The Cultural and Political Wars, Part III

In a sad story out of Los Angeles, we learned that an LA City Attorney, 60 years of age, shot and killed his 60 year old wife and 19 year old son. Thankfully, his 25 year old daughter escaped. Then I read a Facebook post by the sister of the deceased wife. I had to reread it a couple of times. "You never think this is going to happen to your immediate family. Still in shock, but completely heartbroken about losing my dear sister Sandy, nephew Michael and brother-in-law Eric to gun violence today..." What? Eric murdered your sister and nephew, and you put him in the same sentence, and make it about gun violence? No moral judgment about your now dead brother-in-law's horrific act of murder. No, the guns did it. I would bet this woman could make a moral judgment about second-hand smoke.

Earlier this year, the 10th Circuit Court of Appeal declared a Fort Collins, Colorado ordinance to be illegal. The ordinance forbid women from appearing topless in public. The Court's rationale is indicative of leftist thinking. They said the ordinance "discriminated against women and that it reinforced 'negative stereotypes depicting women's breasts, but not men's breasts, as sex objects.'" I get it - men's breasts are the same as women's, because there is no difference between men and women. I never needed an ordinance to tell me that a woman's breasts are sex objects. I bet I knew that by age 12. This is a perfect example of my oft repeated truism that the left lets their beliefs dictate their reality (while conservatives let reality dictate their beliefs). On the other hand, my next blog post will likely be from Fort Collins.

Here's a good one out of New York City. The Commission on Human Rights told residents they may be fined up to $250,000 for the offense of "threatening to call ICE when motivated by discrimination, derogatory use of the term 'illegal alien,' and discrimination based on limited English proficiency," because such acts constitute unlawful discrimination. Apparently, this rule provides that the fine shall be paid to the person making the complaint. That won't encourage abuse. And the First Amendment? What's that? The same commission previously barred employers and landlords from the use of gender pronouns if different from the preferred pronoun of the employee or tenant.

Here's a pleasant surprise. The Jewish Press reported on a Siena College poll. It turns out that only 4% of New York Jews support Bernie Sanders for President. Bernie does little to show his Judaism. He constantly criticizes Israel. He named Linda Sarsour to have some position in his campaign. He has supported the anti-Semites in Congress. Apparently, it has all caught up with him. In another interesting result from the poll, 44% of New York Jews have a favorable view of Trump (although only 33% say they will vote for him). Nevertheless, that favorability number is higher than for whites in general in New York.

In an Op-Ed in the 10/6/19 New York Times, is a piece by Andrew Marantz with this headline: "Free Speech is Killing Us." His concern has to do with Trump's use of the media, and the more serious issue of social media which may encourage some to commit acts of violence. Marantz is also concerned with speech "that's designed to drive a woman out of her workplace or to bully a teenager into suicide or to drive a democracy toward totalitarianism." After 3 years of the left telling us that democracy is dead under Trump, I've yet to see it or experience it. The First Amendment, as interpreted, does allow for certain time, place and manner restrictions on speech. And, Marantz, on staff at "The New Yorker," acknowledges that certain content may be even be banned - libel, incitement to violence and child pornography, for examples. Marantz: "We can protect unpopular speech from government interference while also admitting that unchecked speech can expose us to real risks." But can we really protect unpopular speech from the government? See two paragraphs above re: the New York City Commission on Human Rights.

September 17 was Constitution Day, the Constitution having been ratified on September 17, 1787. A survey by the Annenberg Public Policy Center revealed that 22% of Americans were unable to name even one branch of government. 25% named one branch, 14% named two branches and 39% named all three branches of government. The Center for American Progress reports that only nine states plus Washington, D.C., have a year long mandatory class on civics for their high school students. (D.C. plus Nevada, Colorado, North Carolina, West Virginia, Hawaii, Idaho, Kansas, Virginia and Maryland.) I am confident that many of those unable to name a single branch of government would be able to tell us all about their favorite celebrities.

And finally, there was a rather upsetting story out of Texas, when a black man sitting in his own apartment and minding his own business was shot and killed by a white, female police officer. She was off duty and claimed that she believed she walking into her own apartment with an intruder inside. As I often do on police matters, I went to my friend, a retired cop. He opined that the female officer had many options short of discharging her weapon, starting with calling for back-up. She would also have had other non-lethal weapons on her, such as a taser and a baton. My friend: "I was proud to wear the uniform, but never thought it gave me a pass to be immoral, unethical or placed me above the people I served." Well said; it's an approach by which all of us could live.