What is racism?

Or is it?

Oh, hey, this blog still exists...not that anyone outside of my school is reading it, haha.

Anyway, my blogging assignment for today is to respond to this blog post and the questions it poses. (I only need to answer five of the questions, but I'm doing all twelve because I like stating my opinions, in case you didn't already know that.)

The blogger, Dick Moss, begins the post with a link to a previous post, in which he speaks about how "racist" he found his community's responses to the opening of a new teen hangout spot. While it is quite offensive that the writer of the anonymous letter that has Moss so furious refers to the location as a "Liberty Pole" congregated by "urban-suburban kids," the rest of the letter is just a typical example of an adult having no tolerance for today's bratty kids. I'm willing to bet ten bucks that this person is over the age of sixty and at the risk of sounding like I have a prejudice against older people, that age group came from a pretty bigoted society, so I think we should take their unkind words with a grain of salt. I remember being about twelve and sitting in the car with my eighty-something-year-old great aunt (may she rest in peace) when my mom asked why some houses in her neighborhood were painted in unusually vivid colors. My aunt's response? "Oh, that's where the Puerto Ricans live." Now, I have no idea what the nationality of the residents of these houses had to do with their questionable exterior decorating tastes, but my point is that that's just the way that generation is. My aunt was a good person, and she would never hate anybody because of their physical appearance, but she didn't grow up in a time of political correctness.

Of course, whether or not this letter is rude is not the only issue here; the question is whether it is racist. I might not have been so sure about that a month or two ago, but after recently learning in Social Justice class that racism applies only to people in positions of power who use their racially-motivated hate to actually inflict damage upon the race(s) they dislike. If a person simply speaks or acts in a racially offensive manner without having the power to do anything to their targeted group(s), it is not racism, but rather racial prejudice. So no, this letter is not racist, as it did not have any impact on racial minorities.

Now, onto Moss's questions:

Is it racist for a person (of any color) to tell race-based jokes? (Is it worse if it’s a white man telling the joke? Is it less of a problem if it’s a black man?)
For the reason stated above, no, it's not; it's only racially prejudiced. Is it wrong? Yes, but that doesn't make it racist.

Is it racist for anyone, regardless of color, to use the word “nigger”?
See my answer to the above question.

Is it racist for a restaurant wait staff to let a Latino couple who arrive early for the dinner rush wait until everybody else has been served?
It depends on whether or not they're doing this specifically because the couple is Latino. If so, yes; if not, no. (It's horrible regardless of the reasons, though.)

Is it racist for a white man to forbid African-American nurses from holding his newborn baby?
This is another one that depends on the motivations behind the action. Is the man not allowing these nurses to hold his child because they are black or because he does not think they are qualified nurses for some other reason? Is it possible that he's ridiculously overprotective and just doesn't want any nurse, not even a white one, holding his baby? There's not enough information in this scenario to decide whether or not this man would be in the wrong. Of course, it can't be racist either way, since the nurses are presumably in a higher position of power than the new father.

Is it racist for a police officer to pull over a black family out for a Sunday drive simply because they happen to be in a “white” neighborhood?
Okay, I'm not even going to answer this one because it's completely ridiculous. I'm sure some cops do things like this on occasion, but there's no way any of them would ever admit that they were pulling the family over just for being black, so how would anyone go about proving it?

Is it racist for  a high school homecoming parade to feature a float with a tepee and an “Indian maid” with a feather in her hair to celebrate the school’s athletic teams that are known as the Braves?
This is highly disrespectful, as Native Americans wear  headdresses to symbolize their ranks, and this girl proooobably isn't qualified to wear anything that looks like one, but I don't see how this high school has any influence over Native Americans, so yet again, this is an example of racial prejudice, but not racism.

Is it racist for the Border Patrol to target populations that are clearly Latino in its search for immigrants without proper documentation?
Um, it would be wrong to target an area with any racial makeup without proper documentation. This would most likely be racist, but moreover it's just plain illegal.

Is it racist for a small-business loan officer to favor a loan to a Latino over a loan to an Asian person simply because the Latino is in greater need?
Uh, dude, you just said that the Latino person was in greater need. Of course they should get the money over the Asian person because they need it more. The fact that racism is even being questioned here is just totally stupid because race has nothing to do with anything.

Is it racist for a white prospective police officer to be passed over in favor of an African-American because the city is trying to diversify its police force?
Yes, racism toward white people is still racism. Jobs should be given to the people who are most qualified, regardless of skin color.

Is it racist for a school district’s staff to not reflect the diversity of its student body?
No. Like I just said, race should not be a factor at all when it comes to hiring workers.

Is it racist for a suburban police force to station patrol cars at the border with the city and stop any car driven by someone who looks like they don’t belong?
I think this question is racially prejudiced for suggesting that the people who "look like they don't belong" must be racial minorities.

Is it racist for a particular group of people to be economically and socially isolated in one part of our community?
Probably. I do think that minorities often live in worse neighborhoods because they are less likely to get hired for well-paying jobs, which is wrong on many, many levels. And social isolation is obviously a result of a lack of acceptance.

The answer to most of these questions was, "No, that's not racist," but most of the situations described were quite sinful. Perhaps we shouldn't be asking whether or not something is racist, but rather whether or not it's evil, since that would not only scan for racism, but also for every other problem with the way a person behaves. Is it right to be mean to a black person? Obviously not, because it's not right to be mean to anyone. Isn't that just common sense?

Image courtesy of Deviantart user dmario.

The Ten Commandments and the Holocaust

 vs.












Before explaining how the Holocaust is a flagrant violation of God's law, I think it is important to include a timeline and some important terminology for a better understanding of what exactly took place.

The following timeline covers some important events during the period from 1933 to 1945.

• 1/30/33: Adolf Hitler is elected Chancellor of Germany.
• 3/22/33: The first concentration camp is opened at Dachau.
• 11/9/38: Jews are murdered, are sent to concentration camps, and have their shops and synagogues destroyed on Kristallnacht.
• 11/23/39: Jews in Poland are required to wear yellow stars.
• 5/20/40: Auschwitz is opened.
• 1942: Many Jews are sent to "Death Camps" and gassed.
• 1/27/45: Several concentration camps are closed and the survivors are forced to go on "Death Marches."
• 4/20/45: Hitler commits suicide.
• 5/7/45: Germany surrenders, ending World War II.
• 11/20/45: The Nuremberg trials begin.

 Some vocabulary relating to the Holocaust:

• Antisemitism: discrimination against or prejudice or hostility toward Jews
• Concentration camp: a camp where large numbers of persons are detained for the purpose of concentrating them in one place
• Deportation: the act of expelling a person from their native land
• Genocide: the systematic killing of a racial or cultural group
• Holocaust: the mass murder of Jews under the German Nazi regime from 1941 until 1945
• Kristallnacht: a word meaning "night of broken glass," a display of Nazi violence against the Jewish stores and synagogues on November 9-10, 1938

With that information, it is obvious that the Commandment the Holocaust most directly violates is the Fifth: "Thou shalt not kill." Not only were a great number of Jewish people put to death; even the nonviolent discrimination shown toward them is an affront to human dignity. These people were treated as less than children of God, which is a great sin. Plus, Hitler's suicide was also sinful. Rather than owning up to his actions, he was so cowardly that he simply chose to kill himself. (Of course, even before his death, Hitler was completely rejecting the gift of life that God gave him by choosing to spend it so evilly.)

The Nazis also broke the First Commandment: "I am the Lord thy God, thou shalt not have strange gods before me." They essentially worshiped Hitler by putting his law before God's. Hitler himself valued his country's prosperity over God.

Finally, the Holocaust provides an example of people disregarding the Seventh Commandment: "Thou shalt not steal." Even Jewish people who were not killed were robbed of their opportunities to operate business and make a living, not to mention the fact that their property was greatly damaged on Kristallnacht. Many even had the lives of their loved ones stolen from them, which is far worse than losing any sort of material wealth.

The fact that breaking the Ten Commandments was what led to something as horrific as the Holocaust should encourage us to take these laws seriously and follow them at all costs.

Pictures courtesy of David E. Phillips and BBC.

The information used on the timeline comes from:
http://historyonthenet.com/Chronology/timelineholocaust.htm

The Fifth Commandment

I've been raised Catholic since birth, and I've been receiving a Catholic education since kindergarten, so the Ten Commandments are certainly familiar territory to me. Having ten concrete rules to live by in order to be a good Christian makes enough sense. However, I feel like it is sometimes hard to tell what God intended the Commandments to mean, as opposed to what human beings say they mean. Take the Fifth Commandment: "Thou shalt not kill." It's obvious that God doesn't want us all going on murdering sprees, but beyond that, this statement is a bit vague. As an independent thinker, I don't necessarily agree with everything the Church says counts as killing, but I do think I have a good sense of right vs. wrong. And so today I shall discuss my thoughts on three different subjects: abortion, capital punishment, and assisted suicide.

Abortion is an extremely controversial topic, and one on which I have a strong opinion. I have to agree with the standard Catholic belief that infanticide is evil simply because that's what my conscience tells me. I know not everyone is ready to have children, and there are people like rape victims who don't even choose to become pregnant, but I just don't understand how anyone could live with the guilt of killing their own child. And it's wrong to not give a baby a chance at life because of a lack of money to raise it. There is such a thing as adoption, you know. There are plenty of couples out there who can't have children of their own and would love to have someone else's. I know some people think that sending a child off to an orphanage might not give them the best quality of life, but even a difficult life is better than not having the chance to live at all. Even if giving birth could be dangerous for the mother, I think it's supposed to be a natural instinct that parents will do whatever it takes to protect their children, even if it means dying. Besides, I don't see any issues with birth complications that couldn't be solved by manner of Caesarean section, so in first world countries, this shouldn't even be a problem. Now, I'm not sure if I want abortion to be illegal, since I know it's going to happen whether it's legal or not, but I do find it totally disgusting.

As for capital punishment, I think I've been over this in an earlier post, but it never hurts to state my opinion again. There is no reason to kill a criminal who is already locked away in prison where he can't do society any harm. Why kill without necessity? Not only is taking a life something God alone has the right to do, it robs the person of the opportunity to atone for his sins, and no matter how obvious it may seem that someone is guilty, there is almost never any such thing as complete proof. The justice system has failed in the past, and it would be horrible to execute someone for a crime he did not even commit. I know sometimes killing is unavoidable. I understand that there are cases when a person is running away and arresting him might not be doable without some gunshots, but these shots should not hit any vital organs if possible. Killing should always be a last resort.

Assisted suicide is probably the only type of killing that I'm truly iffy about. On the one hand, doctors are sometimes wrong when they tell a person he is going to die - My grandpa had skin cancer when he was about forty, and the doctors gave him six months to live. He is now 84, and in pretty good health for his age. - so choosing to be euthanized because you are going to die anyway is not a foolproof plan. However, nobody deserves to be a vegetable; that doesn't qualify as being alive in my opinion. I think if a person knows that he will be comatose for the rest of his life, he should have the right to die before that happens, while he still has the free will to make that decision. I guess my solution to such a problem would be to take  someone off of life support in a situation like this. It's not the same as a lethal dose of drugs; it's letting nature take its course. I just don't see the point of keeping someone's body alive when the soul is not in it.

I guess for me, my stances on issues like these are brought about by the common sense that God gave me. If my gut tells me something is wrong, then it must be wrong. Regardless of religion, I think if everyone trusted their instincts, there would be a lot less tragedy in the world.

Picture courtesy of Pontus Edenberg.

More on Trayvon Martin

In my last post I discussed the Trayvon Martin case quite passionately. Well, it looks like I'm not the only one with strong feelings about what took place when this innocent young man was killed. Trayvon's name is showing up all over the media, which is not surprising in itself, but people have had some very different responses, some of which seemed strange to me.

Various athletes such as the Miami Heat players have been rallying for the arrest of murderer George Zimmerman, wearing hoodies like the one Martin wore and writing messages on their sneakers to promote awareness. Protestors all over the U.S. are making a stand. Even President Obama has expressed his empathy for Trayvon's mourning parents, claiming that if he had a son, he would look an awful lot like Trayvon. As a parent, even the leader of our country can appreciate just how utterly sick it is that a teenage boy is dead through no fault of his own. If only everyone would take the time to understand this simple concept.

It is wonderful to see this cause getting the publicity it deserves. However, some people have no respect for the dead and are just being flat-out nasty. Newt Gingrich is criticizing Obama for bringing Martin's looks into the equation, saying that Obama would not care about this boy if he weren't black. Okay, Newt, we get it, you don't like Obama. Now, can we please quit it with the Democrat vs. Republican war for ten seconds and think about the fact that a kid is dead? Politicians these days only seem to care about insulting each other and often forget about the bigger picture.

Stories about Martin not being the perfect student are going around. Apparently he has been suspended for missing and being tardy to class and creating graffiti and has gotten into trouble for suspicion of marijuana possession. How true this information is is questionable, but even if Trayvon was a bit of a troublemaker, does that really change anything? The fact of the matter is that he wasn't doing anything wrong on the day he was shot, and even if he was looking for pot or a wall to spray paint, he obviously wasn't the type of person to cause someone else physical harm, and minor crimes like these are nothing to shoot a kid over. Besides, how would you like it if one of your loved ones was killed and the media was obsessing over every little thing he did wrong in his life? Well, that's what Trayvon's parents are dealing with right now, and if you're besmirching the image of their deceased son, you should feel pretty bad about yourself.

 Picture courtesy of AP Photo/Martin family.

Check out the following sites:

http://espn.go.com/espn/commentary/story/_/page/hill-120326/lebron-james-other-athletes-protest-trayvon-martin-shooting-show-change-agent-power-sports
http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/26/justice/florida-teen-shooting-events/index.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/23/obama-trayvon-martin_n_1375083.html
http://news.yahoo.com/gingrich-calls-obamas-trayvon-martin-remarks-disgraceful-001455842--abc-news.html
http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/03/26/10872124-trayvon-martin-was-suspended-three-times-from-school

People are idiots.

Apparently this is the face of a dangerous young man.

 I went to bed yesterday in a bad mood. Lately I've been thinking a lot about how, while I truly believe that humanity as a whole is good, the vast majority of those in power couldn't care less about the well-being of other human beings. Most of them only worry about money, and some of them don't seem to have any motivation at all for what they do besides some sick desire to entertain themselves in a sadistic manner. (Joseph Kony, I'm looking at you.) I think the reason everyone's so crazy about The Hunger Games these days is that it's a startlingly realistic idea of what America's future could be like. Honestly, I would not be surprised at all if, a couple centuries from now, the government maintains control by forcing innocent teenagers to slaughter each other like it's a sport.

Yeah, just because I act all cheerful and smiley most of the time doesn't mean I'm not a cynical person deep down.

As if I hadn't already lost enough faith in the world, this morning I became educated on the murder of Trayvon Martin. Martin was a seventeen-year-old Floridian known for his good grades and pleasant demeanor before some psychopath named George Zimmerman shot him in the chest just because he seemed "suspicious" while walking around a gated community to visit his father's fiancee. He was dressed in jeans, a hoodie, and sneakers, and armed with Skittles. (Yes, that's right, Skittles. Apparently rainbow-colored candy is considered a WMD in Sanford, Florida.) But according to the "Stand Your Ground" laws that exist in numerous U.S. states, a person can "defend himself" from anyone who seems like a threat by using violence. Considering the fact that what makes a person seem like a threat is highly subjective, I don't see any reason why we won't soon see cases of one kid shanking another because she sees the fact that he called Justin Bieber a bad name as hostile behavior.

Now, to be honest, I don't think George Zimmerman is a mentally stable man. The first tip-off should be that he's called 911 a whopping 46 times since January 1, 2011. How does one make that many 911 calls over the course of a year? "Hi, I'd like to report that my girlfriend just dumped me. I think we have a situation here." "Mayday, mayday! I need to relieve myself, but these public toilets are totally unsanitary!" At least, I'd like to believe that no one with fully functioning brain-cells would shoot an innocent teenager after the police specifically told him not to. I'm not saying what he did was in any way acceptable or that I forgive him for being a complete and total...Well, there's really no clean word for the type of person he is, so I'll just leave it up to you to decide what I would be calling him if this weren't a school blog. But the guy obviously has issues. And people are calling Zimmerman a racist, but I truly don't think that is the case, as his Hispanic heritage makes him a racial minority himself. The police, on the other hand? Hoooo, boy.

I hope the police where I live are not irresponsible lazy bums who just sit around eating Dunkin' Donuts all day, but I have to feel a bit concerned, since clearly this is the case with the cops in Sanford. Here's a little quiz for you: Say you're a police officer. When a woman calls 911 to report a boy screaming for help and then falling to the ground after the sound of a gunshot, do you...

A. Send an ambulance down to the scene of the crime.
B. Give the caller instructions on how she can help the boy.
C. Not care, since the boy might not be dead after all and you agreed to meet your friend for coffee in half an hour.

If you picked C, congratulations, you think just like the cops in Sanford!

Seriously, even after the fight ended and Martin was proclaimed dead, the justice system has done absolutely nothing to punish his killer or even look into the case at all. Even though Zimmerman has a criminal history and his neighbors say he is a disturbingly violent person, he was not tested for drugs or alcohol, even though that is standard protocol for such cases. The message this sends to me is, "Solve your own problems, America, because we police don't feel like bothering to help you."

Gee, my generation sure has a bright future.

Trayvon, rest in peace. I didn't know you, but it sounds like you were a good person, and I have no doubt that you were completely undeserving of your awful fate.

Pictures courtesy of eurweb.com and cfnews13.com.


To learn more about the Trayvon Martin case, visit:

http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/19/justice/florida-teen-shooting/index.html?hpt=hp_bn2

http://www.thegrio.com/specials/trayvon-martin/trayvon-martin-15-facts-you-need-to-know-about-teen-shot-in-sanford-florida.php

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2012/03/19/148905661/killing-of-fla-teen-trayvon-martin-becomes-national-story-about-race

http://www.thegrio.com/news/past-zimmerman-911-calls-war.php

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/03/20/10780286-florida-stand-your-ground-law-could-complicate-trayvon-martin-teen-shooting-case

The "R-Word"

Over the past few years there has been some controversy over the word "retarded." Looking at this word from a linguistic standpoint, it is merely the verb "retard" - which means "to make slow; delay the development or progress of (an action, process, etc.); hinder or impede" - used in the past tense as an adjective. This is harmless enough in itself. However, modern vernacular seems to have changed the meaning to "stupid," and created the slang noun "retard."

The problem with saying things like, "How could you get such an easy question wrong? Are you retarded?" or "That's not how you play defense, retard!" lies not only in the offensive nature of these words, but also in the way they make the speaker look unintelligent. Calling someone "retarded" as an insult is inappropriate because it is wrong to compare someone who has made a dumb mistake to someone with a legitimate mental disability, and also because it is using the word incorrectly. Plus, the noun "retard" is not an actual word.

For some reason, I doubt this cat actually has anything wrong with his brain. He is merely being a cat.

"Retarded" is not the only word that gets this treatment. Another word that I constantly see and hear used incorrectly in a similar manner is "gay." "Gay" has two grammatically correct meanings - "happy" and "homosexual" - and yet people have tacked on a third one: "stupid." If you complain about your phone being "gay" for not having enough battery power, you sound kind of ridiculous. This may come as a bit of a shock, but your phone is an inanimate object. It is incapable of feeling happy or having a sexual orientation. (Even if your phone did come to life and fall in love with a person, the phone has no gender itself, so the relationship would be neither homosexual nor heterosexual. Just sayin'.) Therefore, you are using the word "gay" improperly.

However, going back to the word "retarded," it has been seen as somewhat of a slur recently, and I don't completely agree with that. People are comparing "retarded" to the N-word, but I personally believe there is a huge difference between the two. The N-word comes from a time when black people were seen as inferior and went through a lot of hardships, and using it nowadays, in my opinion, is disrespectful to all those who suffered under slavery and the Jim Crow laws. "Retarded," on the other hand, is not necessarily a mean-spirited word (though it is sometimes used as such). Picking on the mentally challenged is like an adult bullying a child, so most people wouldn't do it, and anyone who does looks like a total jerk. So if a person is referred to as being mentally retarded (and actually is), I do not find it rude. It simply means that this person is "slow" compared to others, which is not saying he is stupid or inferior; it is simply stating that his brain works differently. For this reason, I don't think it was necessary to have the word removed from federal health, education and labor laws under Rosa's Law. Going back to what I said in my earlier post about swear words, words in themselves are not bad; it is the manner in which people use them that causes hurt feelings.

Pictures courtesy of therword.org and cheezburger.com.

Check out the following websites:

http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/07/living/end-r-word/index.html?iref=allsearch

http://www.r-word.og

Topic of the Day: My Teacher Won't Let Me Swear on the Internet

Disclaimer: This post contains some bleeped out swear words that are used to get a point across. If that bothers you for some reason (which it shouldn't, since I'm sure you've been exposed to much worse), don't read any further.

My policy is swearing is this: It's not the words one uses that are offensive; it's how those words are used.The way I see it, people can be just as nasty without vulgar language as they can be with a cornucopia of curses, often nastier.

Take this sentence for example:

"F*** this math  homework!"

Are these words mean-spirited? Not at all. They are simply expressing extreme frustration over math homework and are not directed toward any person. In this case, profanity is perfectly okay.

However, this statement is completely different:

"I hope you f***ing drown!"

Here, the person speaking is using the f-word to enhance an already cruel sentence. This is an awful thing to say, not because of the particular words being said, but because of what those words mean.

Now, I don't swear a lot personally. I think strong language should be used only for strong feelings or it sort of loses its effect and makes a person sound unintelligent and lacking in eloquence. And I'm too much of a goody-goody to ever use the f-bomb, aside from one time when I was two and I repeated it after my father not knowing it was a bad word. But it's perfectly fine with me if other people want to curse, as long as they aren't cursing to be mean.

Now, to elaborate on the title of this post, this blog is for my Catholic Morality class (which you probably already knew, as I doubt anybody reading this does not go to school with me), so I have to keep things family-friendly. With all the hype about ACTA, everybody is vehemently defending freedom of speech these days. I totally get that. But here's the thing: freedom of speech, freedom in general, applies to the real world, not the classroom. I also have to wear a uniform to school, a requirement that the majority of jobs do not have, but I have no complaints about that (and that's not just because uniforms save me the stress of choosing what to wear every day). If the President of the United States made a law that everyone in the country had to dress identically, that would certainly be a violation of personal liberties, but that's not what's going on here. A school, especially a private school, is like a gated community, and it can make rules that might be considered totalitarian if infringed on the majority of the population because it has a reputation to uphold.

Two days ago, I went to the big basketball game between my school and our biggest rivals. In the heat of the moment, I thoughtlessly yelled out a certain something that I now regret. I didn't swear, but what I said was still kind of tasteless. I know pretty much everyone else there was doing the same thing, and the other school was much ruder, but a lot of people heard what I said because the whole area around me just happened to be quiet when I said it (Just my luck, right?), and not all of those people were classmates who knew I would not normally act in such a way and that the worst in me came out during that game. There were a ton of adults I didn't know sitting near me, and I felt so embarrassed that they heard the insult I threw at the opposing school. I felt like I was reflecting my school poorly and making myself look no better than the people on the opposite side booing during foul shots. I know I am much classier than those people, but for that one brief moment, I wasn't acting like it, and I will be kicking myself for that forever.

That's why teachers don't want students speaking impolitely. They're not trying to take away freedom of speech; they merely want their school to look respectable. I don't want my school to be thought of the same way as the trashy public school near me either. Do you?

If not swearing is too difficult for you, try some of these substitutes, conveniently used in example sentences:

• "Holy Twilight Saga, that is an ugly shirt!"
• "That is such a load of iPhone batteries."
• "My brother is a total derpface."
• "Where the Dinkleberg did I put my keys?"
• "Oh, Spencer Pratt! I stubbed my toe!"

Hopefully this will make things a little easier.