There is a lot going on right now with all the subjects I like to write about: Occupy LA is getting evicted (probably tonight) to make way for a movie shoot (starring Sean Penn, ironically). CitiBank’s deal with the SEC to protect them from fault in the MBS mess was overturned by a New York judge. SOPA and PIPA are threatening the free space of the internet for the sake of protecting intellectual property laws conceived in the 19th century. But I wanted to point out some good news that I […]
We Don’t Need a Leader, But We Need Something When the General Assembly in Woodruff Park in Atlanta declined to allow John Lewis, famed civil rights activist and sitting U.S. Congressman to deliver a few words of encouragement, I believe this movement made a curious and possibly detrimental turn toward the irrelevant. The reason for this is straightforward: I do not believe you can assault our broken democracy and our broken economic system simultaneously. By rejecting elected and aspiring representatives of the people from engaging in this movement and taking its message to city halls, state houses, and the impotent galleries of the U.S. Congress, there is a chance we could doom this protest to the alternate fates of destructive riots or perpetual but inconsequential unrest. <much more below the fold>
We’ve all been inundated by reports surrounding the release of thousands of U.S. diplomatic cables by the whistle-blower site WikiLeaks. And while there is a fun and fierce debate going on about the value and/or criminality of this kind of forced-transparency, I’d like to talk about something else: What the fuck?
I recently had a conversation with some friends about the inevitable future of this country: demography shows that by 2050 white Americans will finally become a minority, just like everybody else. While the opinion is generally that nothing will change (at least not for the people who are already minorities) I have a creeping fear of what it will mean for politics in the country, and how the discourse around entitlement, race, and national identity will change.
In a radio interview that I linked to yesterday, Bryan Fischer of the American Family Association said something that got me thinking. He said “[…] we believe sanctity of life has got to be central to any genuinely conservative movement, belief in a creator and to defending natural marriage and resisting homosexual agenda.” (emphasis added) Now, obviously his insistence that our country’s military should be weakened by discrimination against gays is deplorable, and his denial of the validity of their relationships and families is equally shameful. But his belief that viable human embryos deserve the same right to life that a full-born human enjoys is one that I can respectfully disagree with. I am also on the fortunate side of this debate because of a certain SCOTUS decision that protects women from government intrusion into their medical treatment. But what if the opposite were true? What if a future US Congress, led by so-called “Right to Lifers” were to pass a Constitutional amendment protecting the ‘sanctity of life’?