I was up far past my bedtime last night getting final 9-week grades recorded and posted, so no post today. I was just too tired to write anything of substance.
One quick note: this is my 1700th post published on this blog.
I was up far past my bedtime last night getting final 9-week grades recorded and posted, so no post today. I was just too tired to write anything of substance.
One quick note: this is my 1700th post published on this blog.
It may look like a simple through arch bridge, but the Edmund Pettus Bridge is not a simple bridge. The Edmund Pettus Bridge is a bridge that carries U.S. Route 80 across the Alabama River in Selma, Alabama. I’ve crossed it countless times in my life, and have always been struck by the history made there. Built in 1940, it is named for Edmund Winston Pettus, a former Confederate brigadier general, Democratic Party U.S. Senator from Alabama and Grand Dragon of the Alabama Ku Klux Klan. The Pettus Bridge was the site of the conflict of Bloody Sunday on March 7, 1965, when armed officers attacked civil rights demonstrators attempting to march to the state capital of Montgomery.
Saturday, marked the fiftieth anniversary of the event as thousands gathered in the small city of Selma, Alabama to hear among others, President Obama speak. Obama’s address commemorated the 50th anniversary of “Bloody Sunday” during the marches to Montgomery in 1965, but his rhetorical scope encompassed all of American history. Obama made the case that we are not exceptional in the perfection of our virtue, but rather, exceptional in our relentless struggle to live up to our ideals:
For we were born of change. We broke the old aristocracies, declaring ourselves entitled not by bloodline, but endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights. We secure our rights and responsibilities through a system of self-government, of and by and for the people. That’s why we argue and fight with so much passion and conviction, because we know our efforts matter. We know America is what we make of it.
For Obama, the marchers at Selma helped set a new course for American democracy. “Because of what they did, the doors of opportunity swung open not just for African-Americans, but for every American,” he told the crowd. “Women marched through those doors. Latinos marched through those doors. Asian-Americans, gay Americans, and Americans with disabilities came through those doors.” Had one of his predecessors not already taken the phrase, perhaps he would have called this a new birth of freedom.
He further noted, “We do a disservice to the cause of justice by intimating that bias and discrimination are immutable, or that racial division is inherent to America. If you think nothing’s changed in the past 50 years, ask somebody who lived through the Selma or Chicago or L.A. of the ’50s. Ask the female CEO who once might have been assigned to the secretarial pool if nothing’s changed. Ask your gay friend if it’s easier to be out and proud in America now than it was 30 years ago. To deny this progress — our progress — would be to rob us of our own agency; our responsibility to do what we can to make America better.”
Linking all “warriors of justice,” he invoked immigrants, slaves, and more who worked to change the U.S., he commented, “We are the gay Americans whose blood ran on the streets of San Francisco and New York, just as blood ran down this bridge.”
It is often forgotten the role of LGBT Americans in the Civil Rights Movement for African-Americans. James Baldwin was at the Selma to Montgomery March, and he wrote the first gay book I ever read, Giovanni’s Room. Lorraine Hansberry was a lesbian, whose 1959 play, A Raisin in the Sun, blazed a trail for African Americans into mainstream theatre and entertainment. Bayard Rustin was not only dedicated to orchestrating the civil rights movement, he was also one of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s closest advisors, and the organizer of the epic 1963 March on Washington. The Civil Rights Movement owes a debt of gratitude to the many LGBT Americans who fought for equal rights in the 1950s and 1960s.
Probate judges in Alabama’s 67 counties were caught in a tug of war between state and federal courts over the issue of same-sex marriage on Tuesday and were ordered by the state supreme court to stop issuing the licenses.
As of noon Wednesday, the Human Rights Campaign had identified 42 counties it said had stopped issuing same-sex licenses as of today. Another 19 never issued the licenses and the status of six — Bullock, Crenshaw, Lamar, Macon, Monroe, Sumter — is unclear, the advocacy group reported.
“Because of the Alabama Supreme Court’s willingness to ignore their oath of office, all Alabama’s counties appear to be in conflict with the intent of a federal court order,” HRC Legal Director Sarah Warbelow said in a press release. “This is only a temporary setback on the road to equality, but the message it sends to LGBT Alabamians is despicable.”
Same-sex couples will likely appeal up to the U.S. Supreme Court if necessary to block the latest state supreme court ruling, said Ben Cooper, chairman of Equality Alabama. “It’s important to understand that this is not nearly the end of this,” he said.
The federal government does not take kindly to states getting in the way of their rulings. Attorney Shelley Bilbrey notes, “You know at some point, we end up with the George Wallace standing at the school-house door situation.”
Let’s say a probate judge wants to issue a same-sex marriage license. Let’s say they want to side with the federal court and ignore the state ruling. Why not?
Bilbrey answers, “They would be fearful of a contempt citing.” She’s saying probate judges could be jailed for following a federal court decision. You can see why they may be reluctant to issue the same-sex marriage licenses, no matter their own feelings on the legality or morality of the issue. Bilbrey adds, “Regardless of what he believes about the issue, I certainly would never want to risk a contempt citing.” Because the ruling itself shows the state supreme court is using a lot of the powers at their disposal. As for contempt, Bilbrey assesses, “I wouldn’t doubt that they would exercise that, since they’ve already taken this drastic measure.”
The Republicans in our state house and in our courthouses promised smaller, less intrusive government, but right now they are trying, instead, to write our marriage vows for us. And that love and cherish and sweet old fashioned notion stuff just got struck right out. The Alabama Supreme Court has ruled that love is not a factor in marriage. Have they decided to send us back hundreds of years to arranged marriages, when we weren’t able to choose who we’d marry? No, these perverse judges instead want to look in our underpants to make sure our parts are compatible for baby-making.
“By overlooking this Court’s normal procedures; by stretching our law and creating exceptions to it; by assuming original jurisdiction, proceeding as a trial court, and reaching out to speak on an issue that this Court cannot meaningfully impact because the Supreme Court of the United States will soon rule on it; and by taking action that will result in additional confusion and more costly federal litigation involving this State’s probate judges, this Court, in my view, is venturing into unchartered waters and potentially unsettling established principles of law. Therefore, I must respectfully dissent.”
If you are interested in reading the ruling, you can do so by clicking the link below. I skimmed most of it, but the dissenting opinion by Justice Shaw is obviously written by someone who cares more about the rule of law and the procedure of law then by someone who is only concerned with politics.
Last Monday, Google sent an email to Blogger users who had blogs with adult content saying that there would be a change in policy on March 23, effectively banning any adult content blogs. Last Thursday, I wrote about Blogger’s new censorship policy. Now, Google has reversed that decision, allowing people running adult blogs to continue.
On Friday, a rep from the Blogger team posted to the support page:
This week, we announced a change to Blogger’s porn policy. We’ve had a ton of feedback, in particular about the introduction of a retroactive change (some people have had accounts for 10+ years), but also about the negative impact on individuals who post sexually explicit content to express their identities. Blog owners should continue to mark any blogs containing sexually explicit content as “adult” so that they can be placed behind an ‘adult content’ warning page.
This message was also given to bloggers who had written into the Blogger support page seeking help with what to do with their accounts. A rep for Google confirmed the change in policy to BuzzFeed News.
I thought the ban was a terrible idea — it meant that people who had devoted huge amounts of time, labor, and love into their blogs would have that taken away (adult blogs wouldn’t have been technically deleted, they’d be turned “private,” which means they’d be invisible to readers). While porn spam on Blogger may be an issue, there are myriad other types of blogs that contain adult content. Their now reversed policy was vague and left many bloggers with a lot of questions.
An early employee of Blogger, Jason Shellen, told BuzzFeed News earlier this week that he thought the new policy may have been a result of Google’s shifting priorities. The original Blogger team had staunchly believed in it as a platform for free expression, and he was disappointed to hear about the change. Ironically, former Blogger founder Ev Williams, who went on later to found Twitter and then Medium, posted on Monday about new changes on Medium that would make the platform even more blogging-friendly for users and readers.
Turning all adult blogs private would have been a devastating blow for the fabric of the internet. What was likely meant to be an anti-spam measure would’ve taken away not only people’s beloved works of art and communities of readership, but also would’ve deleted incomprehensible amounts of internet history. Google is a big company with deep pockets, and to remove who knows how many (hundreds of thousands? millions?) of the works that its users had been making for more than a decade just because of some pesky spam seemed like a massive overreaction.
I’m glad that Google listened and did the right thing by reversing this decision. I hope that whatever weird interdepartmental power struggle that led to the bad idea in the first place won’t be revisited.
Owning Blogger means being the steward of millions of people’s deepest creative thoughts and feelings and art. As that steward, Google has an ethical responsibility preserve that for the internet. This is a happy day for the internet.