Everyone needs to access the situation
I just hope that people remember that he is an American citizen and gets a fair trial as afforded by being so. When you start making exceptions to the rule regarding due process, it becomes quite easy to bend the rules for lesser crimes. If this were Adam Lanza would the narrative been different? A white kid from CT with no father figure. I think so. It may seem silly to call him a suspect but this is what makes America America - innocent until proven guilty no matter how obvious the guilt appears to be. Only when the majority of us lose this right will we realize, too late, our folly of blind vengeful retribution.
Living Locally.
After travelling so much these last few months I’ve noticed something that most of us Americans are guilty of. Not living locally.
Let me explain.
For most people, we live ordinary, suburban lives in places like Kansas City, Louisville, Columbus, and Buffalo. We go to work, come home and veg in front of the sitcom of the day, and then after doing our evening and nightly rituals, we start the process over in 7 hours. Upon the arrival of Friday, we might hit up the local Chili’s for happy hour, spending the weekend doing whatever normal people do. Throughout this cycle I’ve noticed people pine for more interesting places. “Oh, I just want to move to LA.” “Or why can’t we have culture like New York City?” “Nothing is interesting about where we live.” To this, I say nonsense.
Our collective problem is that instead of looking around us, we are looking to other places for cultural salvation and stimulation. This is not to say that upon seeing a cool idea in Portland on a business trip we can’t say, “Why can’t we have a daily farmer’s market in Amarillo?” You can. And you might already have it, just not know that it exists.
When people visit New York or Chicago, many of them go to the theatre because they’re great theatre towns. And we should see Cats or Wicked or whatever, but I say let’s not leave this to vacations and special shangri-las. Your town has theatre. Hell, they might have a ballet, a symphony, an opera, a comedy club, and sometimes all of them. (Columbus, where I grew up have all of them!) But for some reason, hardly anyone goes. If you live in a small town, patronize your local theatre. Who knows, you might have the next Meryl Streep on stage.
Other places are blessed with different things that make them unique, but do a little searching and find what there is in your own hometown. And if you think your tiny city needs a farmers market every week, or an arts festival, talk with your neighbors, and start one! Even if you have terrible restaurants, or no restaurants, start a supper club with people in your area that are foodies. And today, with things like blogging, meetup.com, and other online resources, coming together is the easiest it’s ever been.
Start living locally.
This is disgusting.
Why is there so much hate in our country?
11 Bizarrely Wrong Beliefs Americans Have About Themselves
I don’t want to live on this planet anymore.
The text (especially the sources at the bottom) is kind of blurry on the dashboard. Click through for a larger version.
Could not be more true.
Is anyone reasonable any more?!
GOD BLESS AMERICA.
Dayyum… I don’t like women’s sports, but holy lord.
The (Racist) History of Government-Regulated Marriage
So much yes.From the article:
WHY do people — gay or straight — need the state’s permission to marry? For most of Western history, they didn’t, because marriage was a private contract between two families. The parents’ agreement to the match, not the approval of church or state, was what confirmed its validity.
For 16 centuries, Christianity also defined the validity of a marriage on the basis of a couple’s wishes. If two people claimed they had exchanged marital vows — even out alone by the haystack — the Catholic Church accepted that they were validly married.
In 1215, the church decreed that a “licit” marriage must take place in church. But people who married illictly had the same rights and obligations as a couple married in church: their children were legitimate; the wife had the same inheritance rights; the couple was subject to the same prohibitions against divorce.
Not until the 16th century did European states begin to require that marriages be performed under legal auspices. In part, this was an attempt to prevent unions between young adults whose parents opposed their match.
The American colonies officially required marriages to be registered, but until the mid-19th century, state supreme courts routinely ruled that public cohabitation was sufficient evidence of a valid marriage. By the later part of that century, however, the United States began to nullify common-law marriages and exert more control over who was allowed to marry.
By the 1920s, 38 states prohibited whites from marrying blacks, “mulattos,” Japanese, Chinese, Indians, “Mongolians,” “Malays” or Filipinos. Twelve states would not issue a marriage license if one partner was a drunk, an addict or a “mental defect.” Eighteen states set barriers to remarriage after divorce.
In the mid-20th century, governments began to get out of the business of deciding which couples were “fit” to marry. Courts invalidated laws against interracial marriage, struck down other barriers and even extended marriage rights to prisoners….
Possession of a marriage license is no longer the chief determinant of which obligations a couple must keep, either to their children or to each other. But it still determines which obligations a couple can keep — who gets hospital visitation rights, family leave, health care and survivor’s benefits. This may serve the purpose of some moralists. But it doesn’t serve the public interest of helping individuals meet their care-giving commitments.
Perhaps it’s time to revert to a much older marital tradition. Let churches decide which marriages they deem “licit.” But let couples — gay or straight — decide if they want the legal protections and obligations of a committed relationship.
