Category: government

One-Liner Wednesday: Women’s Equality Day (USA)

“As we celebrate the last 95 years of progress in advancing women’s rights, let us rededicate ourselves to the idea that our nation is not yet complete: there is still work to do to secure the blessings of our country for every American daughter.”
– President Barack Obama, from the declaration of today, August 26, 2015, as Women’s Equality Day in the United States, in recognition of the adoption of the 19th Amendment to the US Constitution, barring sex discrimination in voting rights.

This post is part of Linda’s One-LIner Wednesdays. Join us! Find out how here:

Hope for the climate

This week, the Islamic Declaration on Global Climate Change was announced, calling for Muslims around the world to phase out use of fossil fuels and switch to renewable forms of energy.

This follows on the heels of the June release of Laudato Si’, the encyclical issued by Pope Francis on the environment, climate change, and care of creation, including humanity. The encyclical draws deeply not only on climate science but also on the tenets of peace, love, mercy, caring, and justice that underlie many different world religions and philosophies. Francis intended this document for the world’s Catholics and “all people of good will” whether or not they follow a religious/spiritual practice.

Faith leaders from other spiritual and religious traditions, including the Dalai Lama, have also voiced their concerns on combatting climate change and environmental degradation.  The People’s Climate March on September 21, 2014 brought people from all corners of the globe together in solidarity to demand action on measures to reign in the greenhouse gases that are already wreaking havoc on our climate and people’s lives.  Various governments have made pledges to cut emissions and convert to renewable energy sources, all as a lead-up to the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Paris, November 30-December 11, 2015.

Past conferences have been disappointing, as countries could not demonstrate the political will needed for the huge change in energy systems required, but, this time, finally, there is hope, due in large measure to the diverse voices demanding or pleading for change.

I have spent years in the grassroots movement to ban high volume hydrofracking in New York State, which drew me into the fight against fracking in other states, as well as promoting the rapid expansion of renewable energy in order to stop using fossil fuels as soon as possible.  This led me to not only being involved in the climate movement but also to being more open to expressing calls for climate justice, environmental justice, and social justice in keeping with my Catholic faith.

There were many times when I thought we had lost the fight against fracking here in New York (and we are still involved in some issues with it, despite the current regulatory situation). There were even times when I had no hope left, but we did ultimately prevail.

There have been times when I had no hope that meaningful action against global climate change would materialize, but, seeing so many disparate groups of people come together to demand climate action gives me hope.

The years of inaction have put us in a precarious situation. Demand climate action now! Contact the government agency in your country and tell them they must reach an effective accord in Paris.

The world can’t afford to wait.

public vs private

I heard a radio story today about a Kentucky county clerk who is in court for failing to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, citing a religious exemption because her personal religious belief is that same-sex marriage is prohibited.

Her belief is protected by the US Constitution. The recent Supreme Court decision made abundantly clear that no religion or religious officiants would ever be required to preside over a wedding which violated their religious beliefs.

However, in the public sphere, marriage between two consenting adults, regardless of gender, is legal. So, in dealing with the public, the law is the determining factor. The religious belief of a clerk, justice of the peace, or judge should not be allowed to interfere with a lawful action by a member of the public. If it does, it violates the establishment clause which says that the state is not allowed to establish an official religion.

There are lots of instances where people of faith take actions in dealing with the public that may go against their personal tenets. For example, a Catholic judge may perform a civil wedding ceremony for a person who is a divorced Catholic who has not obtained an annulment from the church. A Catholic priest would not perform a sacramental marriage in that case, but a Catholic judge is not faulted in any way for fulfilling the civil duty of his/her office in performing a civil wedding.

The same reasoning extends to other public endeavors. A Morman server in a restaurant may serve alcohol or caffeine to restaurant patrons, even though the LDS church does not allow its members to consume them. A Jewish server can bring a customer a pork chop or shellfish, even though s/he may believe they are forbidden foods.

The bottom line is this:  One may believe in whatever religion to which one is called and practice that religion freely. However, one may not impose this belief on another member of the public.

340 US rabbis: ‘We support this historic nuclear accord’ | National Catholic Reporter

In this post, I expressed my support for the nuclear deal with Iran. I so appreciate these rabbis from the United States expressing their support, especially after the announcement by one of my US Senators, Charles Schumer, that he would oppose the deal. I hope the support of these rabbis will help him to change his mind.

340 US rabbis: ‘We support this historic nuclear accord’ | National Catholic Reporter.

Iran

Earlier this month, after long negotiations, a deal was announced between Iran and a group of six nuclear powers to exchange lifting of international economic sanctions against Iran in return for Iran’s abandoning all attempts to enrich uranium anywhere close to weapons grade.

This news was met with celebration in Iran, where the populace has been dealing with a crippled economy. Many people are looking forward to being able to get better jobs and better access to goods and services that many of us take for granted.

While not celebrating in the streets, I and many other folks in the US are happy that an agreement was reached and hope that the US Congress will lend their support. Frankly, if they don’t, all it will do is make the United States look unreliable. The international sanctions will be lifted even if US ones imposed by Congress stay in place, while, worse yet, the Iran nuclear program would once again be free of international inspection and constraint.

I trust that the US’s lead negotiator, Secretary of State John Kerry, has reached a deal that is verifiable and will keep Iran from developing a nuclear weapon. I am grateful that the team also included Secretary of Energy Dr. Ernest Moniz, who is an MIT nuclear physicist. It is hard to imagine a better person to have in the room during negotiations on this topic. When he says that the Iranians could not clean a site of nuclear materials during the time that the agreement allows them to delay on inspection, I believe him. He definitely knows how to detect nuclear particles, even in tiny amounts.

I am old enough to remember Iran before the revolution that brought about the Islamic Republic. As a child, I remember hearing about the Shah of Iran and thinking of the country as a friend and ally of the US. Knowing that it had once been Persia, it also seemed very exotic to a small town New England girl. I did not know until much later the shenanigans that the US had pulled to overturn the democratically elected government and place the Shah in power.

When the revolution came in 1979, I was in my first year at Smith. It happened that a woman living in my house was the daughter of an Iranian diplomat. It was heart-wrenching to see her lose her homeland and see her fear for her family’s safety. Fortunately, they were able to escape the country unharmed.

In the following decades, it seems that many of the Iranian people have remained friendly toward Westerners, even though the government was not.  I hope that this agreement will help promote diplomacy over war and continue on the path toward nuclear disarmament.

SNAP

Dear Members of Congress,

I made a trip to our local farmers’ market this morning to choose among the amazing summertime bounty of fruits and vegetables from the NY/PA border region.

I was pleased to see the market so crowded and gratified to see that the vendors accepted SNAP benefit vouchers from shoppers. The people that I saw using vouchers this morning were retirement age women, but I know that there are also younger adults and families in our area who use SNAP benefits, even though household members have jobs.

I call on you to expand food benefits programs such as SNAP and WIC so that everyone in the USA has access to all the food they need to maintain or improve their health.

I also call on you to ensure that employers pay their employees a living wage, so that they don’t need to rely on government programs for basic necessities.

Both are ways to “promote the general welfare” as you are called to do by our Constitution.

Sincerely,
Joanne Corey

separation of powers

Any presidential candidate who claims s/he will ignore the recent Supreme Court decisions on marriage equality and/or the Affordable Care Act has obviously not thoroughly read the Constitution and does not understand that the judiciary is an independent branch of government over which the executive branch does not have precedence.

Such a person has no business running for president and should withdraw immediately.

President Obama’s eulogy for Rev. Pinckney

The link below is to the inspiring eulogy that President Barack Obama gave today at the memorial service for Rev. Clementa Pinckney, who was killed last week at his church, Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal in Charleston, South Carolina. Our challenge in this country is to live up to our president’s words.

https://youtu.be/GNcGW2LYtvg?t=1h22m23s

The US Supreme Court

Question; Which will better stand the test of time – Justice Kagan’s references to Spiderman in the majority patent case decision or Justice Scalia’s use of the word “jiggery-pokery” in the dissent from the health care subsidy case?

Please weigh in the comments!

(Bonus question:  Can you tell how punchy I am right now?)

Charleston

One thing that being six hours away from my usual time zone has done is disrupt my accustomed television news watching habits, so I have not seen as much coverage of the horrific mass murder at Mother Emanuel Church as I would have, but I feel compelled to offer some thoughts about it.

First, I continue to send my thoughts and prayers out for the loved ones of those who were killed and for Mother Emanuel.  Their prayerful response in the face of such unspeakable loss has been amazing. I also love that other faith communities and the people of Charleston have been so supportive and have encircled them with love and assistance.

I was heartened to see so many stories about the lives of the wonderful people who were killed. Those who attend weekday services or study groups tend to be the core of the faith community, as you see exemplified here – ministers, long-time volunteers and staff, multi-generational church families.  In hearing the stories of the nine lives lost, my mind goes to the members at the heart of faith communities that I have known. The loss to Mother Emanuel is profound, yet they act with profound grace.

I have also appreciated seeing so much about the history of Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church, the oldest AME church in the south which has already overcome numerous horrors inflicted on it by racism.

One point of controversy in the media seems to be what to call the shootings. Mass murder – definitely. It also is clear that the gunman was motivated by racism against African-Americans. In most states, it would be classified as a hate crime, but South Carolina has no such category in their statutes. I think a case can also be made for calling it domestic terrorism, as it was designed to make black people fearful for their safety. Some people seem to think that this should be named as only one thing, but I don’t have a problem with calling it a mass murder, a racist hate crime, and domestic terrorism. All those labels seem to fit.

The label that does not fit is anti-Christian. The gunman did not kill these people at a Bible study because they were Christian, only because they were black. He traveled by many other Christian churches to get to Mother Emanuel. Because it is a storied black congregation, which, due to its long history of standing for justice, is accustomed to welcoming those of all races and nationalities, he was welcomed to participate in the service and Bible study. Reportedly, their exemplary Christian behavior almost convinced the young man to spare their lives; that he did still follow through on his plan to kill them makes the crime even more incomprehensible to me.

The other point of controversy is the Confederate battle flag which flies on the grounds of the South Carolina State Capitol where Rev. Pinckney, who was also a state senator, lay in state. While there will be a vote to remove it permanently, the legislature did not have time to vote on Governor Haley’s proposal to remove it before his coffin was brought to the statehouse. There has, however, been a great deal of movement against selling and displaying the Confederate battle flag in the last week with several major retailers removing the flag and apparel featuring it from their stores and websites. The flag has been used to intimidate black Americans for decades and I hope that it will now finally fade from view.

I wish I could say that this mass murder would finally spur the US Congress to enact better gun control laws in the United States, but they have failed to act after so many others that I doubt this additional massacre will motivate them.  No other developed country is so dangerous – or so heavily armed. Those two things go together.