Another Step Towards Theocracy

I have written dozens of stories in my life. Futuristic, based on real life experiences, and some with social lessons and commentary, among other categories. But I must confess, I never conceived of a story in which a great shift in a society towards a more religious interpretation of laws would be initiated through the election of a twice divorced man who cheated on all three of his wives, claims "for better or worse" famous men are allowed to grab women by their private parts, who more than once commented on how "hot" his daughter was, and is a convicted sex offender.

Life is stranger than fiction, you betcha!

Theocracy, is defined in a number of ways. Some define it as a nation ruled by religious leaders or one in which the leaders claim to be divinely appointed, deriving their power from god. I imagine if pressed for an answer, many Americans would define theocracy as the kind of government Iran has while also expressing their displeasure with such a government.

However, as more and more laws are being passed by (mostly) red state legislatures, and more and more judicial opinions are emanating from right leaning judges, it is now clear that what irks many Americans about Iran's version of theocracy is the religion it adopts, not the form of government itself.

Jefferson is the most quoted founder in reference to the separation of church and state. While the founders, in general, shared a Judeo-Christian ethos, they also made clear their opinion about religious influence within the government in the very First Amendment, via the Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses which basically state that the government shall not establish a religion nor restrict the worship of the people in whatever religion they choose.

Yet, as the non-fiction story reference above indicates, we are in the throes of a movement, which featured the seduction of the evangelical community by the orange Jesus to make abortion illegal, resulted in the Dobbs decision (thanks to the 3 Supreme Court Justices placed on the bench during the Trump Administration), and is now in full swing in dozens of red states, despite the actual wishes of the electorate of those very same states. (See Kansas, Ohio, Kentucky, and Montana.) 

It is a movement driven by a vocal minority which has decided that its religious beliefs should rule the day, literally.

Which brings us to the atrocious decision by the Alabama Supreme Court last week, which ruled that embryos which are the key to IVF treatments which allow couples with fertility issues become parents, are children. Not potential children, actual children! As a result, the accidental destruction of some embryos at fertility clinic has been interpreted as murder, as justified by the interpretation of various biblical (not legal) quotes.  

I know, shocking that in 2024, a panel of justices who represent the most respected legal thinkers in the state of Alabama, (assuming that is not a contradiction in terms) would actually equate a batch of cells in a test tube to a person. 

But, you see, that was the goal all along of the anti-abortion crowd. To establish the legal precedent that personhood begins at conception, which then allows the state to control the most personal, intimate situations of its citizens lives, everything from who to love and marry, to birth control and when and how to start a family. You know, the most repressive form of government based on the tenets of one, established national religion. 

Around and around go the bodies of our founders in their graves!

I posted under the title Separation of Church and State twice before, once in 2022, and the other time ten years previously. Here are links to those two posts.

https://wurdsfromtheburbs.blogspot.com/2022/06/one-step-forward-for-american-theocracy.html

https://wurdsfromtheburbs.blogspot.com/2012/02/contraception-controversy.html

What is truly alarming about this movement is that it didn't just appear in the last decade. For those of you who haven't heard of the Seven Mountain Mandate, and I was one of you, there will be plenty of opportunity to research and learn about its philosophy in the coming months, and perhaps years, as the Chief Justice of Alabama, Tom Parker, believes whole heartily in its tenets. 

In a nutshell, it is an ism which traces its origins to Revelations, verse 9, which identifies the seven spheres of influence that must be penetrated by the righteous; family, religion, education, media, entertainment, business and government. Once those areas of influence are dominated by these true believers, the prophesy of Isaiah 2:2 can be fulfilled, bringing about the end times. 

When Trump talks retribution, I thought he only meant punishment for those who disagree with him, I didn't realize he was talking world wide retribution! Of course, I am sure he doesn't believe any of this, but can certainly spot such an easy to manipulate group of people from a mile away.

In addition to Parker, the Speaker of the House, Mike Johnson has exhibited leanings in this direction, not to mention some other prominent GOP leaders and influencers. While there are some who believe that Trump himself shares this belief, I know better; he has no moral or religious foundation, but will certainly use those who do to be king or dictator or whatever it is that his damaged psyche needs to feel like a real person.

So, gird your loins as the saying goes. We are in for quite a ride through the remainder of 2024, and in the next few years. Whether we actually adopt some of these religious zealot dogmas at a national level remains to be seen, but remember, it won't matter if the majority of people are against such measures. Ideologues like this aren't concerned with what the majority think. They have their holy book, their narrow interpretations, and the sheer belief that God is on their side, the electorate or the constitution be damned. 

Shame on You, Supreme Court Justices

This past Tuesday, I listened to portions of the oral arguments (perhaps some day the Supreme Court of the United States will allow cameras in their court so the American people can see their work in progress). I caught some of the questions put to Trump's lawyer (Jonathan Mitchell), then left the house for a while, only to return to hear some of the questions put to the lawyer representing Colorado (Jason Murray).

I commented previously on the topic of Trump being disqualified from the ballot for his insurrectionist activities. (See link below)

https://wurdsfromtheburbs.blogspot.com/2024/01/colorado-georgia-maine-oh-my.html

Based on what I heard that day, the tone and nature of the questions, and the comments delivered by various legal experts since then, it is clear that SCOTUS will overrule the Colorado ruling (and negate Maine's decision as the Secretary of State of Maine has indicated she will follow the SCOTUS decision).

While this is not unexpected, I said as much in the post referenced above, I am extremely disappointed with the process I listened to last week. And, while I expected that certain conservative justices might be reluctant to entertain the disqualification of Trump, I am especially disheartened by the liberal judges who also appeared to have already made up their minds before oral arguments commenced.

What was particularly galling was the seriousness of the questions and answers surrounding the concept that the president (and vice president) were not officers of the United States, and that therefore the 14th amendment did not apply to Trump. 

Now, I understand that at the time of the Civil War, when the 14th amendment was ratified, focus was on the Congress, and to a lesser extent, those electors who chose who would be on the party's presidential ticket. As I mentioned in my previous post, it was of paramount importance to prevent those who engaged in insurrection (in other words, the Civil War), from either serving in Congress or choosing those who would serve (at the time, Senators were not voted on by the electorate, but were chosen by state legislators) in Congress or in the White House.

But, and this is a BIG BUT, when pressed for why the amendment didn't mention the president or vice president, there is historical evidence that those positions were assumed in the words "or hold any office", and that the concept that an insurrectionist would be tolerated on a presidential ballot after such a horrific and devastating war was ridiculous. Certainly, anyone who actually thinks about it, would conclude that the creators of the 14th amendment would want to make sure that anyone who actively fought against America would be prevented from running our country, none more so than the two offices at the top of the pyramid.

So, while we don't know precisely why the offices were not specifically mentioned, I find it hard to believe that the advocates of the 14th Amendment would have been against an insurrectionist in Congress but not in the White House. Isn't that common sense, or am I missing something?

This is just another in a myriad of examples of Donald Trump finding loopholes in our Constitution and our other laws and norms, to excuse his aberrant behavior. He pushes the limits of the spirit of our laws with impudence, lies incessantly because we allow our politicians to do so, and uses intimidation to bully those who disagree without actually threatening violence.

And, at least in this case, the justices of the Supreme Court will most likely allow him to get away without accountability, again!

I at least hope that, when the ruling comes down, they at least acknowledge that an insurrectionist should be disqualified from running for president. Perhaps they might rule that only Congress can determine an insurrectionist, or that one must be convicted of such to be disqualified, thereby taking the task from the hands of individual states, and placing it in the hands of the judicial system or entire Congress.

Should they, however, rule that the 14th Amendment, article 3 does not apply to the presidency, I believe that will mark this court, Robert's court, as a failure by future historians, to preserve our constitution and our democracy.

Speaking of democracy, why wasn't Mitchell asked if his client acknowledges that he lost the 2020 election, since one of the other parts of the disqualification clauses of the constitution is that no one shall be elected to the presidency three times? They should have pushed the issue to counter Trump's claim that he won "in a landslide" in 2020, so that the American electorate can begin to discount that obsession, and so that, should he and his acolytes try to press for a third term if he wins in November, they will have it on record.

This also gets to the point of denying election results. To me, anyone who claims that they only honor an election when they win, should be disqualified as a candidate, for any office. Again, it is one of the foundations of our democracy, the peaceful transition of power between presidents, and another of the unspoken rules that Trump trampled upon after the 2020 election. 

It is one thing to be a sore loser, to refuse to congratulate the victor when one loses, but another when you spend the next 3 years travelling around the country spreading lies about our country's elections. Lies that led to the attack on the Capitol on January 6th, lies that resulted in Fox Business paying Dominion Voting Machines almost three quarters of a billion (that's billion) dollars, lies that resulted in a libel decision against Rudy Giuliani for $148 million, lies that have convinced more than half of Republican voters that President Biden is illegitimate, enabling GOP reps in Congress to justify not working with him to solve our nation's problems.  

It seems to me that SCOTUS completely missed that point, instead focusing on technical details, placing their ivory tower opinions over the reality of Trumps threat to democracy. 

Finally, there was the point made by one of the justices, one which I made in the post I've mentioned already, that should Colorado's decision to remove Trump from their ballot, might that not cause other states to remove Biden from their ballots? A situation that might result in a handful of states determining the results of the 2024 presidential election. 

Well, I hate to burst your bubble, but that is already the case in America, due to the electoral college. Just look at the last two elections. The results in five states decided the outcome, Georgia, Michigan, Wisconsin, Arizona and Pennsylvania. Biden won those five states in 2024, Clinton lost them in 2020. All the other states, that's 45 out of 50, were won by the same party in each election and had literally no effect on the outcome of either of those elections.

So, in effect, the terrible possibility proffered as a reason not to allow Colorado remove Trump from the ballot, is the reality of our elections at this very moment. There is every reason to believe that whomever wins those 5 states this November, or four of the five, or perhaps even three of the five, if those three happen to be Pennsylvania, Michigan and Georgia, will win the 2024 election. So much for worrying about disenfranchising voters!

If we assume that we don't want a handful of states to decide future presidential elections, perhaps we should be having a serious discussion about eliminating the electoral college? 

Finally, there also seems to be an assumed reluctance for this court to take positions that would change the course of our country, that those kind of choices should be up to the legislative and executive branches. That a decision to remove Trump might possibly lead to strife in our streets even though that didn't seem to stop SCOTUS from removing a right for the first time in history. (The Dobbs decision).

Well, perhaps it is time for the court to show some balls, the female justices included. When the Warren Court overruled Plessy in the Brown vs Board of Education rulings, finding the sanctioned segregation of our public school systems as unconstitutional, all hell broke loose, to use a phrase. Federal troops had to be sent to multiple southern states to escort frightened African American children into desegregated schools, to the outrage of certain racist Americans. Talk about having balls!

Clearly, the Roberts Court will have whiffed on this one, if the consensus is correct as to how they will rule. Perhaps they will do better in the immunity case, should they agree to hear it. Should they fall short on that one as well, I expect that historians will have even more evidence of this court's failure to defend our democracy.   

Accountability Finally? 2

About nine months ago, I posted the following concerning the possibility of accountability finally coming to Donald Trump for all his horrible actions, although I also state at the end that I only believe true accountability will come when the grim reaper visits him. 

https://wurdsfromtheburbs.blogspot.com/2023/04/accountability-finally.html

Still, I reread it to see what may have changed in those intervening months and was both gladdened and saddened.

At the time, Ron DeSantis was the GOP candidate expected to pose a possible challenge to Trump. As it turned out, he, along with all the other men who entered the race have dropped out, most, only to endorse Trump. Of course, other than Chris Christie, those other male candidates were obviously not serious about challenging Trump, rarely, if ever, attacking Trump on any of the many topics available to them. Can you say gutless?

Also, we didn't know just how many felony indictments would be forthcoming, ninety-one, as it turned out. I am old enough to remember when a politician could be forced out of a presidential race for admitting having mental health therapy in the past, or having extra-marital affairs. And when a candidate who may have smoked pot in his past, had to explain it away.

But now we have a candidate with millions of supporters who (among many other things) stoked a mob to ransack the Capitol building in the attempt to thwart the peaceful transition of power (and perhaps kill or hang a few in the process), stole national secrets, then lied about having them and about returning them all, and has continued to lie about the results of the 2020 presidential election. Oh, and believes that as president he should have complete immunity from prosecution even if he should order the assassination of a political rival. Can you say cult?

History is a curious thing. In hindsight, there are often obvious inflection points that historians can cite as the time or place when a sea change had occurred. Perhaps it is a specific battle of a war, or a speech made by an influential person, or an invention. 

But in real time, as life is happening, it is rare indeed to identify such a point when everything that comes after is different from everything that came before.

My hope with this post is to predict a possible turning point in the life of Donald Trump, and our country.

A while back I published a post concerning which gender is the weaker sex and how we might redefine masculinity to allow for the social changes that have occurred in the last hundred years, changes which have reduced the dominance of (white) men while providing for an immense increase in opportunities in education, business, politics, etc for women and minorities.

https://wurdsfromtheburbs.blogspot.com/2024/01/the-weaker-sex.html

Which brings me back to accountability for Trump.

I would like to think that in 5 years, perhaps even less, the events of 2024 will be designated as the beginning of the end for Trump's influence. Not perhaps the end of such influence, but the beginning of the waning of such influence.

And, as indicated in The Weaker Sex post, should that be true it will be women who have demonstrates their strength, specific women and the gender as a whole who were able to create that slow slide towards irrelevance.

As mentioned before, a lot has changed in nine months. While we already knew about Cassidy and Liz, we now have other women leading the charge to shine light on the Donald.

Two women prosecutors, Fani Willis and Tish James are leading strong cases against Trump which demonstrate his past lies about his finances to obtain preferential loans, and the conspiracy he led to subvert the will of the American electorate to disenfranchise Georgia's voters.

E Jean Carroll, and her female lawyers, Roberta Kaplan and Shawn Crowley, have successfully won a jury verdict which not only found Trump guilty of sexual assault and libel in the first trial, but won additional monetary awards for defamation, injury to her reputation and punitive damages to the tune of $83.3, that second jury trial which resulted from Trump's inability to keep his mouth shut. Can you say lack of self control?

And then there is Nikki Haley. Now, I was very disappointed in Nikki's early debate performance, especially her willingness to pardon Trump should she win the presidency, not because I would not be opposed to such a move should he admit to wrong doing, but we all know he won't admit to doing anything wrong, so Nikki should have prefaced her decision to pardon him with the caveat that he admit wrongdoing, and ask for a pardon. 

But, now that it is mano e mano (so to speak), she is pulling out all the stops and is beginning to point out, not just the obvious, that other than 2016, he (and the GOP in his image) has lost every other election; 2018 midterms when the GOP lost the house, 2020 presidential election when they lost the White House and Senate, and even in 2022 when the red wave was more like a trickle, but also his lack of clarity, his penchant for dictators and bully tactics, and his obvious misogyny.

Can she win the nomination? She has survived the primary to date, besting all the other male candidates, so anything can happen as the trials begin and those republicans who are paying attention see his childish behavior, continued all caps temper tantrums, and the testimony of those who previously voted for and served in his administration. As I said in my last post, I believe it is more likely that she could beat Biden in the November general election than Trump, a prospect that I do not embrace, but one which I can't for the life of me understand why the republican party doesn't realize.

So then, will women be the ultimate force behind Trump's fading away? Specific women, as I have mentioned in past posts, and women voters in general? 

If there is still irony left in the universe, that would certainly be the purest example, for a misogynist, women private parts grabber, thrice married philanderer, to be relegated to the trash bin of American history by the very gender which he treated with disdain and contempt.

The Monarch Butterfly and Selflessness

Wonderful article in the January edition of National Geographic about the monarch butterfly. Another tremendous example of why this magazine is so invaluable, why learning about our environment is crucial not to just the survival of the hundreds of species that are  currently under enormous stress but to humanity as well.

Most people probably know something about the monarch butterfly. Many can even recognize one by sight, despite the myriad of categories of butterflies that exist.

Perhaps the most amazing fact about these delicate creatures, their migration cycle, is also known to most people, in general terms. I know that I was aware of the prodigious nature of their travels, from points as far north as southern Canada to central Mexico. Unfortunately, what I didn't know about them was far more than I thought I knew,

First, and most important, it is a generational journey that the monarchs take each year. What that means is that the monarchs that we might see in our backyards during the summer, are not the monarchs that left Mexico in the spring, and they are most likely not the monarchs that will travel back to Mexico in the fall. The yearly cycle takes at least three, and as many as five generations of monarchs to complete.

Also, those monarchs that are born in southern Canada and America, never see Mexico. They are non-migratory, and tend to have smaller wings than their migratory ancestors and descendants. They are born of the monarchs that left Mexico, survive between two and five weeks, then pass along their DNA to the next generation, eventually producing the one that does the heavy flying, back to Mexico. Those that represent the 4th and 5th generation can live up to a few months, in addition to being bigger than their progenitors.

Yet, amazingly, they know when to depart and where to go, despite never having been there before. Perhaps, due to having very little knowledge of etymology, I assumed that, like birds, monarchs were led by the senior members of their group, at least for one round trip, thereby imparting the migratory cycle through experience. 

But no, those that make the return trip have never been there before. Considering my own tendency to easily lose my car in a large parking lot, or get turned around when approaching a familiar destination from a different angle, it is a remarkable achievement.

Last year, my wonderful wife decided to realize a dream of hers by creating a wildflower garden in our backyard. In our previous home with its postage size backyard, she had, over the years, eliminated most of the grass, replacing it with flower gardens and plants and bushes of many types. By the time we moved in 2020, I was able to mow the lawn with a weed wacker.

But it was very small, as I said, so when we were searching for a new home, we prioritized a larger yard, which we were lucky enough to have found. Consequently, last May, we contracted to have about 900 square feet of lawn removed down to the soil, whereupon she distributed wild flower seeds, like the proverbial Joanna Appleseed.

Now, if you recall, it was very dry in late May and early June last year. And so, three weeks into the experiment, we were looking at dry ground with a few random pieces of grass struggling towards the sky. To be honest, there were a few days when we wondered what madness made us scrape off such a huge swath of land.

But June's dry spell was replaced with rain, and by mid-July we had a host of wildflowers growing, followed by all sorts of bees, bugs, and butterflies. I can't say we saw any monarchs, but the colors and smells and plethora of nature eliminated the doubt we had experienced for those first few weeks. 

Or, in monarch time, it took one generation for our garden to prosper.

Needless to say, the wildflower garden is here to stay, and will most likely get expanded, in hopes that a generation of monarchs will find a home, if only for a short time, in our modest back yard.

Selflessness.

Without falling to far down the rabbit hole of anthropomorphism, wouldn't it be nice if humans showed even a tincture of the selflessness that those generations of monarchs display which never leave America. Their only function is to procreate the next generations, eventually leading to those monarchs who travel back to Mexico to spend the winter, only to migrate up north where the cycle begins again.

Of course, in some ways, we do behave in such a way when we become parents. A little bit of sacrifice here, some nods to the future there, and hopes that by providing roots and wings, our children will have the confidence to pursue happiness, wherever it may take them.

We also act as those monarchs who live so the next generations can migrate, when we discuss the problems of the day, and when we fashion solutions to address those issues. While politics has always been partisan, there has also been a generous amount of compromise and bipartisanship at various times, even in our recent past. 

There is a lot of evidence to suggest that all the stimulus money distributed by both the Trump and Biden Administrations during the pandemic, while adding a certain percentage to the ugly rise in inflation, also provided the foundation for millions of American families to weather the storm of lock downs and unemployment, enabling America to emerge much stronger than most of the world's other western nations. 

So yes, while the hand wringing associated with the ever growing national debt is justified, the understanding that it could have been much worse, that those at the bottom of the economic ladder may have fallen completely through, that recession and perhaps worse was avoided by temporarily increasing our debt is a strong counter to such worries.

That doesn't mean we should not act to reduce the debt moving forward, but is also doesn't mean we shouldn't recognize the end results. After all, if we were honest with ourselves, compared to the past when we took actions that substantially increased our debt, World War One and Two, the Cold War, the war on terror which began in 2001, and the massive bailouts of the banks and other financial institutions in 2008, at least the funds causing this rise in debt went to everyday Americans, not the military industrial complex or the bankers and hedge fund managers.

Will we act communally to address this debt, will we demonstrate some selflessness? Will those with the most (have you read about Elon Musk's $58 billion pay package that is being challenged in court) act as those monarch generations who are content with never migrating? Will we begin to understand that fair distribution of our great nation's considerable resources is the only true way to guarantee that the generations to follow will be able to prosper? 

A few years ago, I posted the following concerning personal happiness and global anxiety. While the topic is only loosely associated with this post, it does address the idea that it is possible to be happy with one's own life, maybe even one's position in the migratory cycle, while worrying about the bigger picture, about whether our progeny will be able to create a future better than today, or make it to Mexico.

https://wurdsfromtheburbs.blogspot.com/2019/09/personal-happiness-vs-global-anxiety.html