that Human Rights progress in the United States is so difficult. If your founding was so perfect, why change. If your founders were so accurate in their assessments, there is no reason to change anything. If god ordained what was created, it must be the devil attempting to make changes.

I’m an enemy of whatever god that ordained the circumstances of the founding of the United States. My belief in the human dignity of all Mankind is uncompromising. That is not a principal endorsed by the founders of the United States. And, a blanket celebration of their handiwork without pointing out the fatal flaws in their product, is support for their premises.

The Elders’ New year message

January 20, 2010

“Native Wisdom for White Minds”

November 7, 2009
"Native Wisdom for White Minds"

About fifteen years ago, a dear friend shared with me her morning meditation routine. Part of her
daily ritual was reading from a daily meditation book, "Native Wisdom for White Minds", by Anne
Wilson Schaef. I fell in love with the wisdom of the native peoples represented in the book. Perhaps,
because their wisdom so represented opinions and views I shared. The reading for October 30th
in particular hit a responsive chord in me as I try to understand more fully the objections to a single
pool of the American people for health care. The daily reading follows:

The welfare of the people was what was important. In ceremonies held early in their lives, children
were taught to think of what was best for the tribe as a whole. being selfish or thinking only of oneself
was unheard of.
-Aboriginal Wisdom

In Western culture, we seem to have set up a dualism: I do what is good for the community/ I have
to deny myself.
 Native people do not operate out of that dualism. Native children from very early on are taught to think
beyond themselves, to see themselves as an integral part of an ever-expanding whole in which they
are active participants. Their worldview moves them from the individual to the community to the whole.
 Our Western reductionist scientific worldview moves us into smaller and smaller circles of self-

Can it be that what is best for the community, for the whole, is indeed what is best for me?"

Powerful stuff! At least for me.
Since its founding, the welfare of humans has been, at best, secondary to economic interests, in
America. The tragedy, of course, is that so many of her citizens are so enamored with the culture of
self that they don’t recognize how self defeating it is in the end.
It continues to amaze me that while the US continues to spend more than the rest of the world
combined to wage war, that reality has played no part in the discussion about paying for health care
for all Americans.
Can it truly be that what is best for the community, the nation, is indeed what is best for me?
Apparently not, for a considerable number of Americans.
Perhaps, rather than "nation building" elsewhere, there should be some nation building in the USA.

Talking about Playing for Change

September 6, 2009


August 4, 2009
I find the current furor over several Americans being arrested by countries
protecting their borders, interesting, to say the least.
A significant
portion of Americans are shouting loudly to protect America’s borders. Yet, when
other countries actually do that for their borders, there’s a howl about
Another example of American exceptionalism?
America spends
more on arms than the rest of the world combined. Yet, feel unsafe. To the
extent that they threaten war when others legitimately want to protect
themselves against America.
I imagine there some sick rationale for some of
But, it escapes me.
Perhaps, America should try being a part of the
world rather than trying to lead it.

A wise latina woman

July 15, 2009

I’m having a very difficult time grasping the reason for the negative reaction to Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor’s comment about white men. Why should she have to either apologize or explain such an obviously true comment? How did this country get into the shape it currently experiences? I doubt a wise latina would have denied the humanity of black people for so many years. Or sat quietly by as domestic terrorism cost the lives of thousands of innocent black people. The inherent flaws of the Constitution of the United States, written by white men for white men, would have been pointed out and addressed by an activist latina jurist looking for support from her fellow jurists who just happened to be recipients of affirmative action for white males.

Senator Lindsey Graham’s comment during the confirmation hearing comparing a white male making a similar comment was ridiculous on its face. To hear white southern senators(I’m including Jeff Sessions), whose presence in the senate is a result of race politics is the height of tragedy.

This tempest in a teapot is the essence of political correctness. What one is expected to do is erase the majority of the history of both the United States and the Supreme Court. Well, I won’t forget. And, though progress has been made, I’ll not pay homage to the memory of an America which has never existed.




Terrorism works: Tiller clinic closes

June 11, 2009
From Salon Newsletter, June 10, 2009

A lesson in the effectiveness of terrorism: Dr. George Tiller’s Kansas clinic is closing permanently according to his family’s lawyers. In a statement Tuesday, the family said: "We are proud of the service and courage shown by our husband and father and know that women’s health care needs have been met because of his dedication and service." They will continue to honor his memory "through private charitable activities" — in other words, the type of activism that is less likely to get a person killed.
It’s an entirely understandable response. It’s also the exact one aimed for by extremists. Intimidation, harassment, threats and violence are the name of the game, and without a resolve on the part of the government and law enforcement to show that domestic terrorism doesn’t work, it’ll keep working. And is it ever: The Wichita area is now left with zero abortion providers, and the entire country has but two clinics that provide late-term abortions.
― Tracy Clark-Flory

Any one familiar with America’s proficiency in domestic terrorism recognizes the long tradition of this tactic to promote compliance and engender fear. In the past, the terrorists were willing to publicize their acts of terror on penny post cards. No fear of repercussions from legal authorities. Later, proudly allowing their faces to grace newspapers as the victims of their handiwork of lynching and burning lay nearby. It took bravery for black folk to confront over 100 years of domestic terrorism, intimidation, and organized denial of Human Rights. How long will the current terrorists hold sway with the tacit complicity of the so-called Christian Right?

Tyranny of the majority

May 28, 2009

As flawed as the Constitution was when written, one must grant the genius

of the founders with the tripartite concept of governance. Although peopled

with individuals with the same biases and prejudices as generally held by the

founders, the judicial branch of government has slowly, and continues to

evolve, as the protector of innate rights never assumed by the founders.

Every so often, the spirit of the words of the Declaration of Independence,

rather than the political document, the Constitution, wins the day. I eagerly

await the California Proposition 8 fight to be heard by the Supreme Court. It

is again time for Americans to be confronted with the reality that a majority

vote doesn’t validate the denial of the Human Rights referred to in the Declaration

of Independence. America has a long history of relegating to the opinion of

the majority the legitimacy of Human Rights claims. The Court has long been

complicit in that fallacious scheme. The Court MUST again confront the majority

with the reality that their opinion has no weight in determining the Human Rights

of others.


May 22, 2009

During the presidential election, I heeded the call of one of the

progressive groups I associate myself with and volunteered to work

at the polls for the election. My county election board had no need

for workers for the election. There was a glut of individuals willing

to "work for change".

Fast forward to the primary election just completed on 21 May 2009.

Let me begin my remarks with a personal assessment of the

significance of primary elections. If there is a chance for fundamental

change in the governance of the country, it will come as a result of

citizens actively engaging in the electoral process at the ground level.

Electing people at the municipal, county, state, and national levels

who represent their opinions about the direction of the country. The

newly elected president made it clear that the change he was talking

about requires a major change in the behaviors of the citizens of the

country. Taking ownership of the process which is a hallmark of

representative government.

People who stand for change must stand for office. People who

want change must come out to vote for those individuals. Otherwise,

as the political professionals already know, there will be no change.

I received a call in January that the county election board wanted my

services for the primary election in May because they had lost a

significant number of the individuals who volunteer their services for

elections. I accepted the responsibility of "judge of election" for my

precinct. The county professionals stated, in spite of the excitement,

energy, and interest generated during the presidential election, that

the turnout for this election would be less than 20% of eligible voters.

All the talk about taking on the responsibilities of citizenship from the

last election have been forgotten. It’s far easier to continue to complain

about those who are elected than taking on the responsibility of voting

them out of office during a primary election.

So, with a team of 3 other citizen volunteers in a precinct of 1870

registered voters, we counted the votes of 170 voters who actually

came out to vote. A local candidate who challenged the status quo

mirroring the message of the new president, lost. His opponent’s

only concern during the day was, "what’s the turnout".

The poll workers and I spent 16 hours working for our precinct and a

less than 10% turnout. We worked with less than a full complement

of poll workers because the professionals had it right. The citizens

of this small town returned to business as usual after the presidential

election. There will be little, if any, change because they will not change

what they do. The newly elected president has lost his "army for change".

Soon, they will be complaining that the change he promised to bring

about isn’t happening. And, they will do it with no recognition of their

failure to accept personal responsibility for their future.


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.