Armed Forces in Ferguson?

         After being in the recent news for quite some time, it's safe to say that if you haven't heard about the controversial shooting in Ferguson, you might live under a rock.  I'm not here to discuss the events of what happened that night, whether Michael Brown was the person the media portrayed him to be, if the decision of the grand jury declining to indict Darren Wilson was correct or not, or even anything about that horrific night on August 9th.  What I'm here to discuss is the group called the "Oath Keepers"

Oath Keepers patrolling the roofs in Ferguson 

        According to the Oath Keepers website, their mission statement describes them as, "a non-partisan association of current and formerly serving military, reserves, National Guard, veterans, Peace Officers, and Fire Fighters who will fulfill the Oath we swore, with the support of like minded citizens who take an Oath to stand... to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, so help us God" (oath keepers.org).  They were founded by Stewart Rhodes, a former Yale graduate, attorney and ex-paratrooper.  They are seen as an extreme right wing group that frowns upon the way the government is doing its job, and the direction that the president is leading this country to.  
          

The Official Oath Keeper Emblem

            How in the world does a non-profit right wing watch group from Nevada have to do with the riots and recent protests in Ferguson, Missouri; quite a lot actually.  Based on their promise to protect and serve all things American, a man known as 'Andrews', and other volunteers offered to protect and serve as security at night for local Businesses in downtown Ferguson that wanted their help.  Their arrival could not have come at a worse time for policeman, seeing that they already have to worry about violent protests turning into riots, and now a group of watchman sitting on top of local businesses with rifles making sure none of them are broken into.  I believe that the recent movement of the Oath Keepers is not only to genuinely help and service the hard working members of the Ferguson community, but also is their way of obtaining a little sliver of lime light, and using these recent events for their own benefit.  Their is a quote in the world of politics and media that, "theres no such thing as bad publicity", and The Oath Keepers are believers of this motto and see this as their opportunity to be broadcasted on news to potential members and donators to their cause.  

For the article on yahoo news that I first heard about this story, just follow the link below the website: 
http://news.yahoo.com/oath-keepers-guard-fergusons-streets-rooftops-drawing-police-224853846--abc-news-topstories.html

If the Oath Keepers have struck your curiosity and you'd like to learn more about the non-profit group, just follow the links below:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oath_Keepers
and also the Oath Keepers official website, http://oathkeepers.org/oath/

White Like Me response

         Today in class we watched the documentary titled, "White Like Me", which is based off the book written by civil rights activist and writer Tim Wise.  I came into class thinking that today was going to be an easy class, in which we would wind down and take a break, but it turned into one of the most self-exploring and active classes I've participated in this semester.  Tim Wise is a person that I can closely relate to and connect with.  He is a middle class white make, born to two white parents that did nothing but try and give their children the best in their lives.

Activist and Author Tim Wise

He was never 'rich', but he never struggled for most of the things in his life, similar to me.  After closely aligning and feeling connected to Wise, I think that's why his message had such a personal impact on me.

The Documentary and Novel "White Like Me 

         
           I don't agree with all of his political views and I'm not going to say that his documentary changed my political view completely on very controversial issues in America, but it sure did make me question my views, and try to figure out why I think these ways, and why other people either oppose of follow my views.  I come from a family that has very strong convictions, and holds tight to those convictions, but also pride themselves on respecting other's opinions, seeing the good in them and trying to understand people that are different from us.  After watching the video, and being exposed to even more of the tragedies and issues that still face America concerning the topic of Civil Rights, I really do wonder how we can solve this issue.  I don't believe that it is as severe as it was back in the 17 and 1800's, however I do see it as an evolved and forever changing issue that adapts and is still current based on the modern times.  Civil Rights for minorities are not being sought after in the way they were during the 1960's and 1970's, they have attained almost all equal rights as their white counterparts, however I believe that the issues facing minority civil rights in modern America is the social stigmas and stereotypes that are related to each group, and the effort to overcome those stereotypes.
       

Whites Protests With Blacks In Detroit 

            One of my favorite parts of the documentary is the end.  The end is a little overwhelming because it bring together all these horrific events and a tension builds that maybe their is no solution to the issue.  There are two extremely different sides that almost will never see eye to eye.  However rights after this tension is peaking with all the television show excerpts of people debating the issue of black rights, there is a moment at the end that shows hope.  The answer by Tim Wise is to look into history and instead of focussing on the people that opposed the civil rights laws and movement, to look at the white people that DID help the black Americans achieve their rights to what they are today.

For more background on Tim Wise's Novel and Documentary "White Like Me", follow this link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Like_Me

Moot Court Case: Brown Vs. Board of Education (1954)

        In today's moot court case, both legal sides argued about the consolidated case (4 cases being tried as one, known as Brown vs. Board of Education in 1954.  The pro segregation side argued in favor of the side of the board of education of Topeka, Kansas. The three pronged attack of the pro segregation side started off with a very good summarization of plessy’s statements in plessy vs. fergusen.  They then went to use of common facts about black tensions and feeling inferior as a common sense type approach about integration of schools. A memorable quote from this piece was, “will integration actually help, or will it just be detrimental to both learning environments.  Both parties will be put at a disadvantage”. This side stated that segregation is okay because the african american kids are not being denied an equal education, but are learning the same exact things but in a different setting than white children.  It is a local and state issue, even a city or town issue, not a national affair. 

        The Anti-segregation side, in favor of Brown (4 total sides arguing against the Board of Ed.) used their knowledge of the topic, and research they found out to start their attack with the idea that african american schools have lower funding compared to the white schools, therefore the idea that white children are mentally inferior to whites is false.  They are not mentally inferior, or less intelligent then whites, it's just that they get less funding to have the same opportunities that white children have.  Black children are born natural citizens, the same as white children, meaning that they should too have the same exact rights and privileges and learning opportunities that all white children have racial segregation is a violation of the 14th amendment, and affects blacks psychologically causing them to feel inferior because of segregation and causing the children to feel less than white children.  

        I think that today's court case was probably the most evenly matched case we have had all semester.  There was no real 'winner' in my opinion, because both sides took the opposing argument, and used their stance on the matter to debate and come up with rational and strategic arguments in favor of their stance on the trial.  I think that through the course of the semester, each trial has grown by leaps and bounds, which shows that we truly are learning the material, how to act in a court scenario, and how to research and manipulate the information they are confronted with in order to help their side succeed.  

Here is a link to a overview, or summary of the historical background in the case 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brown_v._Board_of_Education

Mock Trial: Plessy vs. Ferguson

 
  Today in class we had a mock trial that deals with the allowance of the state legislations to uphold segregation based upon that segregation is not a violation of the 13th or 14th amendment.  The defendants brought up the idea that segregation is illegal because they Plessy's 13th and 14th amendment rights were violated.  They also had the idea that Plessy's race allowed him to sit on the white first class train car because he is only 1/8th african american, which means that he is mostly white and should be viewed as a white man.  The defense also brought up that because the train is an equal carrier car, all people have the right to sit wherever they want if they have the ability to pay for their ticket.

     The state used the jim crow laws of the time, and the idea that because white's are more wealthy, and blacks cannot pay as much for items as the whites can, the idea that a black and white train car should be allowed, therefore it is constitutionally allowed because isn't violating anyone's rights, it is just based upon economical and monetary income.  The public conveyances law had to provide accommodations for whites and blacks, but they HAD to be separate.  The segregation of people is allowed by law, therefore it is De Jure Segregation, which means legislation segregation.  

      In my own personal opinion, I don't believe that segregation should be allowed, and it is very concerning to me that at this time in American society, the constitutional law that was supposed to protect ALL citizens of the united states, still allowed for segregation, a form of slavery after slavery was outlawed previously by the 13th amendment.  Concerning the actual trial and both team's cases about the topic, both teams worked very well and made extremely concise and appropriate ideas.  I think even though in reality the State won, I would personally agree more with the defense, and I also think that in our trial, the defense too made a better case that followed and manipulated the law in a better way.  

If you would like to find more information about the case, you can read a brief overview from wikipedia following this link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plessy_v._Ferguson

Civil Rights in College Sports?

      In the world of college sports, the most important thing to a college coach is winning.  Their entire career is based off of their ability to produce and achieve success in the form of turning athletes into successful people in the real world, but mainly winning championships.  They are hired to lead a program to new heights and win championships, not lose or bring about an environment in a program of complacency and contempt with being average.  With all of this being said, a division one athlete goes into a program knowing all the above, and from personal experience being a division one lacrosse player, that fact is clear and imprinted in one's mind numerous times.  
        A female field hockey coach at the #7 ranked school in the country, University of Iowa has been fired after 14 years of service for seemingly acting 'too mean'.  The attorney for coach Griesbaum wrote, "We understand that the athletic department needs to address the concerns of student athletes and that player abuse is a serious issue. However, it undermines the entire system to enable generic complaints about a female coach based on behavior that so often pales in comparison to the behavior of male coaches." 

         In American history for the past 50 years, the push for gender equality has been a top issue in social areas, and after many advances and equality type legislation and stereotypes have been resolved,  I find it very concerning and quite baffling as to why a woman coach who has a legacy of excellence and success, along with players who have been molded and flourished in the real world, is has been fired for doing what any male coach does, in using any technique possible to get the most out of her players.  It upsets me that a woman coach is held to complete standards than a male coach, and that she is being penalized for trying to win, which was the main reason why she was even hired as the head field hockey coach of that University.  
        The next couple weeks should yield a response from the University Investigation team that was put in charge of the incident and decide the exact legal reason behind her firing, but I completely support and back coach Griesbaum filing civil rights violations and complaints about her random firing.  

If you would like to read more about the issue and look at the article I used to find out about this issue, follow the link below. 

http://abcnews.go.com/Sports/wireStory/apnewsbreak-iowa-rejects-calls-reinstate-coach-25895692

State Vs. Mann Case

            In the practice trial today concerning the 'unfair' fee of a man shooting a rented slave, the original decision was overturned, and Mr. Mann had to pay no fine.  In the trial today however, I think that both sides presented very clear and informed arguments.  Being a member for the defendant and arguing pro-slavery, I found that some of my other constituents had arguments that shocked me at how much depth and time they put in researching the topic.  I learned some new facts about the true meaning behind the 3/5th compromise of 1787, along with some historic law about the rights of a slave owner.  On the other hand, the opposing prosecutors (team nido) had compelling arguments that help to not only show the horrors and true evils of the practice of slavery, but highlight how Mr. Mann should be charged with assault and battery and deserved a fine of 5 dollars.  I think that even though the historic ruling in this case was that Mr. Mann was to be let go of all the charges and that the initial ruling would be overturned, as a member of the 21st American Society, I personally believe that anyone who had slaves or harms slaves deserves to go to jail.

if you want to look more into the case and find out some intricacies of the case, go look into it at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Carolina_v._Mann

Trouble In Peru

In Peru, a new television show has started to hit the prime time, and really make an impact in the Peruvian culture.  The television show is titled, "La Paisana Jacinta" (The Peasant Jacinta), a caricature about a poor indigenous woman with blacked out teeth that is played by a man in drag.  This television show is about an outsider living in a urban area, and it highlights the differences in Peruvian culture, and degrades the factions of society that don't choose to live and act like the other members of mainstream and urban Lima.  Personally, I don;t understand why a television station decides to make a show that is so offensive and degrading of a specific group of people, and I am very pleased with the UN's decision to call out the Peruvian television station and basically take this show off of TV by putting it into a 7:30 slot on Saturday morning.  I think this show should be taken off the airways, and I also find it appalling that a large group of people, including the Peruvian government would allow for a show like this to hit the airwaves that is so offensive and rude to a large group of people.


http://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2014/sep/03/peru-tv-racial-stereotypes-paisana-jacinta

When I was looking over recent news concerning first amendment issues, I stumbled upon this article on the Huffington Post website that talked about the mistreatment of gays and the infringement upon not only the rights of gay people, but minorities, rape victims, sexual assault victims and many others.  In the article, the fundamental right of free will that is expressed in the first amendment, is violated, and also the fact that if two homosexual people decide to wed they will be faced with jail time and even death is a violation of the American 14th amendment specifically concerning equality in the equal protection clause.  All citizens in a specific jurisdiction will receive the same rights, freedoms, and non discrimination.  In my personal opinion, I find it disturbing and rather scary to think that in a foreign country, especially in the 21st century that two people who decide to express an act of love with face the possibility of death.  I don;t understand how a country can act in such a way that degrades a certain minority of people and puts such terrible consequences for a simple act of love.  It would seem reasonable if Uganda were to outlaw gay marriages based off of traditional, religious or majority opinion, but to make the repercussion of it certain jail time and probable death is beyond disturbing for an up and coming African country in the 21st century.

Retired Anglican Archbishop Desmond Tutu speaking out against the new law at a Nelson Mandela memorial

Link to article: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/02/23/desmond-tutu-uganda-gay-law-_n_4842280.html?utm_hp_ref=civil-rights