In the US government, in the streets of America, in the schools, and at workplaces discussion and debate about the 2nd amendment is commonplace these days.  As the frequency of mass shootings increases, so does the determination of guns-rights advocates. Nobody wants – they say – innocent people killed, but nobody is willing to even consider the ban of high capacity magazines to the general public.  Or the limit of gun sales.  To do so would be to trample on the our Second Amendment rights. And rights, after all, outweigh morality and ethics every time.

The amendment under scrutiny here reads as follows:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Although proponents would say it is clear and straightforward it is, in fact, open to multiple interpretations, depending on who is reading it and on what side of the gun issue they stand.  What everyone seems to agree on, though, is that some assert their Second Amendment rights in ways that are harmful to at least some of the general populace.

After the Parkland school shooting, students rose up and demanded that elected officials and voters reevaluate their position and choices with regard to gun laws and those who implement them. They have been giving speeches, sitting for television and newspaper interviews, and rallying supporters to make fast and lasting changes. At an organized march on the 24th of this month, which was duplicated in cities all around the globe, they spoke eloquently with strength and anger and demanded again an immediate change to the laws which have taken the lives of so many of their friends.

In school walkouts across the country, students showed support for the Parkland survivors and a conviction that change is imperative.  Most of the reports, like this one at Falmouth High School on Cape Cod, show that school administrators were supportive of the walkouts:

The widespread belief among schools supporting their students is that they are exercising a right we all share, the First Amendment.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Others, though, threatened punishment for students participating in the walkout, citing non-adherence to school policy.

We need to ask ourselves when adherence to a set of policies should take precedence over the very basic right of free expression.  But moreover, we must start questioning why so many of us believe that meeting violence with violence is a policy that we, as a country and as individuals, embrace and, in many cases, celebrate.


Warning: You are meant to be horrified by what you are about to read.

Beginning June 21st and lasting through June 30th, the city of Yulin in the southeastern Guangxi province of China will hold the annual Lychee and Dog Meat Festival, commonly referred to as the Yulin Dog Meat Festival in the West. An estimated 10–15,000 dogs will be killed and eaten during the festival, which celebrates the summer solstice.

Although the consumption of dog meat in China goes back thousands of years, the sanctioning of this practice with an annual festival did not occur until 2010.

Estimates of the number of dogs eaten worldwide and in China proper on an annual basis vary widely depending on sources. Manya Koetse, who reports on social trends in China for What’s on Weibo, reports that 13–16 million to dogs are eaten worldwide on an annual basis (and a number of other interesting, if not disturbing facts about dogs in China. I include the link for interested readers).

The bulk of that consumption is in Asia – in China, North and South Korea, the Phillipines, and Vietnam – but occurs in other parts of the world as well, including the United States. So why has this phenomenon, which has occurred for thousands of years, just recently garnered so much loud and aggressive attention in the international community? Why are people so up in arms about something that appears to be part of a longstanding cultural practice?

What is critical about Yulin is that it brings us the reality of the dog meat trade. This is humanity at its worst. It’s NOT about tradition or culture or health. It is, above all, about profit and ignorance and our inability to hold true compassion for the suffering of others.

The dogs that end up at Yulin are often pets that are stolen from families. When you see pictures of them, crowded in cages, they are cowering together, many with colorful collars. Rescuers, who often risk their own lives to save as many dogs as they can from death, have reported seeing both collars and tags. Others are strays, maybe belonging somewhere to someone, stolen for death. All end up at Yulin, starved and without water, beaten, terrorized, skinned, boiled, some electrocuted, and all in open markets in public and displayed in front of all the others taken and waiting to die.

Can you imagine, being kidnapped from your home, yanked from your run in the morning, crammed into a van with several others and driven miles away, never to see your family again? Worse yet, made to watch those strangers beaten and skinned alive, hanged, then dropped in boiling water? No. It horrifies me, too.

The torture, the Chinese say, is necessary. It tenderizes the meat. It’s also (mythically) important in warding off the heat of the summer and offers other health benefits.

Fortunately, the desire for higher profits that drove the creation of this festival also opened up the brutalities of the tradition to the rest of the world and allowed those in the international community to shine a bright spotlight on the cruelty and suffering these beautiful animals have been enduring for so long. The Chinese government and those who support this practice have received sharp and ongoing criticism from activists from all around the globe and there is an international effort to shut the festival down, as well as an organized effort at the nonprofit/governmental level to help investigate animal welfare laws and compliance. This is an ongoing and concerted effort that needs to continue, with pressure at all levels, from organizations and citizens alike.

There has been an unintended consequence to all of the current efforts, though, likely a product of our frenetic proliferation of “fake news.” If you search for Yulin today, you will see countless stories that the festival has been banned. That is NOT TRUE. As of May 26th, 2017, the festival was moving forward as planned. Efforts to shut it down need to be STEPPED UP and all support for dogs that are rescued from the dog meat trade must continue. Here is one of the latest articles on the status of this barbaric practice:


On Saturday, May 28th, the Cincinnati Zoo’s Dangerous Animal Response Team shot and killed Harambe, a 17-year-old Western lowland silverback Gorilla, one of the world’s critically endangered animals.  Harambe was transferred to The Cincinnati Zoo from the Gladys Porter Zoo in Brownsville, TX in September, 2014 and is a captive born gorilla.

Although the complete story is still sketchy, all news outlets – local, national, and international – are reporting that a 4-year-old boy breached the barrier to the gorilla enclosure, fell down approximately 10-12 feet into the moat that separates the public from the area the animals populate, and was approached by Harambe. After a short time, he dragged the boy to the far end of the moat and, when the security team arrived, they made the decision to shoot and kill the gorilla instead of tranquilizing him, for the safety of the child. The child was then retrieved and taken to Children’s Hospital Medical Center. He was conscious and talking to paramedics, with reported scratches and a bump on the head.

A couple of videos and news stories are worth watching/reading:

As one might imagine, public reaction to this story was immediate and visceral. Reactions range from concern for the well-being of the child to sadness for the loss of Harambe to outright rage toward both the adults responsible for this child and the zoo, for having a penetrable barrier and a solution that was simply not good enough in so many peoples’ eyes.

I had several reactions, all at once, and am still processing the jumble of thoughts and emotions this triggered in me. I think it’s important when something like this happens and we are not there, we are not witness to it, that we are cautious about not only our own reaction to our feelings and how we care for ourselves during these times, but also how we think about and react to others.

A number of news stories on this incident report that, before crossing the barrier and falling into the moat, witnesses heard the child express an interest in going into the water and that the mother had both heard and responded to him by telling him “no.” One story also mentions that the mother accompanying this child had a total of six children with her. There was no mention of another adult chaperone, and no other news agency has reported on the parent or guardians. Many folks have commented both that the mother is to blame for not supervising her son and that one cannot and should not blame the mother, as it is very easy to become separated from a child in public. While I am going to withhold specific blame in this case for the parents until I get more specific details, I do think it sounds like there was a serious lack of supervision that led to the injury of this little boy and the death of this beautiful animal.

The Cincinnati Zoo’s response to the introduction of a human boy into Harambe’s environ is deeply regrettable, but I’m not certain they had another option. Maynard admitted that the young boy was not being harmed while with Harambe, but he believed he was in potential danger.

“You’re talking about an animal that’s over 400 pounds and

extremely strong. So no, the child wasn’t under attack but all

sorts of things could happen in a situation like that. He certainly

was at risk,” Maynard tells WLWT.

Many people did not understand why the Response Team chose a lethal kill over the use of tranquilizers. It took 10 minutes for Security to arrive and it is reported that the child was in the enclosure for 10-15 minutes. We can speculate, in hindsight, what they should have done but, in fact, they had moments to make a decision. Harambe, a 400lb wild animal, fairly new to the zoo and (as can be seen in the video) somewhat agitated by all that was going on, was hands-on with the 4-year-old that had entered his territory. Not under attack, but potentially at risk. Shooting him with a tranquilizer gun would have startled him, probably increasing his agitation, and the effects of the tranquilizing agent would have taken a couple minutes to take effect.

It’s a tragedy, any way you look at it.

There was one foolproof way to have prevented it, though.  If Harambe had never been a captive gorilla, on display for thousands of people to walk by and point and shout at, he would never have come in contact with this 4-year-old boy and no one would have had to make the tragic decision to shoot and kill him. That is fact.

And to even suggest, as some have, that Harambe didn’t suffer, yesterday or during his entire life in captivity is a shameful statement.

Zoos are being touted as institutions of conservation and education.  And The Cincinnati Zoo has been better than most in both of these efforts. But as a lifelong supporter of this zoo, as someone who was active in youth programs there, volunteered there, attended many behind-the-scenes events there I have, over the last several years, begun to grow into a new understanding of what zoos are to the animals they hold captive. And I’ve come to see the zoo from the perspective of the animal and, equally as important, I think, I’ve begun to rethink our methods of conservation.

Now, when I go to the zoo, I can’t see past the swaying elephants and the pacing cats.  The animals that are chewing the bars of their cages and the solitary birds that are kept in darkened, cramped quarters with no room to fly and plastic foliage, pretty and on display for our pleasure. Now, when I go to the zoo, tears fill my eyes when I see tiny terrarium after terrarium filled with snakes and frogs and lizards, destined to live life in a 12×6 in glass cell. Now, when I go to the zoo, I hear people talk about conservation, but I see common birds and reptiles, captive, not to conserve, but to exhibit as museum pieces for profit.

Harambe, like many others, was born a captive to remain a captive until death. Is this conservation?

Metta to all who remain captive.



I had planned to begin this afternoon’s posts with the absolutely preposterous notion of Donald Trump as a serious contender for the Office of President of the United States (yes, we are truly there, folks), but then I read some of the crazy things Ted Cruz has been saying lately and I simply had to begin with the second best.  *cough*

This is a long, but very good Rolling Stone article on what’s wrong with Ted Cruz.

You may think I’m just a Democrat dumping on one of the Republican candidates because, well…I can, but I actually have had some education in this area (focused primarily in foreign policy) and I truly do have an interest in the growth, development, health, perception, and sustainability of our country.  I think that many people are concerned with those things; I just don’t believe that everybody considers the consequences of the actions of those in leadership roles.

On to Mr. Cruz.  If you didn’t read the article at the link, I’ll give you a taste.  From the first paragraph:

“In no particular order, Texas senator and Republican presidential aspirant Ted Cruz has: said acts of Christian terrorism stopped centuries ago, forgetting the Ku Klux Klan and the shooting in Colorado last week; claimed he has never met an anti-abortion activist who advocates violence, despite being endorsed by one just days before; dismissed the need for Planned Parenthood because there isn’t a shortage of “rubbers” in America; and made an offhand comment that Colorado mass shooter Robert Dear could be a “transgendered leftist activist.” All this in just the last week.”

I could write an entire book on the points in that paragraph, but I’m not going to waste my writing life on that.  I would like to focus here, instead, on something I read in ThinkProgress today about a statement Cruz made on torture. Torture is a subject I know a little about and hold very strong opinions on.

The link:

The quote from the article:

“America has never engaged in torture and we’re not about to,” Cruz responded after being asked whether he would engage in torture, enhanced interrogation, and waterboarding by the show’s three hosts.

There is a lot more in the article worth reading and I encourage you to do so.  This single statement, though, if you know nothing else about Ted Cruz, tells you all you need to know about his character and how he will serve as President of the United States.  And if you are a compassionate, honest, ethical individual, you will run as far from this candidate as you can.

The definition of torture (from Article 1, Part 1 of the Geneva Convention):

  1. For the purposes of this Convention, torture means any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions.”

Ted Cruz does not even know what the correct definition of torture is, so he cannot say that we don’t engage in it.  Amnesty International has investigated and documented repeated violations of the UN Convention Against Torture by the US since 9/11:

So, either Ted Cruz is a liar or he’s just stupid.  Since he’s well-educated and a US Senator with a lot of experience, I suspect it’s the former.

But even before 9/11, the United States has been deeply involved in the use and training of torture methods for years.  Take, for example, the work of the School of the Americas (now known as the Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation).  Located at Fort Benning, GA, it is a combat training school for soldiers (rebels) in Latin America. There is a long history of country destabilization, torture, rape, assassination, and other atrocities committed by the graduates of the SOA, which are all trained by the US Army and followed instructions for years compiled in what are now known as the CIA Torture Manuals.  More can be read here:

and here:

And if that is not enough, I’m wondering if Mr. Cruz has read even the summary of the Senate Intelligence Committee’s Report on the CIA’s Use of Torture? It determined that, not only did the US engage in torture, but that the use of torture was not, in fact, useful in obtaining factual and helpful information.

Oh, and yes.  It also determined that waterboarding meets the definition of torture.  As if we actually needed a whole committee to tell us that.

Given Ted Cruz’s position on all of the non-torturing that we’re doing, I wonder how he thinks about and will handle – as President – all of our non-poverty and our non-mental illness and our non-mass shootings and all of the other bad and awful stuff that’s not happening.

I hope that there are enough people eligible to vote who are able to see through this politician’s rhetoric and make a choice for someone who will bring hope and a peace back into this country and its citizenry.

<a href=”″>Roses 2</a> via <a href=””>photopin</a&gt; <a href=””>(license)</a&gt;



I finally sat down and watched the Republican debate the other night thinking that, by now, there may be some intelligent discussion about issues and fewer insults among the candidates.  It did seem to be a little more civilized, and I actually heard some real debate (although to call it intelligent would be stretching it a bit) about a few of the primary hot topics on the ticket this year.  It was a definite improvement over the playground antics of the last few Republican debacles I saw.

Still, from the very beginning, this pre-election posturing has created serious doubt in my mind about the health and future development of this nation domestically and as a vital partner in the global family.

Over and over again Donald Trump and the other candidates have demonstrated, not only a lack of basic knowledge in the areas of international law, foreign policy, and diplomacy, but they have shown that they have no respect, care, and even less understanding for the general populace of this country. They are unable for even two hours to have a reasoned debate on serious issues that mean life and death to many people without resorting to insults and name-calling.  And above all else, they display not only disrespect but contempt for President Obama, and in an almost proud way.  Not one of these men deserves to be the president’s butler.  

Assuming, though, that one of them will be the presidential candidate, I have been trying to figure them out by how they stand on the issues.  Not an easy task when much of their chatter is about bashing one another and deflecting the important questions.

Both Trump and Cruz have clearly stated they will make torture standard operating procedure in times of war and when dealing with terrorists. During the debate on February 6 in New Hampshire, Trump declared that he’d bring back waterboarding and “worse.” Cruz spent a lot of time explaining (incorrectly) that waterboarding is not, by legal definition, torture.

I’m focusing on this particular issue because it not only speaks to the characters of the people involved, but the decisions that are made regarding the use of torture will have ramifications for everyone involved, not just the terrorists we capture. But I’ll get to that in a minute. Also, the public isn’t always aware of the specifics of the legalities surrounding torture and politicians often take advantage of that to influence their vote.

Torture is illegal at all times under international law.  Period.  The fact that we happen to live in the United States does not give us any special privilege or right to commit torture. Period.  Just because we have been attacked by someone does not give us the right to torture someone we think may have information about the attack. In fact, it’s been researched and proven that torturing someone for information does not elicit useful, usable data.

Trump either doesn’t know this, or doesn’t care and was simply trolling for voters on Saturday, “‘You can say what you want,’ he said [again] on Sunday. ‘I have no doubt that it does work in term[s] of information and other things.'”

Cruz has limited knowledge as to what constitutes torture, defining it as: “…excruciating pain that is equivalent to losing organs and systems…” (Saturday debate) and claims that waterboarding does not fall under the definition.

The full definition follows:


“torture” means an act committed by a person acting under the color of law specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering (other than pain or suffering incidental to lawful sanctions) upon another person within his custody or physical control;

(2)“severe mental pain or suffering” means the prolonged mental harm caused by or resulting from—


the intentional infliction or threatened infliction of severe physical pain or suffering;


the administration or application, or threatened administration or application, of mind-altering substances or other procedures calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or the personality;


the threat of imminent death; or


the threat that another person will imminently be subjected to death, severe physical pain or suffering, or the administration or application of mind-altering substances or other procedures calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or personality…”
Waterboarding does fall under the definition of torture.  I wonder if any of our esteemed politicians  has ever read the Convention Against Torture or the US Laws prohibiting torture.  I am actually reading The Official Senate Report on CIA Torture – I am beginning to wonder if anyone in the senate even read it.  It seems that, if one is planning to make policy change about it, one should know what laws he plans to violate.
In just this one instance, candidates who show their “patriotism” and anger toward the enemy by demonstrating a desire for brutal and painful payback will only be escalating the violence and hate that is perpetuated toward us. Because if we capture and systematically torture and otherwise inhumanely treat suspected prisoners and terrorists, there is no reason other countries cannot and will not do the same. We have forces stationed in far more countries than anyone else does in the world.  The argument we make is that we are simply doing it for our security.  Who is to say they are not doing it for their own, as well?
We need someone with intelligence, experience in foreign and diplomatic affairs, knowledge of international law, the understanding that there will be times others may need to be consulted and the humility to say “I don’t know,” and someone who is not going to indiscriminately bomb a country based on information gathered that could be suspect.  And we need someone who knows how to talk to people as equals, without judging.
I don’t know about you, but I’m not feeling very hopeful.

The Real Enemy

Posted: February 7, 2016 in Uncategorized

We here in the West are a “determine the enemy, react quickly, defend our territory and ideology, and eliminate the threat, fast and furious” culture.  The enemy is typically whoever stands in our way of promoting our agenda or ideology and can be either foreign or domestic.  Increasingly, in some countries like the US, political pundits set up an “us” and “them” in the domestic arena to win political power, gain control over the populace, and strengthen the resolve against that enemy.  They do so, in part, by preying on the fact that most of us have become “surface dwellers” these days; we get our news from FOX or CNN or the local stations, hearing only what the biased owners and producers of those conglomerates want us to hear.  We seldom dig beneath all the rhetoric, all the “shock and awe” of round-the-clock, live, as-it-happens news. If we hear it on the morning broadcast or read it in our daily feed, it must be true.

Looking back briefly over US history, it seems there has always been an enemy, an “other.” The Germans, the Japanese, the USSR, Korea, the Vietnamese, the Ayatollah Khomeni, Iran, Sadam Hussein, Osama Bin Laden, Iraq, Al-Quaeda, and now, ISIS.  We don’t seem to be satisfied, though, in dealing only with enemies outside of our nation. We find enemies within our borders at every turn: the natives that were here when the new immigrants arrived, Northerners, Southerners, Republicans, Democrats, the Right, the Left, Blacks, Whites, the police, the administration, Christians, Satanists, large corporations, Big Pharma, and the list could go on.

Even in our smaller, day-to-day worlds, we fight a never-ending battle with unconquerable and often invisible enemies. We wrestle with physical pain that keeps us from doing the things we enjoy.  We suffer unimaginable emotional distress and turmoil that often leaves us unable to engage anymore in the fight and ready and willing to surrender.  We deal with the every day moral and ethical dilemmas of life and living, companionable foes in their own right that help us grow and move us forward.  But always, always, we face an enemy, an entity seen as an “other.”

ISIS is not what’s destroying us as a nation.  What ISIS does, wherever they do it, is horrible and unconscionable. But the fact is, what we do to ourselves and how we fall prey to the perpetuation of the illusion of others’ affects on us is what is destroying us.

“Our worst enemies are those we least suspect – ourselves.”

                                           –  Ivan Panin, Thoughts

We are, indeed, a powerful nation.  Many of us are also extraordinarily ethnocentric and paranoid, as well, believing that everyone else is out to get us even though the facts – the actual numbers – say otherwise.

  • 394,912 – number of people in the US killed by firearms due to homicide, suicide, and legal police shootings between 2001 and 2014, according to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention database.
  • 3046 – number of people in the US killed by terrorism or possible terrorism, as maintained in the Global Terrorism Database.  The vast majority of these were, of course, from the attacks on 9/11.
  • approx. 7000 (gleaned from several sites and to 2015) – number of US soldiers killed in Iraq and Afghanistan wars
  • nearly 1,500,000 Iraqi civilians (innocent men, women, and children) killed during the war there.

There are statistics for Americans killed annually in automobile accidents (33,561 in 2012 – NHTSA), incidents of domestic violence (every 9 seconds in the US a woman is assaulted, suicide (42,773 deaths every year in the US –, and many, many more.

Maybe, instead of looking outside of our borders to find, confront, and destroy the enemy, we should start within.  We cannot be powerful and effective leaders if our own world is disordered and chaotic.





100_1414Recently, Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus announced their decision to discontinue the use of elephants in their acts beginning in May.  This news came to the near-delight of many animal activists and advocates who were frustrated with Ringlings’ initial release that they would be phasing out their elephant acts gradually, by 2018.  Many of the comments on social media and to journal and newspaper articles that address the decision, though, are by disappointed and angry parents and grandparents whose children will miss out on seeing an elephant balance on an oversized ball or a fancily dressed acrobat ride on her back.

In these comments also is hate and contempt for those activists who “lie” about The Greatest Show on Earth and its treatment of the animals in its care. As if they have have some ulterior motive, a true attempt just to spoil everyone’s fun.

The abuse and mistreatment at Ringling Brothers, as well as a host of other facilities that keep captive wild animals and, in particular, elephants, is well-documented. This is just one example:

While the Ringling Brothers’ elephants “retirement” came as good news to those of us who have advocated for it over many months and years, it still leaves many (if not most) of us with concerns.  The elephants that are currently performing in circus acts will be moved to Ringlings’ own Center for Elephant Conservation (CEC) in Florida.  Unlike the sanctuaries that have been set up for retired elephants like the The Elephant Sanctuary, in Hohenwald, Tennessee, which provide open grassland and freedom to roam, sleep, bathe in the lakes, and live as they wish:

the CEC is a breeding and research facility, which breeds its elephants (often by artifical insemination) to preserve the species and conducts studies using the animals to assist in human cancer research.  As the following article describes, the elephants are housed in large barn-like rooms with cement floors and barred enclosures.  Staff continues use of the bull hook, the elephants are chained at night, and they are given daily baths by their keepers.

This documentation was provided by a worker at CEC who witnessed first-hand and participated in many of the abuses there.

The behavior condoned by Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey is common among other (although not all) facilities that keep captive wild animals, including other circuses, zoos, aquariums, and animal parks.  We don’t hear about it often or we are told that those who protest it are “lunatics” or “on the fringe.” These facilities are, above all else, businesses, and to lose the support of the general public or corporate sponsors cuts into their bottom line.

That makes it even more critical for those of us who have the compassion – not just for these animals, but for all animals – to stand up and speak up.  You can do NO harm by sharing and spreading your compassion with and to others.

I leave you with a question to think about:  Would you rather live a life in a cage, beaten, under someone’s constant control, chained, forcibly bred, your children taken away at 2 years of age, no companions with which to express your emotions?  Or would you rather live a life roaming freely with your family and friends, able to bathe when you wish, lie down and sleep under the stars, and cuddle your children?

Yeah, I thought so.