The Inevitability of South Carolina

I was half listening to the Nightly News the other evening when I heard about a car driving into the beach at Daytona.  I harrumphed, because I had visited Daytona Beach a couple of years ago and was totally flummoxed by the fact that cars drive up and down that beautiful beach just because, well, they can.  I just assumed some idiot had gotten distracted.

But as I watched further, it was apparent that this was a different matter entirely.  A woman with three children in a minivan intentionally turned and drove into the surf.  The children were screaming for help, and the oldest trying to wrestle the steering wheel from his mother.  Others on the beach responded to the obvious distress and rescued mother and three children.

As I listened, I felt a bizarre sense of inevitability.  I almost said the words along with the commentator:  the woman was from South Carolina.

In 1994, Susan Smith achieved national notoriety when she claimed that her two children had been abducted by a black man; after a nine day search, she admitted that in fact she had pushed her car into a lake, drowning her sons.  Her stepfather, a Christian Coalition leader, admitted to having sexually molested Smith.

I only relate that story because, as with Ebony Wilkerson, it is pretty much a checklist of what is wrong with South Carolina.  A mentally disturbed woman, victim of spousal and/or sexual abuse, responsible for children.  It turns out that three days earlier, Wilkerson had called 911 from her Myrtle Beach home to report having been raped by her husband.  He had also been arrested and charged with battery in 2005.  This time around, the Myrtle Beach police appear to have been "still investigating" the call when questioned three days after she attempted to kill herself and her children.

Earlier on that same day in Daytona, her sister called the police and reported that Ebony was delusional, talking about Jesus and demons.  They actually stopped her on the road, but had no reason to hold her.

Wilkerson was 27 weeks pregnant.

Obviously, in both South Carolina and Florida, attempts were made to intervene.  But this woman had been wrestling with crises that needed intervention a long time ago.

Here in South Carolina, our governor is working hard to deny people food stamps and health care, two pieces of a struggle that could be easily addressed for so many of us.  More difficult problems of mental illness, spousal assault and isolation would require hard work from our government.  Ebony Wilkerson has had contacts with various government services, and they have been inadequate.

Poverty, racism, inadequate education, lack of family assistance, inadequate health and mental health outreach, lack of sex education and family planning, failure to pursue and prosecute the abusers of women.

I could go on.

It's been quite a number of years since Susan Smith drowned her children.  Sadly, South Carolina continues to be number 1 (or right up there) in all the wrong things.

Isn't it time we stopped worrying about whether we should be feeding people who don't have jobs and just feed them?  And how about knocking it off about the evils of the Affordable Care Act, and taking that Medicaid expansion?
  
Then maybe we can begin to address those tragedies that can be prevented with commitment and work.



   

--isms

I'm currently reading a book about women in politics, that begins with the 2008 presidential primary race between a woman and a black man.  Hillary v. Barack is rife with misunderstandings and overanalysis between women of both camps, and manipulations of those sensitivities by mostly white men.

As I'm reading it occurs to me that there is one "ism" that is not addressed, ever.  As a 62 year old woman I've been invisible for some time.  Friendly smiles don't mean respect for my brain; I have eventually become that sweet old lady that lived in the era before women had a clue.

A few days ago, at lunch with a number of other women, most of whom were also in their 60's, the young, cocky male waiter came up to us and asked, "What can I get for you girls?"  "Girls?" one of my friends asked in astonishment.  The young man in his turn was puzzled at the fuss.  Imagine him walking up to a group of men and asking what he could get for "you boys."  Doesn't happen.

Ageism is the ism that dare not be spoken.  Just as I did back in the 60's, the young continue to treat the old as though age=stupidity and that they have just invented the world in which they happily live.  And the worst of all ageisms is that combined with sexism.  Don't call me "honey," and don't call me by my first name.  Amazingly, I've settled for "Ms." although I have a doctorate, and I am thrilled when I'm not called "Mrs." or "Miss," neither of which is accurate as I am one of those dinosaurs here in 2014 who is married and kept the name of my family of origin (also barbarically still called a "maiden name.")

Sure it's nice to have someone offer me a seat on a crowded bus, although I would surely stand if someone less physically able were to board.  It's kind of nice that people who don't know me smile at me because they don't know what a curmudgeon I really am.  Good reasons not to ever want to dye my white hair.

But, people, my brain has not changed.  I'm still pretty smart, and probably know a lot more about the world around me (except for technology) than most under-thirties.  I also have something it will take years for them to gain, a historical perspective of what's going on.  Not just because I've been there, but because over the years I've become more open to what happened in the world before my time.

When I was preschool age, my younger sister and I were sitting in a parking lot in the back seat of my father's car.  Bored and silly, we noticed a nice older woman sitting in the car next to us.  We began to wave.  She gave us the finger.

And good for her.  At some point, I got the message.

Justifying Abortion

Let me begin by saying, none of your business.  We need to remember this.  Our right to a medical procedure is nobody's business.  And yet because we are constantly under attack for the freedom to decide to have an abortion, we have found it necessary to tell private, personal stories and to attempt to provide a justification for those decisions that are palatable to religious radicals in this country that are no better than the Taliban.

Here's another point:  we allowed the insurance industry to increase premiums on those who smoke.  At some point, we will allow them to increase premiums on the obese.  With DNA testing, it will become possible to increase premiums for those who are high-risk for genetic factors.  Forcing women to pay a rider for abortion coverage is really another component of the country's intolerance and willingness to let industry profit from it.  Which does not excuse or minimize this new attack; I am merely saying we should step back and look at the atmosphere that allows it to happen.

Under the heading of, "I Can't Believe They Can Do This," Michigan Right to Life gathered sufficient numbers of signatures on a petition to require women to pay for an insurance rider on any insurance policy, even those held privately, if they want abortion services to be covered.  So, once again, the voice of the fanatic holds sway over individual rights.   Of course, this did require that the Michigan legislature do the group's bidding.

Most of us are not fighting for reproductive freedoms because we are not wrong.  We are engaging in the freedom that we take for granted in a democracy.  We have fought hard for equality, and assume it is our due.  But just as if we were a country under attack, our attacker has no justification, only the desire to control us.  They have not ever needed to prove that they are right, only that they are more powerful.  And that they have, because they are louder and they don't give up.  Ever.

And this has been going on for a very long time.

So we need to fight back, and as ferociously as they fight, and as though we are a country at war defending our liberty.

And there are others that should be joining the fight, for a variety of reasons.

Men should be interested in defending the right to reproductive privacy and equality, because after abortion comes birth control, already under attack.  A woman who does not have reproductive freedom makes the entire family structure more vulnerable, emotionally and economically.

Employers should want to assure that women are in control of their reproductive health, for the stability of the workplace.

The insurance industry certainly must know that it makes sense financially to cover birth control and abortion.

And finally, as a community we should all recognize that those who are seeking to prevent women from determining their reproductive paths are by no means pro-life.  In fact, they oppose funding better health care and nutrition for pregnant women and children.  The women most affected will be the poor, but it will also be the middle class who in 2014 will be struggling to provide the best for their families.  The additional costs for preventive care, and even more the  burden of being forced to carry a pregnancy, can be enough to push that woman or that family over the brink into undue emotional stress, and financial hardship.  It can end the possibility of college, even high school, and put an end to a promising career and hope for the future.

And here's something else.  A woman who is able to make her own reproductive decisions is more likely later to have wanted, healthy and happy children.

God did not create a world in which a woman has an abortion and is then banned from having children.  That's the case whether the abortion is the result of a rape, a medical complication, or an error in judgment.  Those who seek to punish women for their sexuality would have us believe that abortions reduce the numbers of children.  In fact, being able to wait until a woman feels ready to have a child is something that many of us might consider a blessing.  That God may have given us the option of ending a pregnancy because this is not about punishment but about growth.  And there are a lot of women who have had that opportunity, and wonderful, wanted children were the result.

I am one of them.  Not that it's anybody's business.

So instead of wondering why the anti-abortion, anti-life, anti-freedom people are attacking us, I think we need to see the attacks as irrational acts committed by tyrants, and do what we need to do to control our bodies and our lives.

Religious Exemptions -- That Slippery Slope

I was disgusted, but not surprised, when I heard yesterday that the Senate was entertaining something called "the Toomey amendment," which would allow employers to discriminate against LGBT employees because of their -- pardon the expression -- religious values.

Not surprised because the religious tyranny wing of the republican party was able to get away with this lame rationalization for religious groups when in June the Obama administration allowed religious groups to exercise a religious exemption by not covering contraception, which would be somehow covered by other means.  Good deal, right?

Not good enough for the rabidly religious.  This was a mere victory en route to the next battle.  That next battle was that employers, whether a religious group or not, should not have to pay for contraception if it conflicts with their religious beliefs.  Nor should they have to pay the penalty for failing to cover this required benefit.  And the D.C. Appeals Court did in fact last Friday, strike down the requirement.

And of course, there is the battle raging over whether a pharmacist should have to fill a prescription for contraception if it burdens their conscience.  Even a waffling bill which allows an employee to refuse to fill as long as there is someone at the pharmacy who will do so has been unable to make it through Congress.  And why should it?  Refusing outright has been the raison d'etre of our current republican legislators.

What does contraception have to do with LGBT rights?  That religious exemption is the key to wiping out a whole lot of our civil liberties.  Because the same god who thinks women should not have protection from pregnancy believes that being lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender is wrong.  According to the god who talks to these folks, a person of faith (i.e. christian) should be able to deny workplace rights to any of the above based on the perversion known as their "conscience."

So let's just look ahead down that slippery slope.  If the law and the courts agree that based on religious freedom an employer should not have to provide contraceptive care, or give LGBT persons employment equality, and businesses have the right to refuse to provide contraception based on their religious beliefs, some other likely god-fueled battles are:

Refusal to marry an interracial couple.

Refusal to allow adoptions by certain racial or religious groups.

Refusal of a restaurateur to seat people who are LGBT.

Refusal to allow members of certain groups service.

Segregated proms.

Signs in windows exercising business owners' rights:

Two things about the above examples.  First of all, check out the dates on the links.

Secondly, notice the language in defense of these horrific acts of discrimination.  They all positively flow with the blood of protecting religious freedom.

So here's the thing.  If we don't all join together to fight these injustices, we are all going to be living in a country in which the only freedom is granted to those who are white, wealthy, and claim to be christian.

The only way to protect our individual freedoms, and our freedoms as members of minority groups, is by uniting and not allowing any discrimination of any one of us by any person (or business or church).  If you can't see the problem with refusing to fill a prescription for birth control, I guarantee, your rights will be next in front of the firing squad.



  

Family Values

Maybe it's me, but "family values" means a whole lot different to the Tea Party, the Heritage Foundation and groups that actually have the words "family" and/or "values" in their names than it does to me.  I think of family values in terms of valuing families -- being sure that children have proper nutrition and a secure roof over their heads, including in school, where there should be heat in the winter and no water leaking from said roof.  And of course a decent education followed by a job that provides a living wage for a good day of work, and decent benefits, like sick leave and health insurance to provide for the children.  See, it's like a cycle.

But the folks that brag about their family values today tend to be the ones that do not value the families of those with less wealth and power than they have.  And then try to justify those other children and families doing without all that fine stuff with nonsense about killing jobs and creating debt that their children will have to pay off.

And when they say they don't want their children to have to pay off the nation's debt, they really mean their children -- not yours.

So in that atmosphere, forget about daycare, we have to fight for the adequacy of our schools.  And where far too many workers barely subsist on minimum wage, our government is convinced that the way out of debt is to continue to pay off big farms and cut food stamps.

So it comes as no surprise to learn that with all the talk about being "pro-life," pregnant women continue to be discriminated against at work.  Given jobs that jeopardize their health, limited sick leave, forced to take unpaid leave or terminated when they are unable to continue to do their job.

The ACLU and its New York chapter worked to pass the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act in New York City, which was signed into law on October 2 by Mayor Bloomberg.  As you can imagine, getting this law to go anywhere in our current Congress will be a fight.  It was introduced in 2012, and reintroduced this year.

The ACLU is asking for our support, in signing a petition to Congress to pass a Pregnant Workers Fairness Act.  Please sign, and spread the word.  And be sure to let our representatives know that all that talk about family values is just hot air without passing legislation that truly supports families.

And while we're at it, I'm thinking we should get our own legislators here in South Carolina to pass its own Pregnant Workers Fairness Act; maybe those who feel the need to safeguard pregnancy could do something more constructive than force women to carry unwanted pregnancies to term.

We're #1

Read what Mia McLeod has to say about South Carolina being #1 in domestic violence.  Maybe raising the amount of the bond needed to be posted would help, but people that are crazy violent have been known to wait around a few days to take out their rage.

I was a visiting therapist at a shelter for battered women on Long Island back in the 90's, where three women in the month of December one year were killed by men to whom had been served an order of protection.  Interestingly, or obscenely, it was the same judge, and he had ordered the women to serve the petition themselves rather than have the court pay for a server.

While at the shelter, I saw what happens when a woman without family and financial resources makes the courageous decision to leave an abusive partner.  Even with social services and medicaid the resources are pathetic.  After the short stay they not only have to deal with housing, but also with transportation.  Often with children, there is inadequate care available, and finding a job while juggling temporary and/or unaffordable housing and transportation is one step too far in this nightmare.

More often than not, when abusers come calling with apologies and promises, the women go home to whatever security they have there.

Society's biases are really what this is all about.  Here in South Carolina where the mass killing of children in Newtown last December resulted in a season of gun bills designed to protect the rights of gun owners, we pretty much know where the loyalties lie.  Hard to believe but the philosophy is that women that get beat must be doing something to deserve it.  Oh, and if she doesn't like it why doesn't she leave.  And if she leaves and he comes after her, well, that's her own fault too.

Add to that an education system that struggles to provide "minimally adequate" schools, the constant stress of being working poor -- and in this economy, the stress of being working middle class.  We have a governor who won't take federal money to assure Medicaid for the poor, and who would like to prevent those on food stamps from buying sweets.

And then our legislature gerrymandered districts so that the status quo is guaranteed.

There's two levels here.

The first is stepping in those shoes and living that life.  Knowing what it is like to be a woman afraid, and unable to do enough to keep herself and her children safe.

The second is a society that approves and rewards power and punishes weakness.

Strong laws that communicate disapproval of violence against women and children need to happen before the violence will be lessened.

And while that happens, allowing people to have a life with the security of home, health, a living wage, and for their children a good education with promise for the future, will perpetuate the value that violence is unacceptable.

Mia McLeod is a strong voice to that end, but she needs a lot more voices to call out for change with her.
   

Across the Aisle

I heard that State Senator Vincent Sheheen made an appearance at SC Pride yesterday.  Not surprisingly it has not been widely reported, especially by the Sheheen camp.  Sheheen made news earlier this month by reaching across the aisle to Governor Haley in his support of the ban on gay marriage.  The public outcry apparently stunned Sheheen, who wants more than anything to be governor, to the point of making the appearance at the Gay Pride event.

The problem with Senator Sheheen as I see it is that his values lie on the other side of the aisle, but his political affiliation is with us Democrats.

While Sheheen unabashedly seeks support from women's groups, unions, and gay rights groups, he wants to do it without making it too public, and without having to compromise his lack of support for same.

Pardon me but my rage is showing.

It would be a simple matter even for a proud Catholic like Sheheen to support women's reproductive privacy and freedom.  Even Pope Francis, who has to deal with the ultra-conservative archbishops who elected him, has figured out a work-around to the Church's obsession with contraception and abortion.

With Pope Francis, his own Church's leader, as the model, now is the time for Senator Sheheen to take a stand that sets him apart from the rabid Christian republicans, like Senator Lee Bright, who would bring back the Inquisition (for women only) which looks a bit like his fantasy of Sharia Law.

In other words, women's reproductive choices should be as private as are those of men.  They should be as fully covered as those of men (When was the last time you heard an argument that vasectomies should not be covered by our state health plan?).  Women's health care -- the promotion of discriminatory practices against women -- has no place in the legislature.

Abortion and contraception are private matters, to be addressed by the woman, her doctor, her family, her church, and not by government.  God did not appoint lawmakers to make God's rules.  In fact, there's that whole "render unto Caesar" idea that pretty much means the state should stay out of God's business, and God will do the same for the state.

Meanwhile, the state's business is to see that those who choose to have children are not made to suffer needlessly.  In other words, health care, education, a living wage, those are the issues that need to be addressed by government, not what goes on in the doctor's office, or in one's church.

We need to suggest this to Senator Sheheen, to insist in fact that he listen to us -- and to the Pope -- and stop obsessing about women's reproductive parts.  We need to let him know, on Facebook, on Twitter, by email and in person, that church and government, his religion and his role as a public servant, are separate entities.  We need to call and write to the media.  We need to light up this issue, while there is a chance that a Democratic candidate might listen.