Black on White Crime is NOT equal to White on Black (?)

Black people in America seem to get very angry and band together when we are victims of White perpetrated crimes. But where is the disgust and anger when we badger, torment and/or kill White people?

Where's the banding together to ensure that those who committed the crimes (regardless of race) are arrested and charged? Also, why don't we get even more outraged about black on black crime? We are tearing ourselves apart. 

We as black people need to stop with this "us vs. them" attitude and start embracing that crimes perpetrated against any person are wrong. And yes, I understand that there are other people out there besides blacks that don't follow the law but, to quote Diddy, we can't change the world until we change ourselves.

CNN's LZ Granderson talkes more about his disappointment in Black culture here. It's a nice read.

What are your thoughts? Should black people care more about one crime than another? 

"Secretary"

Does the word "secretary" mean anything to you? Does it make you cringe or does it leave you unaffected?

Well apparently, the word is somewhat demeaning, and unreflective of the professional duties required by the position. Enter the word: "administrative assistant".

Warren Buffet's secretary, Debbie Bosanek, doesn't seem to mind still being called a secretary. And most people would agree that its just a cultural gap---older people don't have a problem using words that used to be okay until we (the younger generation) deemed they were unfit for circulation. And who says older people should have to change what they've been doing?

Stand Your Ground, says Grandmom

If you've been following the Trayvon Martin/George Zimmerman saga, you've heard the words "Stand Your Ground" used multiple times. But do you know where the law came from?

Meet her here: Marion Hammer. 

She's a 70 year old woman with a chip on her shoulder and a gun drawn. She's been a great shot for years and was a leader in creating the 2005 controversial Stand Your Ground law. The law was cited as the reason that George Zimmerman was not immediately arrested and charged for the Martin shooting. Proponents of the law call it the "Make My Day" law and think it levels the playing field while opponents say it brings about vigilantism.

Marion flashed her weapon once when she was a younger woman and it stopped several men from attacking her. That is the reason she is so adamant about the Second Amendment.

Where do you think you would be without the right to bear arms?

jewish without the judaism... can it work?

I'm a huge proponent of religious freedoms (and freedom from religion) so this article's headline attracted me:

"My Faith: Raising religious (but not too religious) children"

To the author, "Religion was an interesting idea more than a belief system."   The author, a mother in this case, decided that living as a secular Jew was not in the best interest of her children and decided to pass along a little more of the religious aspect of her culture to them.

I found the article interesting because in my opinion, children shouldn't be force fed religion and should choose what religion (if any) they will choose to follow. However, this  article presented a different side of religion--the cultural issues. Jewish people actually have a distinct culture attached to their beliefs so it's hard to differentiate teaching your child who they are and what they believe. In Judaism, they are quite intertwined.

collegiate athletics --- a paradox?

There's a few things I really enjoy talking about. Sports, music, and accounting. (I know, pretty boring, right?)

Collegiate sports is such a great topic because the intensity with which the players compete, and the pride that they ooze out on the court, field, track, and ice is amazing. As with everything, there is good and bad and with collegiate sports comes the controversy of the "student-athlete".

The NCAA touts that its student-athletes are students first but schools constantly contradict that by allowing the athletes (which help contribute millions of dollars to their respective universities) to take (meaningless) majors with low eventual profitability and/or low difficulty. For example, this article I read today, claims that big-time schools' Athletic Departments ask teachers to basically 'take it easy' on the athletes in their class. By doing this, schools are telling their athletes: "We couldn't care less about your academic composition and development and after you graduate, we don't care what happens to you. But thanks for putting kids in the stands for us." NCAA, why say you hold them to the same standards as other students if you know that you really don't?

So here's the paradoxical issue: if the NCAA wants them to be students first---make them students. Put them in classrooms (and monitor their attendance) and challenge them! Help them succeed and hold them truly accountable. BUT! There's another obvious side to this. There are some collegiate athletes who don't really plan on using the college tools and really just want to use the college level as a springboard to the big league, which is perfectly fine. And if this is the case---the NCAA NEEDS TO ADMIT THEY ARE NOT FULL-TIME STUDENTS. Allow them to take "phony" classes, skip as many as they'd like, and treat their sport as their full time employment.

The NCAA cant have it both ways. You can't treat a student like a superstar athlete with little classroom obligation and then portend to say 'education comes first.' The only thing that matters to the NCAA are the dollar signs.

Dear Catholic Church, Get Over Yourself. Signed, America

The Roman Catholic Church says they're getting picked on. What's new?

The American Bishops have decided to launch a new initiative to protect the rights of their religious freedoms. They claim that recent issues in American culture and government practices have encroached upon the precious rights that are granted to Roman Catholics throughout these United States. As we read in the news about which things are bothering the Church and disrespecting the Church's rights, I sit and wonder when the Church will stop disrespecting the rights of American Women by limiting control of our own reproductive organs, and when the Church will stop treating homosexuals as second class citizens. Where's their initiative for that?

What type of issues are bothering the Catholic Church? Well, of course the usual---rampant homosexuality, same-sex marriages--but lately its women's rights, availability of free contraception coverage that have been bothering them.

"Religious liberty is under attack, both home and abroad," American bishops said on Thursday in their document which is titled "Our first, most cherished freedom."

So let's talk about the backdrop story: After the United States attempted to amend a version of its Affordable Health Care Act requiring employers, not insurance companies, to pay for contraceptive coverage---hoping to appease the Catholic groups who objected to Catholic entities (colleges, hospitals, etc) having to fund contraception coverage, The Roman Catholic Church says: No Dice. It's not good enough. And honestly, I can see their displeasure. However, acting as if they are the little guy that's getting trampled on by legislation as they lead hundreds rallies and charges every year to make abortion illegal and limit women's rights is a bit sideways to me.

Another side to the story: The Catholic Church has had several Catholic foster care and adoption services put out of business because those entities REFUSED to place children with gay couples or unmarried straight couples. Because of this adamant discrimination, public/government funds cannot be given to the Catholic child services entities and thus, the services have failed. What happened to 'beggars can't be choosy?' I'm willing to bet the $23.75 in my checking account that every single one of those kids would have been better off in a home with a family rather than in an orphanage. Where are there priorities? Are they so caught up in believing the immorality of homosexuality and cohabitation that the children can't get a chance to get a family? (And anybody that comments that unmarried people shouldn't be able to adopt because they can break up at any time which will cause stress to the child, please see Divorce Rates and then get back to me.)

See here an article posted on the Right Wing News website that headlines: "Homosexual Agenda Used to Close Catholic Adoption Services" noting in the article that Catholicism is one of the last "roadblocks on the road to totalitarianism" and thus, liberals use the corroding "obscene travesty of homosexual marriage" to attack it. So, anyone defending their freedoms that are "under attack",  has an ulterior motive to undermine the Catholic Church? Excuse me while I gag.

So, finally, this initiative is going to be "extensive and it's going to be occurring over a few years," and it will include urging priests to individually speak out in favor of religious freedoms and including inserts in church bulletins.

"The encroachment upon the rights of Catholic Americans is a plight that must be ended immediately, says American Bishops. "This is not a Catholic issue," the statement released by the Bishops said, "This is not a Jewish issue. This is not an Orthodox, Mormon or Muslim issue. It is an American issue."

Well, they seem to be the only ones crying about their rights as they step on others. So, yeah, I'd say its a Catholic issue.

What are your thoughts?

north korea stirring up trouble

Yesterday, North Korea made headlines by launching (albeit, botched) long-range missile. The United Nations will meet today and discuss what actually occurred. Also, Secretary General Ban Ki-moon warned North Korea not to do anything to further provoke the world community and or heighten an already increased tension.  While the United States (along with South Korea and Japan) sees this missile launch as a long-range ballistic missile test, North Korea says the missile was designed to carry an observation satellite into orbit. Only time will tell how this will play out. Hopefully, North Korea doesn't plan a huge aggressive move to save face.