Thank You, Jane

Fighting for social justice maybe more important than ever. With children at our borders…in crisis. With Veterans roaming the streets (homeless) of the land they fought to protect. With something as simple as, healthcare for all…a silly debate…

With all this, and socialism shouted from the rooftops of aging, life time politicians, where do we turn?

So many quotes on history and how it repeats. How the United States does not learn from her mistakes. Hatred in every corner of every town…red or blue. Again, it is important to look back to see where we need to grow.

It is well to remind ourselves, from time to time, that “Ethics” is but another word for “righteousness,” that for which many men and women of every generation have hungered and thirsted, and without which life becomes meaningless. Jane Addams

So a little history is what I present!

Addams developed three “ethical principles” for social settlements: “to teach by example, to practice cooperation, and to practice social democracy, that is, egalitarian, or democratic, social relations across class lines.”[46] Thus Hull House offered a comprehensive program of civic, cultural, recreational, and educational activities and attracted admiring visitors from all over the world, including William Lyon Mackenzie King, a graduate student from Harvard University who later became prime minister of Canada. In the 1890s Julia Lathrop, Florence Kelley, and other residents of the house made it a world center of social reform activity. Hull House used the latest methodology (pioneering in statistical mapping) to study overcrowding, truancy, typhoid fever, cocaine, children’s reading, newsboys, infant mortality, and midwifery. Starting with efforts to improve the immediate neighborhood, the Hull House group became involved in city- and statewide campaigns for better housing, improvements in public welfare, stricter child-labor laws, and protection of working women. Addams brought in prominent visitors from around the world, and had close links with leading Chicago intellectuals and philanthropists. In 1912, she helped start the new Progressive Party and supported the presidential campaign of Theodore Roosevelt.

Jane spoke, fought for social injustice. She started with conversations on poverty. And, discussed the bias’d idea that the poor simply did not work hard enough (as many were led to believe.) The poor and down trodden were also victims of the state. The state in which they live; genetics, environment, illness, threat.

Why do we view social reform with such disdain? Why is it such a far fetched idea that…all citizens should be treated equally?

I listened to the (below) listed podcast with baited breath. Wondering why had I not known more about Jane Addams and/or her ‘Boston marriage’ to Mary Rozet Smith?

**The fact of relatively formalized romantic friendships or life partnerships between women predates the term Boston marriage and there is a long record of it in England and other European countries.[1] The term Boston marriage became associated with Henry James‘s The Bostonians (1886), a novel involving a long-term co-habiting relationship between two unmarried women, “new women,” although James himself never used the term. James’ sister Alice lived in such a relationship with Katherine Loring and was among his sources for the novel.[2]

There are many examples of women in “Boston marriage” relationships. In the late 1700s, for example, Anglo-Irish upper-class women Eleanor Butler and Sarah Ponsonby were identified as a couple and nicknamed the Ladies of Llangollen. Elizabeth Mavor suggests that the institution of romantic friendships between women reached a zenith in eighteenth-century England.[1] In the U.S., a prominent example is that of novelist Sarah Orne Jewett and her companion Annie Adams Fields, widow of the editor of The Atlantic Monthly, during the late 1800s.[3]

Why, why, why is not in the best interest of society (centuries ago and/or today) to treat those we live with, eat with, walk amongst, with dignity and respect?

Everyday People

Hate crimes on the rise! Homegrown terrorists…on the rise. Hate speech from our elected officials…on the rise. Children who are more accustomed to having their heads in the wi-fi sand than in a physical book, on the rise. The list goes on and on and on.

We should not be at a point in this nation where witnessing acts of pure, unadulterated, disdain, with our morning coffee…is commonplace.

Cartoons of particular notions not being televised because it may disturb the family balance.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/may/21/arthur-gay-wedding-banned-alabama-public-tv-same-sex-union

Children being torn away from their parents and placed in nothing more than 2019’s version of concentration camps.

And, so it goes?

Possibly!

Now our elected officials have up’d their game! And have come up with a new and improved manner in which to show off the vulgarity of hate!

The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) has announced plans to roll back Obama-era protections for transgender people who are experiencing homelessness. The change would allow shelters to turn people away by claiming a “religious” exemption.

So-called “religious freedom” exemptions have become popular with the religious right as evangelicals attempt to use it as a license to discriminate against LGBTQ people and women. The federal law was not intended to be used as a get-out-of-jail-free card for civil rights violations.

Christianity is based off the belief that Jesus Christ was a benevolent savior. He repeatedly taught that his followers should help the homeless and destitute without judgement. That would be the opposite of what modern evangelical Christians seek to do under the law.

Trump administration will give homeless shelters the right to turn away transgender people

read more at :LGBTQnation.com

The change would allow shelters to turn people away by claiming a “religious” exemption.By Bil Browning Wednesday, May 22, 2019 

I tell what should be on the rise…Everyday People saying something! Everyday People who do not like what they are seeing.

What is that saying,

If you see something that’s not right! Say something!

I am no better and neither are you
We are the same whatever we do

We Don’t Serve Your Kind Here

As with the baker in Colorado, free enterprise has ventured into monetary moral judgment.  

When I had been 16, I had been the cashier at a local movie theater.  Best job I ever had.  Having lived in a highly dysfunctional home, getting away to the world of cinema…was fantastic.

My duties were simple, take the money…give the ticket.  In the 80’s customer service did require that we smile and say, thank you. So pleasantries also were encouraged.   An unusual job requirement in this day in age.  

Being from a small town, I had the wonderful opportunity to turn away kids I went to school with…that were not of legal age to see an R- rated movie.

I did not turn them away because of color (though New Hampshire is predominately white.)  They were not turned away because sexual orientation.  Not a one sent to the curb for the religious beliefs.

The only ‘schoolmates’ turned away?  Assholes, bullies, mean jocks, snobs!  Unpleasant persons who did not deserve to watch Animal House.

The case is part of a nationwide crusade by evangelical Christians to weaponize the First Amendment and religious freedom to defend anti-gay bigotry.

The Arizona Supreme Court will soon issue a ruling on a case brought by two evangelical Christian artists, Joanna Duka and Breanna Koski, who want to be able to refuse to make custom wedding invitations for same-sex couples.

Unfortunately for Duka and Koski, the city of Phoenix has an ordinance prohibiting them from doing so—and from posting a “We don’t serve your kind here” sign in their store, Brush & Nib Studio. So in 2016, they filed a lawsuit asking the court to block the city from applying the law to them—even though no same-sex couples had asked them to design a wedding invitation in the first place.

In Phoenix, it is unlawful to “refuse, withhold from, or deny to any person … accommodations, advantages, facilities, or privileges thereof … because of sexual orientation.” It is also unlawful to “display, circulate, or publicize or mail any … communication which states or implies that any … service shall be refused … because of sexual orientation… or that any person, because of… sexual orientation… would be unwelcome, objectionable, unacceptable, undesirable or not solicited.”

In other words, if you run a business in Phoenix, you can’t refuse to provide a service to gay people because they’re gay. And despite all the bluster in their complaint about God and running their business in keeping with their religious faith, that’s exactly what Duka and Koski want to do.

Plaintiffs in these cases have insisted that they are not bigots; they are simply exercising their freedom of religion. They argue that state efforts to ensure that LGBTQ people have the right to access services are tantamount to an infringement on that freedom. They just want to operate their businesses and remain faithful to their religious beliefs—including the belief that marriage is between a man and a woman.

Remarkably, Duka and Koski argue that they are simply “politely declining to create artwork for same sex weddings,” as if the manner in which they practice their bigotry—politely as opposed to maliciously—makes a legal difference.

But it is still bigotry at its most vile: the “we don’t serve your kind here”-style bigotry that civil rights activists in the 1960s fought against. Indeed, when it comes to the law, there is no difference between evangelicals in the 21st century using religion to justify discrimination against LGBTQ people and evangelicals in the 18th, 19th, and 20th centuries using religion to justify imperialism, slavery, and Jim Crow.

rewire.news/author/imani-gandy/

 

 

Anxious Commentary

Around or about…the tightness.

A spiritual choking.

A breaking down of matter.

Chomping, chewing, relentlessly.

And, spitting me out.

Here I am…’do not leave in doubt.’

Cigarette burning into the middle of night.

Supine vertigo…prompted upon an endless fright.

I awaken to a self…basquiat

Self, as a victim viewer.

I am there in her eyes.

All my sentences a scratching post…Tainted with compromise.