On Friday the Supreme Court announced it would, once and for all, decide two important questions when it comes to gay marriage.  First, are state required to issue marriage licences to same-sex couples and second, do states that don’t give licences to same-sex couples have to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states.  The Supreme Court is hearing the cases from Michigan, Ohio, Kentucky, and Tennessee.  The oral arguments will be heard in April, with a decision being made before court goes into recess in June.

These are the basic questions when it comes to same-sex marriage, does a state have to grant you a licence to marry, and do other states have to recognize your right to marry.

With the make up of the current court, I feel as though the court will say that other states must recognize same-sex marriage license in all states.  I don’t know if the court will say that all states must give marriage licences to same-sex couples.

Article IV section 1 of the US Constitution says:

“Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state. And the Congress may by general laws prescribe the manner in which such acts, records, and proceedings shall be proved, and the effect thereof.”

So under the full faith and credit clause, all the marriages should be recognized state to state as legal and valid.  I hope that the  court will be willing to do what is fair.  Because voting on equality makes no sense to me.

I was reading an article on the Hill today Jeb:  Show Respect in Gay Marriage Debate  and I became very confused by the end of it.   On Tuesday the ban on same-sex marriage will be lifted in Florida.  When asked about this Jeb Bush, former governor of Florida, stated on Monday, “We live in a democracy, and regardless of our disagreements, we have to respect the rule of law, I hope that we can also show respect for the good people on all sides of the gay and lesbian marriage issue — including couples making lifetime commitments to each other who are seeking greater legal protections and those of us who believe marriage is a sacrament and want to safeguard religious liberty.”  Many Conservatives I know believe the issue of same-sex marriage should be a state issue, and in turn this is an acceptable and fair statement to make.   J. Bush has even stated previously that he believes that same-sex marriage is a state issue. And some see his statement as, wobbling, or flip-flopping on that.  I disagree.  He seems to be saying that all branches of the government should be respected.

The truth is J. Bush’s statement should be taken as a victory.  A leader in the conservative party is telling conservatives that they should respect the law of the land and the people who are given rights by it (I wonder if Jeb would make the same statement if talking about abortion rights?).  The truth is there is always going to be racism, sexism, bigotry, and all the other hate words that I can’t even think of at the moment, and isn’t respect the right direction?

Mo Elleithee, DNC communication director hammers J. Bush for his statement saying, “It took Jeb Bush 69 words to say absolutely nothing — 69 words not to say, ‘I support marriage equality.’ Nothing’s changed.  At the end of Bush’s statement, he still had the same position: he opposes the right of gay and lesbian Floridians — and all LGBT Americans — to get married and adopt children.”

I think Mr. Elleithee is wrong, J. Bush’s statement is more powerful that he thinks.  We live in a Democracy, and we don’t have to agree with each other, thank goodness, but we should all respect each other and the rule of law.  Bush’s statement doesn’t need to say that he agrees with gay marriage, it says something more important, it says that the people who are entering into a life long commitment should be respected.

If J. Bush had made the same statement in the last election there would be no way that he would still be considered a front-runner.  I recently read an article where Kid Rock, a noted Republican, stated that he is fiscally conservative but socially doesn’t really care, as long as it doesn’t affect him.   I think that if the Republican party really wants a real shot at making change in this country that is where they should be looking.  For too long the media and Congress has been too worried about what’s been going on in my bedroom and vagina, maybe they should be worrying about things that I can’t take care of for myself.

The Interview is the new hot button movie.  Causing an international incident between America and North Korea, with the same sort of hacking and spying that one would expect in a mission impossible novel.  All this coming from the creators of Pineapple Express and Knocked Up.  Why would this be, what nerve could this film have that would make Kim Jong-un and his leadership so angry?

First of all, I think one must put politics into perspective.  North Korea is one of the last absolute dictatorships, don’t let the DPRC’s name fool you.  And with any absolute power there is fear from all sides, especially in such a global society.  It’s difficult to keep your people insulated, although the North Korean leadership has tried.  When you try to make your people believe that you are a God and that you come from Gods, and these American comedians make a comedy lambasting your God, well it can’t be that way.

Now, some countries might just make a public statement denouncing a film and that would be the end of it, but not North Korea, a group called Guardians of Peace hacked into the Sony Database releasing private information and memos, the FBI believes it to be North Korea, other experts disagree.  North Korea praises these hackers.  This hacking caused Sony to initially say they were pulling The Interview but then they changed their minds and the film was released Christmas day.

North Korea responded condemning president Obama for allowing the film to be released saying, “Obama always goes reckless in words and deeds like a monkey in a tropical forest.”

North Korea is fearful for its own future, and it shows by the way that it reacts to a film.  I just hope that there aren’t more temper tantrums from North Korea, they have nuclear bombs.

Honestly America, I wish I knew what to say.  I feel as though all of us need to stop, breathe, and think about our words and actions when it come to the Mike Brown and Eric Garner cases.  We have heard many facts and interpretations of this situation and many people’s feelings about this.  Here is the bottom line:

Mike Brown and Eric Garner were both men, and although each man had committed a crime each man deserved to live to see his day in court.  The officers in question do have the right to protect themselves, if their lives are in danger.  Now it’s hard for me to say who is right and who is wrong without trying to be an armchair CSI investigator.  My father always told me, that there is always more information that the media doesn’t have.  And that may or may not be the case but we as the American people have a responsibility now.

We need to work together.  I don’t understand how looting and violence is going to fix anything.  We as a nation have to work together to find a solution.  The criminal justice system, and our prison systems need to be reformed, and I think that rather than listening to our Facebook news-feeds and screaming at the the world our frustrations we should work together to find a real solution to the problems of police brutality and racism in our criminal justice system.

image via qz.com

On October 30th three pro-democracy protesters were arrested.  All three of them men, ages between 24 and 50. According to the WSJ two of the men were arrested for “obstructing police officers executing their duty”the other man was arrested, according to the WSJ for suspicion of criminal damage.  According to the AP the skirmish began when a protester shined a cell phone camera light in an officer’s face, the officer tried to arrest he man, and a line of protester swarmed the police.  The protesters are in their 6th week and are planning on marching from the business district to the Chinese government liaison’s office this Sunday.  Hong Kong’s Chief Executive, what they call their president (shows the economic history of Hong Kong) will be in Beijing for the Asian- Pacific Economic corporation forum.  The student groups who said they would go to Beijing during this conference says they will wait, because they want their own time with Chinese officials.  It isn’t going to be easy for them to go to main-land China anyway, China can deny entry to anyone, even Hong Kong residence.

It seems strange to me that the student leaders of this protest aren’t taking full advantage of what is going on.  Hong Kong is an economic gold mine for China, that is why they wanted it back and why Great Britton took it after the Opium wars. This is also why the Chinese government wants to control Hong Kong faster, as opposed to the forty years that was promised after the hand over in 1997.  I am curious of the aims of Hong Kong, the protesters say they want Democracy, but not independence.  Do the protesters want permanent democracy or China to keep their promise for another 20 years?  These are some of the questions I have that maybe you could lead me to a good answer about.

Catcalling, street harassment, no matter what term you use it’s all the same.  Not asked for remarks made by a person on the street.  These remarks are usually of a sexual nature designed to illicit a response from the other person.  Most of the time catcalling is perpetrated by a male.  And honestly, as a woman, I don’t know why men do it.  Is it to illicit a response, because quite frankly I don’t believe these men want a response.

When I was younger and people talked about catcalling it was something that construction workers did.  There was an episode of “Sex in the City” where Miranda was catcalled outside of a video store and she turned the tables on them.

But the truth is, even for Miranda, catcalling is unwanted.  Women are human beings, just as men are, and we want to be talked to and not talked at.  When did catcalling become a thing that many men do.

I am going to blame a few things on this.  One is media and the other is women ourselves.  The media has slowly but surely showed the female body as a prize, and the more you get to see the bigger the prize is.  There seems to be, in this day in age, an entitlement, almost a reverse political correctness, in seeing a woman’s body.

The 1990s were all about political correctness, what we can and cannot say on the street and in the office, and how much those women and sometimes men were teased and made fun of.  As children of the 1990s I think men and women of my age group don’t want to be seen as “those” kinds of people.  We are the children and grandchildren of the sexual revolution, we have always had access to birthcontrol (mostly), safe and legal abortions (mostly), and Title IX.  Equality is complete.

But these same people who see equality as being  complete also believe that with complete equality means a right of equal and complete objectification.   “A girl doesn’t walk down the street in leggings if she doesn’t want people to look.” I have heard before, and for some women that is true.  Some women feel good being checked out.  But that doesn’t mean that she wants strangers to talk to her.

Girls, as I can only speak as a woman, are taught to be afraid of strange people.  Women are taught to be afraid of dark corners and shadows and to be wary of strangers, because this stranger may want to attack or sexually assault you.  Men teach these ideas to their daughters.  And yet other men go out on the street and catcall?  Most women in America are taught from a young age to fear strangers, and yet men don’t understand why we don’t like catcalling.

I watched a video by CNN about he recent viral video by Hollaback on this subject:

And the man in this video says that women should, “stand up for themselves,” even after he is told that a women died in Detroit, http://michronicleonline.com/2014/10/08/shot-down-mother-of-three-killed-because-she-said-no-to-a-mans-advances/ .  He then says women should go buy guns and blames bad parenting.  She didn’t add this incident in New York, http://nypost.com/2014/10/08/womans-throat-slashed-after-rejecting-mans-advances/ .  Women shouldn’t need guns to walk down the street.  Women shouldn’t be made to feel unsafe because our “ass looks good in dem jeans.”  We as a society shouldn’t stand for it.

EBOLA!!!

Now this word has become a new fear buzz word.  Remember anthrax and what could any white powder have been?  The problem with the Ebola breakout is two-fold.  One is that we, as a television watching, internet reading community, know who deadly this virus has been.  The

picture via the CDC

BBC has reported today that World Health Organizations numbers, that 4447 people have died from this Ebola virus outbreak with the majority of this people being from West Africa.  As of when this article was published the WHO states that an estimated 8,914 cases of Ebola overall.  This is a deadly disease and we all know it.  And yet, the media is also trying to calm people.

Recently I took a trip back to the United States and for the first time in a long time watched the nightly news.  As the anchors were discussing what Ebola is and why it is so dangerous they kept mentioning over and over again that it’s not an airborne disease and that one cannot catch Ebola from being in the same room as another person with Ebola, and yet, every person who was dealing Eric Duncan, the patient in America with Ebola was wearing a hazmat suit.  The people who were going his living quarters were wearing hazmat suits and people were being quarantined.

This doesn’t make sense?  Why does the news tell us we have nothing to fear when we can all see that we do.  When the BBC has to publish an article called “How Not to Catch Ebola”

The US media is downplaying the risk of catching Ebola by focusing on it not being an airborne cotangent, but in a way it is.  This BBC article clearly states that if a person with Ebola sneezes on a person who isn’t wearing protective gear there is a high risk of catching the disease.  There are good things to know the media has reported, such as if a person doesn’t’ have symptoms they aren’t contagious.  But this downplaying of Ebola to not cause panic is clearly going to make the disease worse.  Already a nurse who treated Eric Duncan has contracted Ebola.  We have to be vigilant.

When I traveled to the USA from China I had to take off my shoes, but when I left the USA I didn’t have to take off my shoes.  Does that mean Americas are becoming less vigilant, or that the USA has better trained bomb sniffing dogs?  I don’t know.  America has historically perceived itself as being better, more knowledgable and more prepared. But it just feels like we aren’t.  There has to be a line between fear pushing and truth-telling about something that is scary and dangerous.  I just feel as though my media should tell me the truth and not just what they think I need to know.

Image via Forbes

Donald Sterling no longer owns the Clippers but he is counter-suing the NBA, because he says he was illegally taped.  He lost his team and was banned for life based on a conversation he had in private that he never ment to see the light of day.  The NBA says that this conversation reaching the public has tarnished the image of the league.  Funny the NBA has a stronger punishment for racist remarks than the NFL does for domestic abuse.

For some clarification, in case you have forgotten back in April Sterling was caught on tape with a female friend.  This friend, V. Stivano irritated Sterling when he saw that she had posted on instagram a photo of herself with Magic Johnson.  Sterling stated  “It bothers me a lot that you want to broadcast that you’re associating with black people”, and, “You can sleep with [black people]. You can bring them in, you can do whatever you want”, but “the little I ask you is … not to bring them to my games”

These comments caused a backlash within the team and within the NBA in general.  Sterling was banned, within four days of this taped being released, from the NBA and given a fine of 25 million dollars.  It’s crazy to realize all of these events happened about 6 months ago.  Sterling’s ban has forced a sale of the team.  Now he has lost a court battle is taking place over whether or not the sale Sterling’s wife made was legal and binding.

Basically Donald Sterling, no matter how much apologizing he tries to do will always be labeled a racist, and an organization like the NBA has no room or tolerance for racists.  Players don’t want him around, it’s better for the moral of the NBA for him  not to be there.  The question he poses though is more interesting, should a private conversation that was illegally taped cause you to lose everything?

In this day in age where everyone has smart phones and tablets, it’s almost a given that your photo can be taken or you can be recorded at any moment.  I think those of us under 30 have realized this.  I think we have lost true privacy, unless you have good friends and this case will prove that.

September 11, 2001 is a day that I will never forget.  I can’t believe that it has been 13 years.  I guess that it makes sense that I just missed my 10 year high school reunion, so many friend of mine have had babies and the world has been introduced to the iPhone 6, and yet that morning still feels sickeningly real.

At that point in my life I was living in a small town outside of Chicago, and was in the 11th grade.  I was sitting in my Algebra 2 class when my notoriously forgetful teacher told us she still hadn’t graded our last tests, and we had a test tomorrow.  So she went to the office to photo copy our previous tests, like she did the test before, and the one before that, so we would have something to study from.  25-30 minutes later we all started to realize that she hadn’t returned.  I don’t know why none of us left the room or didn’t do anything stupid, we just didn’t, I was actually playing on my friend’s TI89 calculator, cause those things were the coolest.  Our teacher walked in with this dazed look on her face and said that a plane had hit the World Trade Center and she was listening to the radio in the office and then walked out.  We all sat there confused until the bell rang.

My next class, English, we were all talking about what we had just heard and made the most logical conclusion we could, drunk pilot.  It had to be a drunk pilot, how else could something like this happen.  Then third period AP History, that calmness of truth was gone.  Live my friends and I watched on TV as the second plane hit the second tower and I knew that there was no mistaking, their was no question, something was wrong and we were going to war.  The rest of the day was confusion and tears.  All the downstairs classrooms in my high school had TVs but the upstairs ones didn’t, so it felt like you were going into a different world upstairs.  A friend of mine had a brother in the Pentagon, and I was worried about my Aunt and Uncle who I knew were supposed to be flying out that week, but I didn’t know when.  And my daddy who worked as a limo driver at O’Hare.  There were so many rumors and so much speculation going on, we were worried that their were other planes heading for the Sears Tower (now Willis Tower) or this huge nuclear power plant near us, it was all rumor and fear and speculation that day.

The truth is though we all saw that our generation would bear a huge brunt of this war.  And that is something none of us could question, we (America) would be going to war with someone.  I have seen so many of my friends go to Afghanistan and Iraq and come back, thank goodness.  They have never come back the same though.  My generation grew up with terror alerts and heightened security, fear of the dodgy looking person near landmarks and sadly less personal liberty than the generation before.  We won’t ever feel freedom from fear again because September 11th began a different type of war that Americans never had to deal with, and it will never end.

I still remember thinking, no country would ever be stupid enough to attack mainland America, and now I know, a country wouldn’t do that, but a terrorist would.