The Rights We’re Fighting For

The Rights We’re Fighting For Are Yours Too
The First Amendment

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

I have recently made a comment about a meme I saw in which it compared the women at the Million Woman March and sister marches all over the world to women in the military. It was belittling the women of the marches. It struck me as a complete fallacy and I pointed it out, to which the poster completely missed my point. She was one who doesn’t want to hear anything contrary to her own views and got defensive immediately. I wasn’t insulting her; I was merely stating that it was comparing apples to oranges. The reasons for the two groups marching are completely different. The soldiers are sworn to defend the Constitution, yes, but their marching is a part of the job they signed up for. The Million Woman March was about the rights our own government is trying to deny us under this new administration. So the only comparison I see is that they defend the very rights we are exercising. You would think they would feel good about the fact that we’re actually using the rights they defend instead of letting them lie dormant and unused. If we do that, we will most surely lose them. The rights we’re fighting for are yours too.

I will state that no, I don’t understand conservative thought patterns any more than they understand liberal ones. I don’t understand how any woman could support donald trump when he has been very vocally anti-woman and has even bragged about committing sexual assault and getting away with it. Did you not learn at any point in life that sometimes a man just says what he thinks you want to hear to get you to do what he wants? To listen to what someone says and not pay attention to what he does is putting yourself in a vulnerable position to be taken unfair advantage of. And of course when that happens, you get the blame for putting yourself in that position. That is where rape culture was born. And chalking it up to “locker room talk” encourages the behavior because they got away with it, so they’ll continue to do it. And believing that something never happened because they told you so and ignoring that fact when someone shows you video proof is willful ignorance. You become the victim of gas-lighting when you do that because you’re buying into the illusion of innocence. The rights we’re fighting for are yours too.

I see so much out there that is critical to the protesters in that they are being judged. Another commenter said that half the people out there didn’t even know why they were there. I was there and everyone there except perhaps the little ones knew exactly what they were doing there. Even some of the little ones did. Between signs, conversations, t-shirts, buttons and chants, everyone had a valid reason to address during that march. There were many, but all of them were born of the acidic vitriol that came out of the trump campaign. There is much fear and rage out there over the things that he promised his followers that put us all at risk. The rights we’re fighting for are yours too.

To assume that the marchers were all out there for the same reason is to make an assumption with no facts. Try a Google search of the protest. There are literally hundreds of signs posted on Facebook alone that were at the actual protests that address a multitude of reasons for protest. All of those signs all boil down to one thing. The protesters fear that they’re losing rights under this administration. More than just reproductive rights. More than just equality. More than just one issue. I alone made signs for multiple reasons. All of our concerns should be addressed. All of our voices should be heard. Not just by the new administration but by the supporters of it as well. Pay attention. The rights we’re fighting for are yours too. You might think we’re fighting for something we already have but you’re not paying attention if you think there is no threat to them. The truth is, trump has threatened the first amendment multiple times already. If we allow him to attack a primary constitutional right specifically mentioned first in the Bill of Rights, they will slowly pick away at the others as well. The rights we’re fighting for are yours too.

I know the first argument will be that his threat to the media is only those reporting lies, but the ones reporting lies are not the ones he’s attacking. He is attacking the respected media outlets that have earned their place as respectable reporting entities. He is attacking those who report anything he dislikes, even if there is documented proof of it. And 6 reporters have been arrested and charged with a felony for rioting because they were on protest sights reporting on those protests. We can’t allow this to happen. (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/25/business/media/journalists-arrested-trump-inauguration.html?_r=0) that’s the NEW YORK TIMES ladies and gentlemen, not just some fly by night organization that just popped up over the last few years. Not just some tabloid on tv organization. The New York Times….The rights we’re fighting for are yours too.

The first amendment gives us the right to free speech, free press, peaceful assembly and the right to petition the government for redress of grievances. All of these things are involved in our protests. To arrest people for exercising our first amendment rights is a violation of the Constitution of the United States. Yet there are states that have bills on their agenda trying to criminalize the right to peaceful assembly and petition the government for redress of grievances. (http://www.snopes.com/lawmakers-criminalize-peaceful-protest/) Yes, Snopes is a legitimate source. They are a fact checking organization. And the article does say they are definitely on the agenda, but that none have passed into law. These are the things we need to pay attention to. This is a FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT they’re trying to criminalize. They’re trying to chip away at the foundation of the Constitution ladies and gentlemen. The rights we’re fighting for are yours too.
Yes, we have a problem with the right trying to criminalize and ban abortion. You can’t legislate morality because morality is subject to individual interpretation and some of us believe it to be more moral to spare our offspring a short and extremely painful death than to force it to feel that pain. YOU DO NOT KNOW what leads a woman to the decision to have an abortion. You don’t even know when you see a pregnant woman going to a Planned Parenthood office if her fetus is even viable. A D & C is also performed at Planned Parenthood. This is done after a fetal demise, yet people who insist on judging these women stand outside of Planned Parenthood offices and brutalize these women for their decisions without knowing the first thing about them. Stop judging when you don’t know what’s going on. And stop supporting legislators who want to force these women to risk their lives to carry out a pregnancy without knowing the circumstances either. These decisions need to remain between a woman and her doctor, NOT her legislator. The rights we’re fighting for are yours too.

Stop trying to force your beliefs on everyone else. Science is real. Scientists have made a career of studying their choice of scientific field. They have devoted their lives to it. Just because you don’t know the difference between a theory and a scientific theory does not give you the right to discredit their research and make assumptions about it, much less to allow lawmakers to make laws governing it. Science is responsible for every advance to improve human life. Open a book. Not just any book. Rush Limbaugh and Bill O’Reilly don’t know anything but their right wing propaganda. Open a book by A SCIENTIST. The rights we are fighting for are yours too.

Open a medical Journal. Learn about genetics. Explore how genetics works and learn that there are genetic variations that people might find to be odd but they recur in nature more commonly than you might think. Like genetic mutations that cause a human being to be born with more than one set of reproductive organs. If that can happen, then being born with a male identity in a female body and vice versa is also not only feasible but occurs often. Quit making assumptions and do some research. The rights we are fighting for are yours too.

Ask yourself this question. Look at yourself in the mirror and ask yourself if you think everyone you meet sees you the same way you see yourself. If you have any critical thinking skills whatsoever, you know that they don’t. So do you want people that don’t know you making assumptions about you and condemning you for it and stripping you of your rights based on an assumption? That is exactly what is happening. Pay attention. The rights we are fighting for are yours too.

Stop assuming that because it gets cold, Global Warming is not real. ALL scientists agree it’s real. The only people that say it’s not are politicians. And if we let it go and continue in the direction we’re going, we will kill ourselves when we kill our planet. The rights we’re fighting for are yours too.

Multiple species of animals are dying due to the actions of humans. This is not natural selection; this is human beings becoming the cancer that is killing the whole planet. We have to do the right thing for all of us, for our children and future generations. The Bible doesn’t defend your denying what’s happening. We’re supposed to be stewards of our planet. The rights we’re fighting for are yours too.
Start paying attention….before it’s too late.

Advertisements

Endangered Species

Watching the outrage on Facebook is often frustrating. It amazes me how many people make assumptions that are complete fallacies and they have no idea they’re doing it. They think they’re using logic. Fallacies however are not based in logic. They are a stretch at best.


The recent outrage over the death of Cecil the Lion has spawned a whole new wave of such assumptions and conclusions. On the one side, you have those who are outraged because a hunter took unfair advantage of an animal, depriving it of its life with a man-made weapon in a simple Peta-esque sort of way. On another side of it, those who are enraged that a man who by all appearances seems to think he’s entitled, killed an endangered species without regard to the fact that the species is dying out and contributing to that fact. On a third side, there are those who assume that those who are outraged over Cecil’s death are not outraged over the deaths of black women in police custody or black men being killed in the streets by cops for non-death penalty offenses or trumped up offenses.


The truth is that those of us outraged over Cecil’s death are also outraged over the deaths of black men and women who should not be dead. And while this fallacy was presented by one or more sources on Facebook, its comparison is not really that far of a stretch. It involves the fact that neither the people, nor the Lion did anything that warranted their deaths. And in this liberal’s humble opinion, both are endangered species of a sort.


Now don’t go assuming I just called black people animals. I have way more respect for human beings to do such a thing. The truth is, however, that black people are in danger at all times by the simple reason that they have dark skin. Sadly, this is true of being inside their homes as well as being out in public. They’re endangered by the system itself. People who have not lived as black or lived among them and witnessed it for themselves don’t fully grasp it, and most who HAVE lived among them don’t see it either. At least those incapable of empathy can’t see it, but when you watch a friend mistreated just because of the color of their skin, it tends to change you. It opens your mind to just how much they’re mistreated. You start seeing other ways that other people mistreat them.


I had a friend in Syracuse who was pulled over because she was black and in a nice new black SUV. The officer pulled a gun on her for taking the time to calm her very sick sister down before letting down her window. She even asked the officer nicely to please be patient as her sister was hysterical. He wasn’t listening. She survived the incident without being shot, but it could have gone much worse. This same girl was being abused by her white nurse coworkers and was told by the union she went to in order to seek help with the situation that it wouldn’t be worth fighting because they’d make her miserable until they pushed her into quitting. When is it enough? How far will they take it before they realize they’re contributing to the problem?
During the 4 years I lived in Syracuse, a black toddler was killed in the crossfire of competing drug gangs. The toddler was sleeping in his own bed, in his own room when a bullet penetrated the wall by his bed. As I said, not even safe inside their homes. And none of them are safe.


Our society has taught white people to be afraid of black people. They’ve done so through the use of the media. They report on black on black crime and racial tension events, ignoring the indiscretions, crimes and discrimination of white people toward black people. They create an illusion that black people are lesser people by using their success rates in life itself all while creating the roadblocks that contribute to their failures. And Heaven forbid a black man or woman be successful. It can’t be because they’re very intelligent and worked hard, it MUST be about the laws in place that force companies to hire equally, to admit to colleges equally, to treat black people equally to whites. Sorry to burst your bubble GOP, but some black people are just smart and work hard and break the stereotypes you’ve created and feed on a regular basis. The right wing insists on believing Affirmative Action is the only way black people can get into good schools and get good jobs and that their abilities have nothing to do with it. But it is just as common for there to be intelligent black people as intelligent white ones. And it’s just as common to have ignorant white people as black ones. The fact is, intelligence has nothing to do with race or gender. So the right wing has fabricated these ideals to appease their insecurity. And those not smart enough to create these stereotypes buy into them and parrot them; all to make themselves feel superior to people that don’t look like them.


It is possible to end these systemic issues but it will take more than black people standing up and fighting for their rights. As a single black person, they put themselves in danger just suggesting their rights are being violated, which is what got many of these men and women who have died in police custody killed. There are those who suggest that #blacklivesmatter protests are just black people demanding more rights than others, but all they’re asking for is the very same rights so many white people take for granted. And they’re asking for justice that they’re not getting. And these protests are a people trying to stand up and say ENOUGH. They’re trying to be heard in a system that suppresses and oppresses their voices and their very existence. What it’s going to take is for people of all races to come together and say THIS IS NOT ACCEPTABLE. It’s going to take us voting together as one to eliminate those who feed these stereotypes and eliminate the laws that are designed to protect them, to remove those who refuse to enforce the laws that are still on the books evenly, fairly and correctly. It’s going to take white cops standing up to other white cops and saying “what you’re doing is wrong”. It’s going to take us standing together and saying we are all human and as such, all deserve to be treated fairly and equally. We can no longer remain silent and ‘not get involved’. To do so is to condone these behaviors that cost black lives. To do so is to allow cops to continue to murder people and cover it up by calling it justified despite video that says otherwise.


I’m not saying that as a white woman with only daughters that I understand what black mothers face when they have children. But I know that I would be devastated to lose one of my children and cannot imagine what it must be like to have to teach my children to just do as they’re told and to avoid any kind of confrontation with the law because their lives are at risk in any given situation. I can imagine what it’s like to worry about what the adults and adolescents in my own neighborhood are doing because their actions put my children at risk. I’ve lived among them and that part I fully understand. But I did not live with the fear that desperation would drive my children to join their ranks. I didn’t have to live with the fact that hormonal teenagers harbor resentment for that kind of life and that surviving with those resentments is a major hurtle for many of them. I can see why so many of them are so angry. They have every right to be. I’ve also lived among rednecks who are quick to say “they’ve never been slaves themselves so what are they angry about?” How can one be so sure of that? They may not be calling anyone master and they may not be living on a plantation. They may be getting paid when they do work, but that doesn’t make them less of a slave to the system. That’s not to say that none of the white working poor are any less of a slave to the system but it’s much more common among black communities. And the system feeds the poor white communities the idea that it’s in their hands to change their situation but that they’re poor because blacks or immigrants are taking their jobs when that’s simply not true. Good paying jobs are not being taken from poor whites and given to poor blacks or immigrants, they’re being outsourced. Yet these poor whites believe the lies they’re being told and continue to vote against the best interests of all the poor in this country because they’ve been force fed these lies and believe them because their education has been cut to the bare bones. They’ve been taught to pass tests instead of to question what they’re told and to think for themselves.


The only way to change is to come together as one and speak in once voice. The best way to do that is to vote. But it can also be done by participating in community events. We can stand, black, white, Hispanic, Asian, Native American hand in hand and speak in one voice ENOUGH. We as a nation must stop fighting amongst ourselves and stand together to fight for all of us against a system controlled by Corporations. This is the only way revolution can happen. It’s the only true path to change. We must realize and accept our differences but to stand together in our similarities. We all want the same things; peace, fairness, opportunity, stability, and better for our children. And if we decide that animals are suffering and dying at the hands of the same people that humans are, we stand up for them too.

To Be Constitutional or not to be?

We have discussed before how legislation often doesn’t mean what it appears to mean. And it garners support for what people assume that it means based on its title; case in point, Georgia State Senator Josh McKoon’s ‘Religious Freedom” bill. To see it named such a title, most who don’t bother to read it or at least do minimal research on what it is would assume it’s to protect religious freedom.

At first glance, it is, that is until one starts looking into the wording of the bill. The first question that comes to mind is why would we need this bill if our religious freedom is protected in the bill of rights? Amendment I Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. What the new law does is allow people to discriminate against other people using religious freedom as an excuse. It does not, however address the fact that by doing so, it denies the victims it creates THEIR freedoms. Not just religious but others as well. The exact wording of the law can be found here: http://www.legis.ga.gov/legislation/en-US/Display/20152016/SB/129 .

Let’s take a closer look what the act says. The first section describes that it’s an amendment to title 50 of the Georgia code. The meaning of that is simple. It’s an amendment to change what title 50 says….language we’re use to in the Constitution. So that part is easy. Then it goes on to say what its intent and purpose is. First, to preserve religious freedom; doesn’t the Constitution of the United States do that? So this act is not needed for that. Then it goes on to say ‘to provide for legislative findings and purposes” and my first question there is what findings and what purposes? If I had to guess I’d say to give support for allowing for something title 50 does not allow for. Essentially, it will be determined by any lawyer that can justify any given case.

As we go further, that will become clear. “To provide granting of relief” is likely interpreted as a relief of a burden. The definition of said burden is left undefined so that it can be interpreted widely. This was done intentionally. They WANT it to be interpreted widely so as to allow for it to be applied to anything and everything they want to use it for, thereby gutting the laws that prohibit what they are working to allow for. “To provide for definitions” leaves it open for the definitions of anything they want it to apply to, case specific…again leaving it wide open to interpretation. “To provide for short title” heaven knows what that means. The other parts of this law are scary enough to make it dangerous without interpreting that short piece. “To provide an effective date” means just what it says probably, but what effective date? And how can that be used? These are questions we have to ask because any law and its language are subject to interpretation and often are interpreted in such a way as to benefit whoever has the most money to pay for its interpretation in their favor. “To repeal conflicting laws”…..WHOA….WHAT? What laws? Any law that conflicts with the purposes this law is intended to support? Here is where the big problems begin. We’ll continue with that further in. Finally on this statement of purposes of this act, “and for other purposes”, another one of those wide open statements intended to allow for wide interpretation. It could be used for any number of things.

The meat of this law is that one small portion of the first paragraph which can also be found in the last line of the act. This is the whole root and foundation of this act.

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination in employment on the basis of race, color, sex or ethnic origin. If a business owner believes he is superior to anyone that this law protects, he can claim it’s a “sincerely held religious belief” and render this law null and void, thereby repealing this conflicting law. It also allows for them to discriminate against interracial couples. I know this sounds extreme, but this act allows for such extremism. (Which is pretty much the point in opposing this act) (http://www.dol.gov/dol/aboutdol/history/herman/reports/futurework/conference/staffing/9.7_discrimination.htm) –

Pregnancy Discrimination act of 1978 was intended to amend Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to included prohibiting discrimination against pregnant women. Under this proposed Act, if an employer decides he doesn’t like the fact that one of his employees is unmarried and pregnant, he can claim it’s against his religion and he cannot employ a woman who is pregnant but not married and fire her, rendering the Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978 repealed according to the terms of this act. (http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/statutes/pregnancy.cfm)

This Act would also head off any anti-discrimination legislation that could come in the near future, such as LGBT protections. All they would have to do is claim religious exemption to the new laws and continue to discriminate at will.

This supposed ‘Religious freedom” Act is an abuse in that it allows business owners to deny anyone who works for them their own rights, making the business owners rights prevalent over anyone else’s. Not only that, but it allows them to deny service to anyone they wish to deny and call it against their religion. Think about that for a minute. People own a business and their rights are more important than the rights of the people who work for them. Rich people’s rights are more important than the rights of the middle class and the poor. Isn’t that EXACTLY what the founding fathers were trying to protect us from? Isn’t that part of the oppression that many were escaping when they came to the United States? And consider this; if a person is denying their employee birth control because it’s against the business owner’s religion, isn’t that forcing that employee to conform to the religious beliefs of their employer? Does that not deny the citizen her own rights to religious freedom? So in that sense, how does THIS law protect religious freedom?

And then there is the most important issue. The Grand Poobah (in the words of Fred Flintstone) of all applications of this act. The one for which it was intended; The Affordable Care Act. If there is one thing the rich are pissed about, it’s that the Affordable Care Act forces them to provide decent healthcare options to their employees. Federal law requires them to provide preventive services in EVERY policy and they have to be paid at 100% of the allowed amount. So the cost of these policies is bound to go up because this is better coverage for everyone, right? Actually, no. The cost is contained because if you utilize your preventive care consistently, you will head off any illness that could be seriously costly by catching and treating it early, thereby reducing costs before it even happens. And healthy employees don’t call out sick, but that’s a different blog altogether.

(a) The General Assembly finds and determines that: (1) The framers of the United States Constitution and the people of this state, recognizing free exercise of religion as an inalienable right, secured its protection in the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and in Paragraphs III and IV of Section I, Article I of the Constitution of this state, respectively;

Okay, this says the framers of the constitution and the people of the state recognizing the free exercise of religion as an inalienable right. But who determines who is exercising that right? In the first amendment, it says the free exercise thereof but it does not say unless you work for someone of a different religion. It says Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or free exercise thereof. Meaning Congress isn’t allowed to make laws respecting one religion over another nor any law restricting the free exercise thereof. It does not make exceptions. Does not this act respect the religion of a business owner over that of his employees and his customers? Does it not also inhibit the free exercise of the religion of those employees or customers in favor of that of the business owner?

Then it goes on to give additional excuses for a need for this law as (2) Laws neutral toward religion may burden religious exercise as surely as laws intended to interfere with religious exercise;

Could be interpreted as laws that prohibit discrimination interfere with religious exercise, therefore they need to be eliminated. Or perhaps any law that was passed to protect people could be used to hurt the people. Isn’t that exactly what this act is doing? Sure looks that way to me.

Then (3) Governments should not substantially burden religious exercise without compelling Justification.

Okay, it’s obvious that they’re calling cost a burden. But how could providing services to a mixed couple or a same sex couple be construed as a burden to religious exercise? It’s obvious now what “other purposes” refers to isn’t it? And the reasons for leaving the law wide open for interpretation is also obvious.

I think I’ve made my point in interpreting the purposes and extreme possibilities of this law evident. Need I go on? Lines 24-42 of the act merely cite cases the writer seems to believe justify the creation of this act in that they allow for similar interpretations of the law. He considers them justification. He then uses discrimination as justification for this law. But his interpretation of discrimination is to claim discrimination against those being prohibited from discrimination. It’s hardly justification to create this law, opening the floodgates to wash the state and any state that follows suit back into the 1960s.

(a) Government shall not substantially burden a person’s exercise of religion even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability, except as provided in subsection (b) of this Code section. (b) Government may substantially burden a person’s exercise of religion only if it demonstrates that application of the burden to the person is: (1) In furtherance of a compelling governmental interest; and (2) The least restrictive means of achieving that compelling governmental interest.

Again, this section is dependent upon the interpretation of the term “substantially burden” which is left wide open to interpretation by the terms of the act. This being said, anyone that can pay more has the potential to swing the judicial interpretation their way. That’s not to say all judges are corrupt but the Supreme Court has shown that some of its members tend to rule in favor of whoever has the ability to pay more or whoever has more financial pull. (Burwell vs. Hobby Lobby) At least one has contradicted himself in his own rulings in order to please the “right side” of the argument. The point in this statement is that this law opens the door for this kind of corruption. Without going too deep into interpretation on this portion of the act, it speaks loudly to me of money, ‘big government’ having too much control and it costing business owners. You know the typical tea party approach to how things work in their world. And I don’t have to express how I feel about that. My blog name says it all on that score.

(c) A person whose religious exercise has been burdened in violation of this chapter may assert that violation as a claim or defense in a judicial proceeding and obtain appropriate relief against government.

Relief in this clause of course means relief from the burden of having to treat someone fairly under the law; or relief from following the anti-discrimination laws because they are hurting you in some way. The fact that not enforcing these laws on you because you have a religion you think exempts you from treating people fairly and as human beings is hurting those you’re discriminating against, don’t you think? Business owners want a free pass from enforcement of federal laws based on their religion. How is that fair and balanced?

And then there’s this: In any action or proceeding to enforce a provision of this chapter, the court or tribunal may allow the prevailing party, other than government, a reasonable attorney fee as part of costs.

They want you the tax payer to pay the court costs that it takes to gain relief from the burden treating you like an equal human being and using their religion as an excuse for doing so. Heaven forbid a rich man pay a fee to get things ruled in his favor.

My main point is this. Men make laws and give them simple names that encourage the ignorant to support them. By not exploring the meaning of such laws, we do ourselves a disservice. There are likely still many who read this who disagree with my take on it that still have not made the connection that if these laws allow a “Christian company” like Hobby Lobby to deny their employees birth control because they don’t believe in it, that it also means a “Muslim company” could begin to force women to wear burkas or even fire them because a woman’s place is in the home, not in a man’s working world. These laws don’t specifically name Christianity as the definition of religion. So one may assume this is putting God into the laws of this country and its “Christian values” but it’s not that specific. Do you want people of other religions forcing their beliefs on you?

I thought not.

Columbus NOW

Whether people admit it or not, women are under attack. And not just physical attacks like rape and domestic violence. They’re also attacking our rights. And it’s being done on multiple levels. The reason so many people don’t believe it is not just because the politicians are denying it. It’s because the right wing media is hiding it while they slowly chip away at the legal weapons we have to fight it.


Why would anyone want to redefine rape? Rape is rape. If a woman doesn’t want to have sex with a man and he forces her to, that is rape. If she says no, that’s rape. If he drugs her or gets her drunk and forces himself on her, that is rape. If she is unconscious, she cannot say no, that’s rape. Who’s going to fight this redefinition if we don’t speak up for ourselves and each other? No one will. It’s up to us.


Why would anyone be interested in giving a rapist the right to visitation with a child who is the result of his rape of the child’s mother? So he can terrorize her again, repeatedly, with the law on his side? This would make a woman’s life a living hell. Why would they want to punish a woman for being raped? Hasn’t she already been punished enough? Why SHOULD a man have a say in whether or not a woman can abort a zygote put there by brutality on her body? What makes anyone think they have the right to do so? Who’s going to teach them that this is not okay if we don’t?


We all, but especially women, need to stand up and say human beings are human beings regardless of their sex, sexual orientation, race, creed, or religion and if there is any God given right, it’s to be treated as a human being. That means not only not being called a piece of meat or an animal, it also means not being controlled or manipulated by another human who thinks he is superior. It means not being owned, controlled or oppressed. It means being allowed to make our own decisions about how to live our lives. It means deciding what courses of action are best for us. It means being granted the same rights as every other human.


If you are in the Columbus, Georgia area, and you believe in women’s rights, equality, equal pay, and equal protection for women under the law, please join us in bringing to Columbus a chapter of the National Organization for Women. Let your voices be heard. Contact me on Facebook for details.