Archive for the ‘ Controversy ’ Category

ET Phone Home!

Today is Extraterrestrial Abductions Day.

Yeah, I was surprised too.

There really is a day for this which proves to me that we are desperate for reasons to party!

A relatively new holiday, it origins are unclear, but I’m sure weed, peyote, and gin were involved.

It stems from a 2008 Toronto celebration called Alien Abduction Day.

Oh Canada!

Seems Alien is a non-PC word, so Extraterrestrial it is!

The celebration can take many forms, but don’t look for any marches or pink hats.

Tin foil maybe, pink no.

Folks generally sit out in the yard waiting and wishing to be abducted by aliens.

Hey, it’s a reason to party, and it’s Monday, so bring on the tin foil and phone home ET!

Today is my 2,500th post, I know, I know, it should have been more monumental.

Have a great Monday.

Danger: Opinion Ahead

You may want to look away.  I’m medicated, messed UP, and mad!

And before I go further, really, the twitter thing needs to stop, it won’t but it needs to.

The President started a twitter war with Snoop Dogg.

Which is ridiculous.

Snoop don’t care!

His fight with Snoop was bad enough, but of course got worse when  his “nephew”, Lil Bow Wow chimed in with this.

““Ayo @realDonaldTrump shut your punk a*s up talking sh*t about my uncle@SnoopDogg before we pimp your wife and make her work for us.”

He essentially threatened to enslave her sexually.

What?  Has he joined ISIS?

Melania Trump deserves the same respect as any other First Lady, and threatening her in such a way is despicable if not felonious.

It’s since been deleted.

My question is where’s the outrage?

No one is talking about this.

Where’s Madonna, Whoopi, Cher, and where in the world is Samantha Bee? Where’s Meryl?

If this had been any FLOTUS from Mamie to Michelle, the women’s movement would be on this like Oprah on a Honey Baked ham!

But, alas, there’s not one pink hat in sight!

Yes, I know, you can pick your battles, but the battles you pick reveal the real you.


And don’t start with me on “she posed nude,” that doesn’t play into it., it makes her a model, not a hooker, and if it makes her a hooker, well, Madonna, Cindy Crawford,

And, you might want to check your own cel phone before you start that stuff!

Much Ado About Something

It really is a big deal, all this talk about religious liberty.

Yeah, yeah, I know, we don’t talk about it all that much from time to time, but it’s been in the news lately even if we aren’t calling it by name.

So, you might ask, “Why today?”

Well, back in 1672, on March 15, King Charles II of England issued a Royal Declaration of Indulgence.  It was his attempt to extend religious liberty to Protestant non-conformist and Roman Catholics in his dominions worldwide by suspending the penal laws that punished “recusants” (those who refused to attend Anglican services) from the Church of England.

Prior to this ill-fated declaration, England had undergone religious turmoil since the days of Henry VIII’s divorce from Rome and his Catholic wife, Catherine of Aragon.

The British Isles had been fighting religious wars on one side or another during the last part of Henry’s reign, his son’s reign, and the reigns of his daughters, Catholic Mary and Protestant Elizabeth.  And at the time of the declaration, not only were the Catholics in hot water, the Protestants within the protestant Church of England were too.

Rules were rules, and they’d for darn sure better not be broken!

The Stuarts (Charles II’s granddad, James I) took over when Liz died.  They were in reality, Catholics posing as Scottish Presbyterians posing as Anglicans.  Charles II’s mom was so Catholic she refused to be crowned in an Anglican ceremony and was never really queen.

Of course, all of Europe was in religious upheaval at the same time as the Protestant Reformation had been going on for years.  The Eastern World had never known religious freedom.  In the Middle East and beyond, it was the religion of the current war-lord that was en vogue.

In the United States, we’ve never had to deal with this stuff.

Sure, sure, some of our first “citizens” landed on our sunny shores for religious freedom, but most of them brought their beliefs from back home and most of them were about as tolerant as an Ayatollah.

That all changed with folks like George Washington, James Madison, Roger Williams and such.

As a matter of fact, George didn’t become a popular name in Jewish communities until George Washington went into a synagogue in New York City and promised the congregation not only religious tolerance, but religious freedom.

But back to Charles II and his Royal Declaration of Indulgence.

It was highly controversial, as most religious decrees are.  Sir Orlando Bridgeman resigned as Lord Keeper of the Great Seal and refused to apply the Great Seal of England to it.

Orlando thought it was too generous to Catholics.

See, Catholics in England couldn’t enter public service, lost lands, estates, and power, and this was Charles’, who was decidedly and not-so secretly Catholic, attempt to restore much of that.

It was a big deal.

Charles’ parliament, known as the Cavalier Parliament, forced Charles in 1673 to withdraw the declaration and in is place, impose the Test Acts.

They required anyone going into public service (lords, barons, earls, dukes, sheriffs, dog catchers) to deny the Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation and take communion at the local Anglican church.

To Catholics, then and now, transubstantiation is pretty important.

But with the Test Act, they had to place their hand on the Bible and say “I (state your name) do declare that I do believe that there is not any transubstantiation in the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper, or in the elements of the bread and wine, at or after the consecration thereof by any person whatsoever.”

If they didn’t, they couldn’t be employed.

If they did, their church taught they were bound for an eternity of torment.

At the onset, the Test Acts didn’t include the peers (lords, dukes, etc.) but they were included in the Protestant only play in 1678 which required all peers and members of the House of Commons to take the oath as well.

It went further and required them to declare against the invocation of saints, the sacrament of Mass, and of course, transubstantiation, effectively excluding Catholics from both houses.

This was in no way religious liberty, religious tolerance, or religious freedom.

It wasn’t until 1828 when the “necessity of receiving the sacrament” as a qualification for office was repealed.

Sir Robert Peel’s Catholic Relief Act of 1829 cleared that UP.

So, again, you might ask why.

Well, it’s my blog, religious freedom is important to me – not just my religious freedom, but yours too –  and the guy down the street whom I’ve never met, for that matter.

So today, when you pray, or chant, or meditate, or go to mass, or vespers, remember, this religious freedom thing, it’s not just a conversation, it’s a right, and a right many fought and died for you to have.


Love In The Time Of Segregation

People often say,’Love is blind,” but there are times when love actually opens our eyes.

Julius Waties Waring was one of those men who had his eyes opened because of the love of a woman.

Julius Waties Waring, a US Federal Judge was instrumental in early legal struggles of the American Civil Rights Movement.

A native of Charleston, South Carolina, he married his first wife in 1913.  He became an assistant US Attorney and the lead counsel for the city of Charleston after which he co-founded a law firm.

Things were looking UP.

He was a Federal Judge from 1942 to 1952 and presided over several civil rights cases.  He had been nominated to the bench by FDR.

Initially, Charlestonians supported their home grown jurist, but when he warped from a moderate to a proponent of radical change, well, things got tough.

He said, “The cancer of segregation will never be cured by the sedative of gradualism.” Stuff like that wasn’t so popular in Jim Crow South Carolina.

Spending the first 60 years of his life as a scion of the city, his status changed when he divorced his wife and married Elizabeth Avery, a twice divorced Detroit native!

He ended segregated seating in his courtroom and appointed John Fleming, a black man, as his bailiff.

People started shunning him and his poor wife wasn’t invited to any teas.

And the Cotillion was just O.U.T!

He was one of three judges to hear a school desegregation test case.  Briggs v. Elliott pitted Thurgood Marshall against the Clarendon County South Carolina public schools which Marshall described as separate but not at all equal.

Marshall lost, but in his dissent, Waring stated, “Segregation is per se inequality.”  The statement formed the legal foundation of Brown v. Board of Education which would come in 1954.

His lovely bride took the heat.  The label of Yankee aside, she was disliked as she was considered the radical influence that had turned Waties Waring from a questioner of status quo to a radical outspoken critic of segregation and a champion for racial justice.

Though they can’t take all the credit, “separate but equal” was eventually declared unconstitutional due in part to this couple’s influence.

But, again, Charlestonians didn’t approve.

Eventually the couple moved to New York.