Category: culture

Posted on

State-sponsored anti-discriminatory discrimination? Way to fight “discriminatory” laws by discriminating against other states, California.

Image may be subject to copyright.When California deems other states’ laws as discriminatory, what do they do? They pass discriminatory laws to fight these discriminatory laws.

“Our country has made great strides in dismantling prejudicial laws that have deprived too many of our fellow Americans of their precious rights,” trumpets California Attorney General Xavier Becerra.

So in the spirit of prejudicial law dismantling, California has assembled a prejudicial law (AB 1887) that restricts state-funded travel to Tennessee, North Carolina, Mississippi, Kansas, Alabama, Kentucky, South Dakota and Texas.

“While the California DOJ works to protect the rights of all our people, discriminatory laws in any part of our country send all of us several steps back,” says Becerra. “That’s why when California said we would not tolerate discrimination against LGBTQ members of our community, we meant it.”

Zero tolerance of intolerance

It seems that California lawmaker considers any community in any state as their community and will not tolerate discrimination against any LGBTQ member in any community…because they’re part of California’s (global) LGBTQ community, you see. Wait…what?

We are the world. Or at least the nation. Or maybe just the state.

Which discriminatory laws of other states prompted heroic measures like AB 1887? Here’s one:

Mississippi’s “Protecting Freedom of Conscience from Government Discrimination Act” (House Bill 1523) prohibits the state from discriminating against churches and businesses that believe marriage should be between one man and one woman and who decline to provide services to facilitate same sex marriages because doing so would violate “a sincerely held religious belief or moral conviction.”

Here’s another:

South Dakota’s Senate Bill 149 shields faith-based and private child placement agencies from state-sponsored discriminatory measures. This means that if these agencies refuse to provide any service, including adoption or foster care services, on the basis of their religious convictions, the state will not retaliate against them.

So rather than “opening the door to discrimination” as opponents claim, the bills actually close the door on state-sponsored discrimination against the free exercise of religion—in theses cases—the violation of religious entities sincerely held beliefs.

Chucking the discriminatory First Amendment

State retaliation against religious entities, which violates the First Amendment separation of church and state, is an unconstitutional practice California champions and demands that other states employ…or…dun dun DUN! They’ll wield the incredibly intimidating travel ban.

It seems that Texas and the other pariah states are shaking in their boots. Here’s a response from the Texas Governor’s office: “California may be able to stop their state employees, but they can’t stop all the businesses that are fleeing over taxation and regulation and relocating to Texas.”

Snark attacks and giggles aside, the crux of this debate is this:

California considers faith-based entities sincerely held beliefs concerning gender, marriage and sexuality backward and discriminatory. They will not tolerate discrimination in any form, but don’t seem to realize that using state power to discriminate against entities they deem discriminatory is a form of discrimination. And so is their silly travel ban.

Or worse—they know very well that they’re doing the very thing they decry, but justify it based on their sincerely held beliefs. Beliefs that run counter to theirs “send all of us several steps back,” as California Attorney General Xavier Becerra so sanctimoniously pronounced.

According to Becerra, California will not tolerate people being “deprived” of their “precious” rights—except those people whom California seeks to deprive of their constitutional religious liberty rights.

Dear Governor Brown and California lawmakers,

If your voters allow you to abuse the power of your state to discriminate against citizens and private businesses, that’s their failure. Why would you expect other states to believe as you do and jettison the constitutional separation of church and state? Do you truly believe that your beliefs about gender, marriage and sexuality trump others’ beliefs?

A travel ban? Really? AB 1887 makes you look arrogant, small-minded and silly. Sorry, but your bill is as impotent as it is self-important.

Here’s a time-tested truth: Your sincerely held beliefs about marriage and gender are the product of a relatively recent zeitgeist and are shared by a minority. Notwithstanding, the Constitution protects your right to hold them.

Vast majorities in societies worldwide for centuries have embraced sincerely held beliefs regarding marriage and gender. Don’t they deserve the same protection?

Posted on

Diversity=disunity. Rediscovering the American Dream is our only hope.

dream

We become not a melting pot but a beautiful mosaic. Different people, different beliefs, different yearnings, different hopes, different dreams. ~Jimmy Carter

Let’s talk about the dream that once made our nation strong. This vision has nothing to do with differing anything. Where once our differences were incidental; they’re now monumental. What can we do to overcome our obstacles and achieve real unity? Rediscover our shared American Dream.

The American Dream once beckoned hopeful immigrants to come for the chance to build new lives through opportunity and freedom. If they could only get to our shores, they reasoned, they could work hard to become citizens in a nation that, far from perfect, afforded them the best chance to build new and better lives.

What happened to the American Dream? It’s been lost to the limiting, shaming and militant god of cultural diversity. If my grandfather had arrived in 2021 instead of 1909, he would find a once promising and relatively united country torn and tugged by division and a glorification of all things different.

Building barriers, not bridges

Instead of discovering a diverse nation of fellow immigrants and new citizens united by a shared dream, he’d be encouraged to cling to his cultural heritage and to resist embracing American culture—the very culture his family had scrimped and saved and sacrificed everything to join.

My grandfather would be confronted by his supposed “white privilege” even though he was more olive than white. America’s diversity dealers would demand he accept his white guilt and embrace his tribe. They don’t build bridges; they build barriers by glorifying differences.

Our once shared American Dream has been trampled and trumped by a small, but vocal minority who decry its legitimacy. A dream that galvanized generations of immigrants has been replaced by a glorification of cultural diversity.

There’s nothing wrong with cultural diversity per se—but there’s everything wrong with it when it divides rather than unites us. Diversity, with the right perspective and emphasis, makes us uniquely American.

Diversity as America

What began as a rekindling of interest in our rich ethnic and cultural origins has become an elevation of all things diverse. And by making diversity an obsession, proponents have denigrated the idea of conforming to a shared national identity.

Here’s a fun factoid:

According to the Online Etymology Dictionary, the word “diversity” only acquired a positive connotation as recently as 1992. Since then, diversity means so much more than … well, what it actually means.

Contrary to our leaders in education, politics and the spirit of the age, diversity does not make for a Utopian paradise of differing and self-contained, yet somehow cohesive mini-cultures. Neither does it weave a strong national tapestry or create a beautiful mosaic. What did diversity mean before its meaning was co-opted?

Diversity is rooted in a Latin word for disagreement, which naturally occurs when people of differing cultures, ethnicities, religions and worldviews come together. Diversity is a close cousin to discord, which is inevitable—just as my words will create discord. Worthwhile diversity is about commitment, not division.

Commitment is constitutional

In America, what unites people with differences is a commitment to a common dream: Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. This is a central tenet of our Constitution, which, by the way, immigrants swear by before they become citizens.

The oath, in part, is this: I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America … that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same.

Renounce allegiance … bear true faith? These words confirm a commitment to a uniquely American way of thinking, an embrace of uniquely American values and dreams. The words of the oath are a commitment to … dun dun DUN … assimilation.

Assimilation good, tribalism bad

Sadly, assimilation has been made a dirty word just as “melting pot” has been made a dirty phrase. Here’s the truth—an immigrant cannot truly commit to becoming an American nor fulfill his or her oath without assimilating.

The idea that successful immigration can occur without assimilation is a relatively new construct—and it’s naturally illogical. A foolish, mouthy minority has convinced a generation of young minds that a culture with differing beliefs, yearnings, hopes and dreams makes for a stronger society and nation. This is nonsense.

Here’s more truth: A culture with different people with differing beliefs and points of origin can be strong—but only if its people are united by a common dream.

Consider the world-changing actions of our “Greatest Generation.” Ask an elderly American what made his or her country great. They certainly don’t cringe at the mention of a melting pot. If they’re honest—and most are—they’ll tell you Jimmy Carter is full of it.

Issue of the heart

This quote by a much more effective president make much more sense: “Citizens by birth or choice, of a common country, that country has a right to concentrate your affections.” ~George Washington

This seems like “nationalism” because it is. Is nationalism also a dirty word? It is now. Somehow, to be a nationalistic nation is to be a racist one—even though our country have been its strongest, wisest and best when we’ve been the most nationalistic. Is it wrong to be a nationalistic superpower? Not when a nation balances its greatness with goodness.

The greatest nations in history were powerful, altruistic and influential in their time. And they were nationalistic … without being Nazi. Take this test: Think about the word nationalism. Does Nazi or Alt Right come to mind? If so, have you been influenced by an ideology?

Conversely, if nationalism makes you think about our nation coming together after Pearl Harbor or 9-11, maybe your mind is still free and historically sensitive and unencumbered by propaganda.

Logic over lunacy

Let’s look at this logically. Allow me to ask some penetrating questions regarding this diversity-as-virtue motif:

When athletes on a sports team hold differing beliefs about how to reach their goal of winning a championship, will they be as likely to become champions? If soldiers in an army have different ideas about how to win a battle and aren’t willing to follow the battle plan, will the army be as effective a fighting force?

When employees of a company don’t conform to a singular business model to achieve profitability, will the company stand the best chance to succeed? If we hold differing beliefs, yearnings, hopes and dreams, can we be strong as a nation?

Never too late

Yes, we can, but only if we lose the hyphen and see ourselves as Americans first and foremost. We desperately need to re-examine this infatuation with elevating and glorifying cultural differences. If you want to appreciate other cultures, please do so, but don’t do it at the expense of a shared American culture.

The opportunity to pursue happiness and the American Dream can be as inviting, accepting and amazing for us and our children and grandchildren as it was for our great-grandparents and their parents.

We’re different, but let’s be different together—as Americans. Let’s resist the diversity despots who create barriers between us by glorifying our differences. By coming together, we can recapture what Americans do best—excel by pursuing a shared dream of freedom, opportunity and goodness through commitment.

Posted on

Cali Crazy: A Texan’s take on the Golden State—part 4—Speed humps, crosswalks and men at work

Californians

The way Californians see traffic and pedestrians is a funny thing. It’s like the way they look at guns and people—instead of teaching humans to handle cars and firearms with care and common sense, they discriminate against the very things that can’t learn a thing—vehicles.

Take this crosswalk conundrum, for instance. What makes more sense—requiring a driver to stop a 7,000-plus pound pickup truck for a lone pedestrian waiting at a crosswalk or for the pedestrian to wait ’til the coast is clear and cross without the danger of another driver in the far lane running ’em over?

It’s about momentum … and physics

Is it me, or don’t it seem like human nature to wanna keep the momentum going in a vehicle rather than stopping for someone who should have sense enough to cross when it’s safe? Humans can stop on a dime, but vehicles take a lot more coin to come to a halt.

By now, you where this is going … things are done a whole lot different in Texas.

It’s more like the Old West there than it is in the Old West here. Texans decide for themselves when to cross the road based on their trusty eyeballs. In California, people rely on laws that establish bipedal supremacy instead of using their noggins.

Californians

Speed humps? Follow me, Californians.

Then there are these silly California “speed humps.” Speed humps? Those are what you see at a dog park. Where I come from, speed humps are called speed BUMPS. But either way, they’re just as annoying. These pesky little mounds of asphalt not only slow you down, they really exercise your pedal patience.

In Texas, you might find a couple of ’em in a strip mall parking lot. But in some parts of California, they’re placed every 30 feet or so. I dunno—maybe the powers that be think the more you annoy drivers, the safer they drive.

And then you got the “Follow Me” escort trucks that state lawmakers think are necessary to “Pilot” people safely past men (and women) at work on roads, bridges and, in the Sierra Nevada, piles of fallen rock. Here’s a Texas tip—use a few traffic cones and put the guys or girls holding STOP signs to work to make things go faster.

Californians
I can see this road work system making sense on two-lane roads, but they seem to employ it for just about any road. And most times, there are four or five workers loitering around watching two people do the work, anyways. They must be unionized.

Too much of a good thing

Public safety is paramount around here. It takes precedence over—like so many other things in California—good sense and personal responsibility. Maybe this stuff is another way the smart folks in Sacramento protect us from ourselves.

Where I come from, people protect themselves by making smart pedestrian and traffic decisions. It’s like how we teach our kids: “Wait ’til there are no cars comin’, Tommy, then cross the road.” The only laws we need are the laws of physics—big, heavy machines take a lot longer to stop than itty-bitty people.

So, let ’em blow by, and go when it’s clear.