Archive for Vote

To Vote or Not to Vote

Posted in Life, Politics, Religion with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on September 17, 2012 by urbannight


According to recent news articles, the black vote is wavering.  This does not concern me as much as the reason WHY it is wavering.


Some Christian Blacks are concerned that Romney’s Mormonism may affect his policies.  Others are concerned that Romney seems to be a president for rich white men and feel he doesn’t care at all about the African American population of the country.  This impression is, in part, due to the fact that until fairly recently, African Americans were not allowed into the priesthood.


These same people are concerned about Obama supporting gay marriage.  They don’t see how a true Christian can support that and therefore are reluctant to vote for him again.


As congregations are discussing this, pastors are offering their people a third option.  On that I think is no option at all: the option of simply not voting.


I’m sure this is going on among white people and people of every race or ethnicity.  But the current articles are focusing one blacks because they are viewed as one of base demographics in support of Obama in general.


By choosing not to vote, your ‘vote’ in essence, becomes a factor in favor of the person you least want to win.  The political process, buy it’s very nature, is not a vote for the best but for whomever you think is the least worse.



By choosing not to vote, you give up your voice and your right to complain if you don’t like how things turn out. 


For example, I voted for Obama.  I don’t like how the Obamacare package turned out.  Despite some of the good things in it, it is otherwise so flawed and so bad that I think scrapping the whole thing and doing it over would be better.  But Romney is my ‘Antichrist’ and I would rather vote Obama again than risk him getting into office.  Had I NOT voted, I would have given up my voice in this political discourse because I chose not have no opinion and to let the opinions of others determine the outcome. 


In other words, if you want to complain, you have to participate first.  Otherwise you don’t have any solid ground to stand on. You become the house build on the shifting stand rather than the one build on solid rock. 


Now the issues that concern them are NOT the reasons why I myself am concerned about a wavering black vote.  It is the fact that pastors are using the pulpit to give advice on not voting.  I think that it is wrong for any pastor to be using the pulpit to discuss political activism.  I think that they can discuss social activism because they are concerned with social issues. But when it crosses a boundary into political advice on how to vote then they are crossing the line of separation of church and state.

Once churches cross this line, I think they should be giving up their status as a tax-exempt entity.  I don’t care if a church protests social issues, as much as I dislike churches trying to tell everyone that they should live their lives by the churches rules.  I do care when they start telling people how to vote or when to not vote.


It is even harder to imaging people who have fought so long and hard to get the right to vote decided on to do it at all because they don’t like either candidate.  Once again, with politics, you are trying to pick the lesser of two evils.   



Is allowing people to get married really more harmful to you than a candidate that is pushing through reforms that will make it harder for you to vote, and who things corporations should be treated as people and people are just cogs that can be easily replaced with cheaper cogs overseas?




Don’t choose not to vote.  You should choose to vote for someone who will actually do things to improve your personal situation.  Another person’s marriage or reproduction decision doesn’t affect your life personally, so don’t base your vote on that.

Mrs. John Doe

Posted in Politics with tags , , , , , , , , , on May 4, 2012 by urbannight

Hello, I’m Mrs. John Doe.  I have no identity of my own.  I can only be known by my husband’s name.  Who I am is meaningless and irrelevant.  I have no value as a person so must find my value through my husband.

This is the subtext I hear in my head when a woman calls in and identifies herself with her husband’s identity.  I know it is a generational thing.  It happens very rarely.  But there are older ladies that cling to that form of address.

It drives me bonkers. 

Completely bonkers. 

Utterly Bonkers.

I see no value in it and no point to it.  I start to feel this overwhelming urge to ask a series of questions that might get me in trouble at work.

“Don’t you have a name?” 

“Did your mother really name a daughter Thomas?”

“Don’t you have an identity?” 

“Don’t you have any self-respect?”

“Don’t you realize you are your own person?” 

“Do you really only find your self-worth through your husband?”

“Don’t you realize that when you identify yourself like that, you tell everyone that your own identity is meaningless?  That you are meaningless?”

A coworker who sits next to me says I’m silly.  That it is no big deal.  But it is.  It means this woman is stuck in a mentality that tells her she had no identity outside of her marriage.  When I come across women who have militantly held on to their husband’s identity rather than their own, I wonder if they were the women who tried to hold other women back.  The women who agreed with the idea that women didn’t need to continue school past age 16.  The women who believed that all girls should get married.   So there was no need for women to be able to get bank loans or hold property in their own names.  Women like that U.S. Senator that was quoted saying that women shouldn’t have needed the right to vote.  The fact that women have the right to vote is just proof that men were not doing their jobs properly.  She couldn’t support the 19th Amendment because it started the erosion of family values.  I can’t believe a female politician would say that.  (Senator Kay O’Connor if anyone wants to look it up)

So yes, I get offended when I hear someone say, “I am Mrs. John Doe.”  It tells me that she sided with the people who want to keep women tied to the kitchen sink, barefoot and pregnant, with no rights or identity of her own.

Maybe I am taking it too much to heart?  Maybe I am over reacting?  Or maybe I’m just really cranky today and it was that one little thing to push me over the edge?

Some personal thoughts on the GOP and Rush and views of Women.

Posted in Life, Politics with tags , , , , , , , , , , on March 7, 2012 by urbannight

The problem with Rush L’s statement is that it implied that any woman using birth control is a prostitute and the extension of that idea is that ‘good girls’ don’t use birth control.

This perpetuates the medieval idea of the ‘virgin or whore’. A woman can only be one or the other. So a wife and mother who is devoted to her family automatically falls into the ‘whore’ category because she is no longer a virgin. This is a subconscious ideal that still crops up from time to time today.

It also is an attack on female independence from a biological function and therefore female independence from a patriarchal society. By implying that women who do not want to be seen as sluts and prostitutes should not use birth control, it subtly keeps them under the control of their male partners.

The fact that he then states he was saying it to be ‘funny’ or ‘amusing’ makes it worse. And as a conservative spokesman, he is showing that beneath the surface of conservative men, woman have low value in their world view.

It ties in with the conservative, female politician that recently stated that if men had been doing their job properly, women would never have needed to vote and she didn’t agree with women having the right to vote. She thought it was a bad thing done out of necessity because men weren’t doing things properly.

For such a thing to be said now, it indicates a deep thread in the GOP on how they view women that they generally try to keep buried in order to get the Independent and moderate Republican votes. I realize that I no longer think of moderate Republicans as GOP and that term stands for those much farther to the right.