Chick-fil-A: 'Cuz Nothing's as American as Fast Food

So in case you're living under a rock and hadn't heard, Americans came out in droves today to eat lots and lots of fast food in support of Dan Cathy, president of Chick-fil-A and son of the founder of Chick-fil-A. Dan Cathy recently came out against gay marriage, stating that his religion perceives it as wrong and immoral. Several days ago, in response to Cathy's open bigotry, the mayors of Boston and Chicago let their voices be heard, telling all who would listen that their fine cities would not support an establishment which supported inequality. One such mayor being my mayor, Rahm Emanuel. A Chicago Alderman also vowed to not allow a Chick-fil-A to open in his ward. Now, part of me thought, "Wait, what?! You have no legal right to deny any business from opening an establishment if it isn't breaking a law!" Many people are touting this whole thing as a "freedom of speech issue" and yes, people do have the right to their opinions... and yes, people should be allowed to freely run a business, regardless of their beliefs... which is why, even though I disagree with Cathy's beliefs, part of me was like WTF?! But then I read this:

"Chick-fil-A, the corporate parent, has been sued at least 12 times since 1988 on charges of employment discrimination, according to records in U.S. District Courts. Aziz Latif, a former Chick-fil-A restaurant manager in Houston, sued the company in 2002 after Latif, a Muslim, says he was fired a day after he didn't participate in a group prayer to Jesus Christ at a company training program in 2000. The suit was settled on undisclosed terms."
(Forbes)

And this:

"Honeycutt, who used to work for Chick-Fil-A, is suing her former employer because according to court documents, her supervisor, Jeff Howard, who owns the Duluth, Georgia Chick-Fil-A restaurant, fired her because he wanted her to be a 'stay home mother.' To make matters worse, Howard replaced Honeycutt, who is suing for wrongful termination, with a male employee. Court documents also state that Brenda Honeycutt got performance evaluations of 'satisfactory' or 'above satisfactory.'"
(The New Civil Rights Movement)


Did reading that make you shake your head in disapproval, too?
And did Judas Priest just pop into your head, too?


I can not help but ask myself, "How would people feel if the CEO of Chick-fil-A were against interracial marriage?" I would hope that most people would be boycotting Chick-fil-A instead of standing in line for hours. It wasn't that long ago when Americans were divided between what was "right" and "moral" in concern to whites marrying non-whites, African-Americans in particular. Many people who were opposed to interracial marriage used religion as a means to justify their argument:

"Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with his arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend the races to mix."
(Loving v. Virginia)

If you really think about it, the Gay Rights Movement is the Civil Rights Movement of today. Just as African-Americans were fighting for their freedoms back in the day, so is the LGBT community fighting and struggling for their rights as they come up against road blocks, narrow mindedness, and laws created out of bigotry. Now before anyone gets their pannies in a bunch and starts telling me how these movements are different and how the bible says this, that, and the other, let me just say this: Just as the majority of people today don't believe that gays should be allowed to be married, so did the majority of people not so long ago believe that people of different ethnic backgrounds should not be allowed to marry. However, now-a-days, most people aren't against interracial marriage, and it's pretty common place. So I'm pretty sure that in the not so distant future, gay marriage will also be common place, and as our grandchildren and great-grandchildren read about the Gay Rights Movement in their history textbooks (hopefully not written in Texas!) they will be shaking their heads and thinking, "What the #*$% was wrong with these people, just as we do (well, I sure hope the #*$% you do) when reading about our ancestors who were for slavery, against Civil Rights Laws, against interracial marriage, for segregation, and so on.


I leave you with this article: "Chick-fil-A restaurant goes rogue, supports gay marriage"

Tell me, how do you feel about this?

Separation of State and Darwinism?

So I have one of these on my car:

Today someone left a note on my windshield in response to it. It is as follows:

"I'm a secular humanist too, but please understand that we took morality out of schools because it smacked too much of religion. Now all we have is DARWINISM, which is survival of the fittest on the playground. Hence, all the bullying."

I couldn't stop laughing to myself after I read this. First of all, way to assume I'm a Secular Humanist. Because I believe in evolution, I simply MUST be a Secular Humanist? And although I am an atheist, I truly hate that most people assume that one must either not believe in god or must believe in some new-age bullshit if they believe in evolution. Hello, the Catholic Church recognizes evolution!

Secondly, one can teach morality without teaching about a religion. Why must the two be connected? I know plenty of people who were raised atheists, who have strong morals, just as I know plenty of people who raised under a religious faith, who seem to be lacking in moral values. And when it comes to issues of morality, there are so many grey areas, especially when you connect religion to morality. Hence, why it is difficult to teach morality in schools. Plus, many parents prefer to teach their own morals and values to their children, rather than have it taught in schools. However, morals are still taught in schools, both public and private. While I was student teaching in a public school, I taught a lesson on The Code of Hammurabi. Religion was not discussed once, but we did have quite a riveting discussion on moral codes and laws.

Thirdly, it seems that this person is implying that teaching about Darwinism in schools is leading to increased bullying. Bullying can start as early as kindergarten, and from what I remember from grade school, the second and third grades seemed ripe with bullying on the playground... but Darwinism and the Theory of Evolution tend not to be taught in great depths until much later in schools and focused on primarily in junior high and high school. Further more, bullying is not a recent phenomenon, but teaching evolution in schools sort of is, as many states did not make it legal to teach about evolution until the last decade and many still teach the theory of intelligent design. (Check out this article: Fighting Over Darwin, State by State for further insight.)

Well, enough of this rant... for now anyway.

Tell me, how do you feel about this?

Wal-Mart: Save Money. Live Better?

Today a friend of mine told me about her awful experience at a Chicago-area Wal-Mart. She had holiday portraits taken of her one month old daughter. Upon looking over the proofs, she selected an image of her daughter laying on her back, smiling. She was told by the Wal-Mart photo studio employees that they could not legally sell her that particular picture because her daughter was was in the "dead baby pose." Yeah, you read that right, the DEAD BABY POSE! She was extremely upset by those words. I told her to file a complaint with Wal-Mart management. The supervisor she spoke with said she was dumbfounded by the employee remarks. Needless to say, my friend was refunded her money.

Now, I was somewhat shocked to hear this, but then again, part of me thought, "Well, what do you expect from Wal-Mart?" From the corporation's unfair labor practices, to the widespread discrimination, and the sexual harassment, Wal-Mart has earned an F in my gradebook. If you don't know what I'm talking about, I suggest you do a little research. I highly recommend you read The Big Squeeze by Steven Greenhouse. He dedicates a whole chapter to the misdeeds of Wal-Mart.  I also recommend watching the documentary Wal-Mart: The High Cost of Low Price. (You can watch it for free through Google Video!) The website WALMART WATCH is also an informative source for up-to-date news on Wal-Mart business practices.

After hearing about my friend's experience, I searched the Internet for any information regarding Wal-Mart photo policies. I stumbled upon the story of the Demaree family of Arizona. In 2009, Lisa and Anthony Demaree had taken a digital memory stick to a local Wal-Mart to be processed for printing. They had returned from a family vacation and wished to print copies of their photos. However, the family found themselves in a world of trouble after a Wal-Mart employee felt that some of the photos were inappropriate. To quote the Examiner: "The photos were of their young children at play and in the bathtub. An employee of the Wal-Mart store where the Demarees took the photos to be processed notified authorities of the photos. The photos, however, were not child porn, but simply the type of photos that most Americans have taken of their children when they were babies or toddlers. The Demarees not only had their children taken, but the children were examined for sexual abuse."

According to Dustin Gardiner of The Arizona Republic, after the police were involved,  the Demarees were unable to see their children for two weeks and "did not regain physical custody for a month while the state investigated." All sexual abuse charges were eventually dropped. The parents sued both Wal-Mart and the state of Arizona. It appears that the case against the state was thrown out, as under AZ state law, "individuals or parties seeking to sue the government must file a notice of claim 60 days before their lawsuit," while the "attorney for the Demarees waited only five days." (azcentral.com) I was not able to find any information regarding the outcome of the case against Wal-Mart, which leads me to wonder if the case was settled outside of court? The Wal-Mart Corporation does have deep pockets...

On a lighter note, as much as I dislike Wal-Mart, I am thankful for the numerous laughs I have been given by www.peopleofwalmart.com!
What, what? Double butt!

Tell me, how do you feel about this?

A Turkey For Your Thoughts

It’s been ages since I last blogged, and although I usually write about current affairs, today I just need to convey my thoughts and emotions about a personal matter.

Today is Thanksgiving. I am sitting in the basement of my mother’s house. While I tend to hide out in the lower reaches of the house on most holidays, today I hide not for the usual reasons – you know the reasons, the same reasons you too sneak away from your family for a time every family gathering or so – but because the sight of my step-dad is too much to bear. He is dying. Stage four lung cancer. Chemotherapy has taken his white hair. His signature mustache is no longer. He is frail yet bloated from multitudes of medications. He wheezes with every breath. This round of chemo has tattooed his skin with red blotches of varying shapes and sizes.

Arcade Fire drowns out the vibrations from his giant oxygen machine. The melodic tunes also muffle my sobs.

My father passed away six years ago. I know what it is to lose a parent. But my father did not have cancer.

You hear from so many people about how ugly cancer is. But until you experience it first hand, you really do not know how hideous it is.

My grandma died from bone cancer. And maybe because I was child, I do not recall how the cancer ravaged her body. Or maybe because my mind thought it best to block the images, my only memory of that time consists of me pushing her down the hallways of the hospital, running as fast as I could, as if her wheelchair was a racecar speeding down a winding track towards a checkered flag.

My mom calls me every day. Every time I hear my phone ring or listen to my voice mail, I expect to hear my mom wailing uncontrollably, barely audible, attempting to explain that the man I have grown to see as my dad has died.

I don’t know why I am sharing this with you. I haven’t really confided my fears or my sadness with my friends. I suppose I don’t want to burden them. But I also suppose that if I talk about it, I have to face the reality that he is going to die soon.

Today I face the reality that this my last Thanksgiving with my step-father.

You’re supposed to reflect on what you are thankful for during the Thanksgiving holiday...

I am thankful that I have had the honor to know Fred Mahoney.

I am thankful that he showed my mother what unconditional love is. He was the first man in her life to treat her with respect. And although my mother is experiencing much sadness as she watches the man she loves wither away, I know that he has brought her much happiness over the past thirteen years.

I’m scared of what will become of my mom after he passes.

Too scared to delve any further into that thought…

So I will end here. I think it’s time for pie.

Happy Thanksgiving.

Hunting Humans?

Have you heard that "Kansas State Rep. Virgil Peck (R) suggested Monday that the best way to deal with the illegal immigration problem may be the same way the state might deal with the problem of 'feral hogs' -- by shooting them from a helicopter"???
This comment has people talking. According to TPM, Peck said that he "was just speaking like a southeast Kansas person."
Well that settles it, I'm never going to Kansas, Toto!

I started to google this man to learn more about his politics because my first thought was, "And I bet this man is against abortion because he thinks it's wrong to kill an unborn child the size of peanut or an egg, but he's ok with killing grown adults who are trying to escape a life of violence and/or poverty that our American lifestyles help to support!" (If you don't know what I'm talking about, do some research on how American corporations do business in countries south of the border, as well as the world, especially in "third world" countries. Also look into how the drug trade between the U.S. and parts of South and Central America - but specifically Mexico - affects the lives of those living south of the border.) I didn't find his stance on abortion, but I stumbled upon an AP GOVERNMENT AND POLITICS blog. The teacher asked: "On top of Peck, the sunflower state has also given us the Westboro Baptists, intelligent design theory, and the murder of famous abortion doctor George Tiller; what is wrong with Kansas?"

I am curious to see answers to this question. No students have answered, as of yet... But perhaps YOU would like to answer the question here? Tell me, what do you think of this?

Virtual Ghosts

So Twitter is all a buzz about the death of Teena Marie. People are tweeting in remembrance of her soulful music, as well as her accomplishments. Many people are posting links to her songs, while telling the world about the impact her music had on their lives. Questlove of the Roots, aka @questlove, has been tweeting about her death, and while some tweeps have found his tweets annoying, I found his tweet to Teena Marie's daughter rather sweet: "@RoseyDough your mom was a rare phoenix of a soul. she will be missed."

All of this got me thinking about how death and social media outlets mix. I'm sure many of you have seen facebook tribute pages created to remember and mourn the death of a loved one or a celebrity. Social media outlets have become, for many, a way to grieve with a virtual community. This concept intrigues me. A Newsweek article, titled "R.I.P. on Facebook," discusses the concept of virtual grief: "One might imagine such virtual mourning is shallow, but it's not. Here is a real gathering place, where friends can grieve together—and where the deceased continues, in some sense, to exist." Here in Chicago, the media has been a buzz about two firefighters, who recently lost their lives while extinguishing a fire. This buzz has not been limited to the news media. I have seen friends tweeting about it, posting R.I.P. facebook statuses, and changing their profile pictures to commemorate these men. A facebook memorial page has even been dedicated to them.

So, does virtual grieving really help? A recent study found that virtual grieving has virtually no effect. The study was conducted by doctoral student Amanda Vicary and psychology professor R. Chris Fraley. The study, which surveyed students after the Virginia Tech and NIU shootings, found that "[m]ost of the students reported that their online activities related to the shootings made them feel better...[b]ut the analysis revealed that the degree to which students engaged in online activities or communications about these tragedies had no discernible effect on their ultimate recovery from depressive or PTSD symptoms." So virtual grieving doesn't really help one in the grieving process, other than making one believe that it does help in the grieving process...

Now, I'll admit that I have at times questioned virtual grieving. I mean, I can understand when friends and family grieve together on-line, but isn't it a bit odd when people come together on-line to grieve a celebrity they have never met? I know, I know, to each is own... but still, I find myself pondering it all. I guess what I really don't understand is when someone dies and their social media site doesn't die with them. Twitter and facebook are filled with pages of the dead. For instance, DJ AM's Twitter page is still up, even though he has been dead for over a year. People can continue to view the pages of the dead, read their tweets or status updates, check out their pictures, write on their wall, send a message, and so on... The dead of social media sites are like virtual ghosts.  

Is it a little morbid that people continue to visit these sites? At first, I thought it was - well, part of me still thinks it is - but after thinking about it a bit more, I thought about how I grieved when my father died. I called his phone a few times hoping he would answer. I slept in one of his flannels. I smelled his hats and his sweaters for weeks, until his scent faded away.  I even cried myself to sleep, curled in fetal position, while clinging to his urn. So I wonder, if my father had a facebook page or a twitter account, would I have continued to view it? I probably would have. With that said, I guess I can understand why some people cling to the social media sites of the dead. It is a way to hold onto them. However, at some point, you must learn to let go in order to heal... And maybe letting go means deactivating their facebook page or closing their Twitter account.


In light of all this, I think you should read "Death and Twitter: Why you should make every tweet count."

 

Tell me, how do you feel about this?

To Kill Or Not To Kill?

So, I'm just gonna put it out there: I'm not a fan of the Death Penalty. I bet that's a shocker! HA! But seriously, I've never understood the whole "eye-for-an-eye thing," and I believe that prison should be about rehabilitation and not punishment. If you've read my previous postings, then you know my stance. (And if you wanna talk about prison and punishment, with me, I first ask that you read the book Going Up the River: Travels in a Prison Nation, by Hallinan. Once you've done that, then game on!)

However, the majority of U.S. society does not agree with me; 69% of Americans support the Death Penalty. My question then becomes, if we are to put a person to death, should it at least be done humanely and with respect? Which then raises more questions, such as: "How is 'humane' defined?" and "How much respect does one, who did not show much respect, deserve?" And of course, the brutality of the crime, as well as the mental health and background of the accused, must be brought into consideration, right? And one might even argue that the killer's remorse or lack thereof might also play a factor. Personally, I say push all that shit aside. No matter the behavior of the person, past or present, treat them with respect. Shouldn't we as individuals, and as a society, show a higher level of integrity by respecting everyone? Isn't that one of our greatest challenges as human beings? Showing respect and remaining dignified, even when others fail to? And I'm sorry, but aren't morals defined by our actions, rather than our words?

So, are you wondering what brought about this rant of mine? Let me get down to it. At 2 a.m. this Friday, the 18th, Ronnie Lee Gardner will be executed by a firing squad in Utah. Yes, that's right, a firing squad! And no, it's not 1847, it's 2010!
It is important to note that in 2004, Utah passed a law banning executions by firing squad, but seeing as Gardner was found guilty before 2004, he was eligible for death by firing squad. (And FYI, he has been on Death Row for 25 years!) But wait, there is more to note: Gardner chose this style of execution! According to Politics Daily, Gardner said to the judge, "I would like the firing squad, please." (Don't believe me? Well, check wikipedia then!)  When I first read about Gardner I was livid... Until I read that he chose this. I thought to myself, "What the hell is wrong with Utah?!" Then I thought, "Is this this man's way of trying to punish himself?" I know he chose this, and I know he took a life, but part of me feels pain for this man knowing that he must die this way. Part of me also hurts knowing that people are excited and happy that he will be put to death this way. I suggest you read the CNN article "Executioner: Death by Firing Squad is '100 percent justice'" for further reflection on this.

Although this whole story leaves me with a sour taste in my mouth, I am pleased that as of 2004, anyone found guilty of murder in Utah will not have the option of death by firing squad. However, I'm not so pleased that the electric chair is still an option in many states... But I'll not get into that now.


Follow Up:

"When the prison warden pulled back the beige curtain, Gardner was already strapped into a black, straight-backed metal chair. His head secured by a strap across his forehead. Harness-like straps constrained his chest. His handcuffed arms hung at his sides. A white cloth square — maybe 3 inches across — affixed to his chest over his heart bore a black target.

Seconds before the impact of the bullets, Gardner's left thumb twitched against his forefinger. When his chest was pierced, he clenched his fist. His arm pulled up slowly as if he were lifting something and then released. The motion repeated.

Although the dark blue prison jumpsuit made it difficult to see, blood seemed to be pooling around Gardner's waist.

The silence was deafening."

-JENNIFER DOBNER, Associated Press Writer

"Ronnie Lee Gardner, 49, was pronounced dead at 12:20 a.m. Mountain Time (0620 GMT) after being shot in the chest by a five-man firing squad at the Utah State Prison in Draper, a suburb of Salt Lake City, Steve Gehrke, a spokesman for the Utah Department of Corrections, told reporters."
-Reuters

 

Tell me, how do you feel about this?

I've Got The Golden Casket!

"Invention, my dear friends, is 93% perspiration, 6% electricity, 4% evaporation, and 2% butterscotch ripple." -Willy Wonka

Oh, money! You can't take it with you, when you're gone... Or can you? Our consumer culture is out to prove that you can. That is, you can bury yourself in gold...  and text us all about it in the afterlife. hey yo, do u c dead ppl? lolz :)

Today, "a cell-phone-equipped golden coffin" was debuted at the Luxury And Yachts Verona 2010 trade fair. And let me tell you, it's such a steal at only $381,000! You know you want one! The King of Pop and the Godfather of Soul had 'em. (Although, the music legends only paid $25,000 for their golden caskets. However, their coffins didn't come with a cell phone! AND HOW CAN YOU LIVE WITHOUT A CELL PHONE WHEN YOU'RE DEAD?!)

I find this simply ridiculous! RIDICULOUS! With all the poverty in the world, how can anyone justify spending so much money on a casket? Think of all the charities that could benefit from $381,000! To spend that much money, on yourdeadself, you would have to think of yourdeadself as a god... or King Tut... or a Magi.

Tell me, how do you feel about this?

I'm Sorry, But Are You Serious?

According to the Chicago Sun-Times, Terry Nichols has decided to go on a "hunger strike to protest unhealthy prison meals." Now, I am all for the fair treatment of prisoners. And I believe that prisons should not be a form a torture or punishment, but rather a form of rehabilitation. With that said, and before everyone gets all up in arms, I do recognize that not everyone can be rehabilitated. And based on Terry Nichols' crime and his beliefs, I doubt that he could be rehabilitated.
 
But here's what gets me about this article:

"Nichols contends he needs a better diet for medical and religious reasons. He contends that eating refined foods defiles God's holy temple, the human body."

Did your jaw just drop to the floor? Because my jaw sure did! Now, I'm not a religious person, but I respect that everyone has the freedom and choice to believe in and practice a religious faith. However, I do not respect people who get all super religious and talk up their religious convictions, but then choose to not live their lives according to those convictions. Mr. Nichols does not want to defile God's holy temple, the human body, by eating unhealthy foods... But he had no problem defiling the hundreds of bodies inside the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building?! Health reasons, ok, I get that, but for religious reasons... No way.

Tell me, how do you feel about this?

What Ever Happened to Rehabilitation?

Did you know that in May of 2009, the U.S. correctional system recorded 2,574 people serving life without parole sentences in the United States, who were juveniles when convicted? True story.

Sarah Kruzan is one such person.

Question: This woman seems to have changed, so why shouldn't she be allowed another chance at life?

I first became aware of this issue after watching the Frontline episode "When Kids Get Life." It aired in 2007. It is 2009, and our system still has yet to correct this, despite the outcry to do so.

However, this may soon be changing. NPR reports that two cases are about to stir things up. Graham v. Florida and Sullivan v. Florida will be heard by the Supreme Court in November. The lawyers for Graham and Sullivan will be arguing that LWOP sentences given to juveniles violate the 8th Amendment, as they are not in conjunction with the CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENTS CLAUSE. The U.S. Supreme Court has "ruled that criminal sentences that are inhuman, outrageous, or shocking to the social conscience are cruel and unusual."

I do not believe that juveniles should be punished as adults. Studies have shown that the brain is not fully developed during adolescence. In fact, the human brain undergoes intense growth during the teenage years. In a series of MRI studies on 145 adolescents, Dr. Judith Rapoport discovered "a second wave of overproduction of gray matter, the thinking part of the brain—neurons and their branch-like extensions—just prior to puberty...the gray matter growth spurt just prior to puberty predominates in the frontal lobe, the seat of "executive functions"—planning, impulse control and reasoning." The growth of gray matter also continues into the teenage years; "the teen's gray matter waxes and wanes in different functional brain areas at different times in development."

Harvard Magazine reports: "Research during the past 10 years, powered by technology such as functional magnetic resonance imaging, has revealed that young brains have both fast-growing synapses and sections that remain unconnected. This leaves teens easily influenced by their environment and more prone to impulsive behavior, even without the impact of souped-up hormones and any genetic or family predispositions."

So, I ask, "With the information scientists have gathered, how can our judicial system continue to prosecute juveniles as adults?" Ok, ok, I'm sure some of you are thinking, "Well, what about those kids who commit violent crimes? Who commit murder? Shouldn't they be charged as adults? If they're grown enough to fire a gun or wield a knife, then aren't they old enough to be punished for their crimes?" Well, I ask you - yes, YOU - to look back on your teenage years. Do you remember all the stupid and irrational things YOU said and did? Yeah, maybe you didn't get arrested... But then again, maybe you were just lucky enough not to get caught! And yeah, I'm sure you didn't kill anyone, but I'm also sure that you did a few things you would probably take back if you had the chance. The point is, no one is fully matured as a teenager, so why punish teenagers as if they were mature adults? Now, I'm not saying that these kids should just get a slap on the wrist. YES, they should face punishment. YES, they should be incarcerated. BUT for the rest of their lives?! What values and ideals do we hold as a society, if we are so quick to give up on these kids? Can we not help them grow into responsible and mature adults? And when people, like Sarah Kruzan, show that they have changed and matured and reflected on their lives and the decisions that they made, then why shouldn't they be given a second chance at life? (Especially when the people involved were abused mentally and/or physically as children, such as Sarah Kruzan and the various individuals featured in "When Kids Get Life!") And if you watched the video of Sarah Kruzan, can you honestly tell me that she doesn't live with guilt everyday? I can only imagine what it feels like to wake up every morning, knowing that you were responsible for taking another human being's life; knowing that you will spend the rest of your life in prison; knowing that you will die behind bars.

Tell me, how do you feel about this?

Tattoo Me Stupid

In April of 2009, a California man had his 7 year old son tattooed with a dog paw, a symbol for the Bulldogs, a Fresno street gang. The news was the talk of the town; it was covered by local media and eventually made national news. When the father finally was arrested in May, he faced a life sentence for aggravated mayhem. NPR reports that a judge has dropped the charge of aggravated mayhem, and instead, the father and the tattoo artist "will face the lesser charge of cruel and inhumane treatment of a child," and "with gang enhancements, they face seven years in prison."

Now, I don't know about you, but this information left me baffled! Who in their right mind would think that it's ok to tattoo a child?! I googled "father tattoos son," and believe it or not, this punk is not alone in his disturbing actions! A man in Georgia had his 3 year old tattooed. A woman in Texas had her two children and her little brother tattooed. All of this is disturbing, but the story of the California man is the most disturbing, in my eyes. One, he tattooed a GANG SYMBOL on his 7 year old son! A GANG SYMBOL! Two, his public defender had the audacity to compare what his client did to ear piercing and circumcision! NPR reported: "During questioning Monday of the boy's pediatrician, Nieto [the public defender] raised the issue of other painful and scaring procedures parents subject their children to, such as ear piercing and circumcision." WHAT?! Now, I take issue with parents piercing the ears of infants, but come on! Trying to compare that to the tattooing of a gang symbol on a child... Well, apparently this man is just as much out of his right mind as his client!

Tell me, how do you feel about this?

Our Tax Dollars Hard At Work?

So, the city passed out FREE T-shirts at the 2016 rally at the Daley Center. I can't help but wonder, "Who the hell paid for these 'free' T-shirts?" And the thought of all the money wasted on these T-shirts stirs more than my soul!


Tell me, how do you feel about this?

Speechless in Chicago

Unless you've been living under a rock, by now you've heard about the tragic death of yet another Chicago Public School student. A student was attacked outside Fenger high school. He was beaten to death with a two-by-four. The news has made national coverage, and a video of the attack is circulating around the web. Watching the video simply leaves you speechless. What can one even say to the parents of that child? What could CPS representatives possibly say in the wake of this horrific event?
The New York Times reports: Chicago school officials "are starting a new anti-violence plan this fall and plan to provide extra counseling and assistance to schools and students seen as most likely to be involved in violence, said Monique Bond, a spokeswoman for the Chicago Public Schools. Officials were focusing on 38 schools with the most problems, including Fenger."

As someone who desires to teach for CPS, this both saddens and scares me. How can children be expected to learn and grow when they face the fear of violence every day? And I can't help but ask, "Are CPS officials really going to act?" Have we not heard this line before? Violence in and around Chicago schools is nothing new, and the violence is increasing. And is this a job for CPS alone? The city needs to step in. Schools located in areas known for violence and gang activity need more support from the Chicago Police Department. And where is our Mayor? Instead of doing all he can to bring the Olympics to Chicago, I think he should be doing all he can to reduce the violence our children are facing!

Tell me, how do you feel about this?

Mother Should I Trust the Government?

The article "Lost To Lariam?" deeply upset me. And it did so not just because I have family in the military. It upset me because this knowledge furthers the notion that corporate greed is invading every aspect of our lives. Men and women are serving our country - often for a cause they no longer believe in - only to be given drugs that our government knows may lead to depression and suicide. I wonder how much money Roche lobbyists poured out? And I wonder how much of our tax dollars went to Roche in payment for Lariam?

Tell me, how do you feel about this?

Are Nooses Making a Comeback?

After reading the article, "Witness Says Census Worker Was Naked, Bound," I was left asking myself, "What the hell is wrong with people?"


UPDATE: Investigators found that this was a suicide. However, I still find myself baffled.

Tell me, how do you feel about this?