Spreading beliefs through violence: A very old tradition

I just read that on this date (September 29) in 1227, Roman Emperor Frederick II was excommunicated from the Catholic Church for not participating in the Crusades. At that point, apparently, the Catholic Church had grown even more powerful than the Roman Empire. And the Church wanted blood. Or else.

The Crusades were the Church's attempt to spread its influence and control throughout Muslim-dominated parts of the region, and to convert - or wipe out - the heathens. They were spreading Catholicism at the point of a sword. What would Jesus do?

Now, hundreds of years later, things are not so different. We've traded in our swords for machine guns and drones, but the more powerful entities on the planet are still trying to spread their own ideologies through violence.

Today it's not called a Crusade. Today it's called "spreading democracy". It's called "winning hearts and minds".

In reality, however, you cannot force people to believe in you or to accept you - especially when they're concerned for their lives and limbs.

But apparently that doesn't matter to those in power who care only about power.

GOP vs. Jesus

As I recall from Catholic school and bible studies, Jesus Christ showed us by example that we should feed the poor and cure the sick.

However, the self-described Christians in the GOP have been spending all their time trying to take food stamps away from the poor and take health care away from those with preexisting conditions.

It's the opposite of what Jesus taught us. And it's nothing short of hypocrisy.

I hope other voters can also see through this.

Same-sex marriage, religious liberty, and fear

Anti-equality organizations, such as the National Organization for Marriage (NOM), keep trying to tell us that same-sex marriage is a threat to their religious liberty.

That is, of course, nonsense.

In states where same-sex marriage is legal, heterosexuals are still at liberty to marry someone of the opposite sex.

The only thing at risk is their sense of superiority over another group of human beings. And that, I believe, is what they are truly afraid of.

September 17 is Constitution Day

Today, September 17, is Constitution Day, which commemorates the signing in 1987 of the U.S. Constitution.

While many on both the political right and the political left frequently lament the perceived erosion of our constitutional rights - and sometimes rightly so, let's take a moment today to be grateful for the freedoms we do have. And then let's fight as hard as we can to protect those freedoms.

You can read the full official text of the U.S. Constitution here.

Amnesty names Malala Yousafzai and Harry Belafonte as 2013 Ambassadors of Conscience

Amnesty International has just announced the two recipients of its Ambassador of Conscience Award for 2013.

Malala Yousafzai, even at the young age of 16, is a strong and inspiring advocate for equal access to education. She was shot and severely wounded last year by the Taliban in her native Pakistan, but that seems to have made her even stronger.

Entertainer Harry Belefonte is a lifelong advocate for humanitarian causes, which he has described as an "obligation to do more than just entertain."

Congratulations to these two very deserving individuals.

For more information about this award, click here.

PA judge rules against county official who issued same-sex marriage licenses

A Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court judge today ruled against Montgomery County Register of Wills D. Bruce Hanes, who has been issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples in defiance of a state law that defines marriage as a legal union between one man and one woman.

Judge Dan Pellegrini did not address the constitutionality of the state's marriage law. Instead, he decided that Hanes did not have the power to act outside the law; specifically, that Hanes has "admittedly failed to comply with his mandatory ministerial public duty" under the marriage law. And he ordered Hanes to stop it.

>> Read the judge's opinion. (PDF)

Fortunately, the issue won't stop there. The ACLU of Pennsylvania has other litigation in the pipeline that challenges the state's discriminatory marriage law. So stay tuned, with fingers crossed.

On this 9/11 anniversary, are the terrorists winning?

After al-Qaeda attacked the U.S. on 9/11, George W. Bush told us that it was because "they hate our freedoms".

That wasn't the real reason for the attacks. But still, it feels as if the terrorists have won - or that we have lost.

From the Bush administration's imposition of indefinite detention without charge or trial, which continues today under Obama, to the PATRIOT Act and the expansion of government secrecy and warrantless spying, our freedoms have indeed been curtailed. Little old ladies cannot even board an airplane without being subjected to excessive and humiliating security procedures.

Despite all these additional "security" measures, and even though Osama bin Laden now sleeps with the fishes, many Americans don't feel much safer than we did before 9/11.

Furthermore, our continued presence and influence in the Middle East, and indeed our continued threats to expand that presence and influence (see Syria), will only serve to feed the true root causes of anti-US terrorist sentiments. Because, in fact, those are the true root causes.

And so, in fact, it's lose-lose for all.

Demonstrations nationwide against bombing Syria (and how to find one near you)

Over the next few several days, actions and events will be held across the country in opposition to U.S. military action in Syria.

Events include a demonstration in New York's Times Square on Saturday, September 7, and a march on Washington on Monday, September 9, as Congress goes back into session.

These actions are organized and cosponsored by a broad coalition of groups, including the Syrian American Forum, United National Antiwar Coalition (UNAC), and the ANSWER Coalition.

>> Click here to find a demonstration near you.

Court hearing today on same-sex marriage in PA

A Pennsylvania state court hearing is scheduled for today in a suit filed by Gov. Tom Corbett's admimnistration against Montgomery County Register of Wills D. Bruce Hanes. Earlier this summer, Hanes had started issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples in defiance of a state law that defines marriage as a legal union between one man and one woman. The lawsuit to be heard today is the state's attempt to stop him.

According to CBS Philly, the state wants the issue decided strictly on the question of whether or not a local official can get away with disregarding a state law that he disagrees with.

Others are hoping that this will be an opportunity for the court to address the constitutionality (or lack thereof) of the discriminatory marriage law.

Questions of legal standing and jurisdiction will also be argued.

Stay tuned. But don't expect a final resolution any time soon, as an appeal is likely in any case.

Divorcing Wells Fargo

I first opened the checking and savings accounts, along with a safe deposit box, in the early 1980s, at Fidelity Bank. Then, through a series of mergers and buy-outs, it became First Fidelity, then First Union, and then Wachovia.

It was a good bank, with conveniently located branches and ATMs, friendly staff, and a reasonable fee structure. For three decades, it was my primary bank - where my paychecks were automatically deposited and from which most of my bills were automatically paid. It was all smooth and easy.

But then Wells Fargo bought Wachovia.

First, the rates went up. Now I had to maintain $1,500 in my checking account - rather than $1,000 - in order to avoid a monthly service charge. And my checking and savings accounts no longer entitled me to a 50% discount on my safe deposit box rental.

But I was attached to that bank account. I guess it was a sentimental kind of attachment, like when you're in an unhappy marriage but not yet emotionally ready to break away. So I ate the extra expense.

Then I started to read about Wells Fargo's role in the subprime mortgage crisis which contributed to the ongoing worldwide recession. In 2012 alone, Wells Fargo agreed to pay more than $180 million in settlements for its crimes, with further legal trouble pending:

• In July, it reached a $175-million settlement with the U.S. Justice Department for allegedly discriminating against minority mortgage borrowers and charging them higher interest rates.

• In August, it agreed to a $6.5-million settlement on SEC charges that it sold risky mortgage-backed securities.

• In October, it was hit with a federal lawsuit based on the Federal False Claims Act, alleging that Wells Fargo defrauded the FHA by engaging in "reckless" lending of FHA-backed loans and then leaving the agency to pick up the tab.

To add insult to injury, from 2008 to 2010 Wells Fargo received $17.9 in tax subsidies, paid for by you and me.

So I decided that I couldn't keep my money there any longer. Now that I had this knowledge about how Wells Fargo conducted its business, I no longer had an excuse. I finally moved my money to a local credit union, which has better rates, lower fees, and branches that are almost as convenient.

Wells Fargo didn't make it easy. When I visited a local branch to close my accounts, the customer service rep and her supervisor repeatedly pressured me to stay, even though I don't have much money. I refused to give in. I calmly and sweetly shared my reasons for leaving, and I hope that information gets passed up the ladder.

So now I have severed all personal connections to Wells Fargo, and it feels liberating. Kind of like my divorce - difficult but worth it.

50 years later, MLK's dream lives on

50 years ago today, on August 28, 1963, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. delivered his famous "I Have a Dream" speech at the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, DC. He was one of many speakers at the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom. And he is probably the one most remembered.

Last weekend, on Saturday, August 24, a 50th Anniversary March on Washington drew thousands of participants, including leading civil rights activists of today and icons like Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.), the last living speaker from the 1963 rally.

Saturday's event was impressive. The speakers' words confirmed that we've come a long way in the past 50 years - and that we've still got a long way to go.

The first African-American President currently occupies the White House, and I wish Dr. King could have lived to see it. However, Obama's success has been met by a ridiculous amount of opposition from Tea Party racists and "birthers" and Congressional Republicans alike.

Fortunately, it seems as though our younger generations, for the most part, are much more color-blind that those of the past. And interracial marriages are much more commonly accepted these days in many, if not most, parts of the country.

Our non-white population is slowly but surely edging its way into a demographic majority. While this is surely a contributing factor to the white man's fear, it represents to me a welcome kind of karmic justice.

It is a shame, however, if the war on racism can be won only by outnumbering the racists. And so the dream lives on.

>> Read and hear the "I Have a Dream" speech.

George Zimmerman wants Florida to pay for his defense costs

George Zimmerman now wants the Florida taxpayers to cover the defense costs he incurred during his trial for the murder of unarmed teenager Trayvon Martin. Since he was acquitted, he believes he should be reimbursed.

Let's see...

Zimmerman disobeyed police orders to stop pursuing Trayvon Martin.

Instead of backing off as ordered, he shot Trayvon to death.

And now he wants the state to cover his legal expenses.

Clever.

Florida law does allow for that. But, in this case, it feels wrong. It feels ... dirty.

Amnesty calls on Obama to commute Manning's sentence (and how you can help)

Amnesty International is calling on President Obama to grant Bradley/Chelsea Manning a commutation to time served.

"Instead of fighting tooth and nail to lock him up for decades, the U.S. government should turn its attention to investigating and delivering justice for the serious human rights abuses committed by its officials in the name of countering terror," said Widney Brown, Amnesty's Senior Director of International Law and Policy.

"Manning had already pleaded guilty to leaking information, so for the U.S. to have continued prosecuting him under the Espionage Act, even charging him with 'aiding the enemy,' can only be seen as a harsh warning to anyone else tempted to expose government wrongdoing," explained Brown. "More than anything else, the case shows the urgent need to reform the U.S.'s antiquated Espionage Act and strengthen protections for those who reveal information that the public has a need and a right to know."

If you agree, please sign Amnesty's petition here.

While the petition is unlikely to change any minds in the White House, it is important that we sign on in a display of solidarity against Manning's excessive sentence.

Sign on now.

Rights group condemns Bradley Manning sentence

Today, war crimes whistleblower Bradley Manning was sentenced to 35 years in prison for leaking hundreds of thousands of classified documents to Wikileaks which exposed U.S. war crimes and other government misconduct.

In response, the Center for Constitutional Rights issued this noteworthy statement condemning the sentence as well as the law it was based on:

"We are outraged that a whistleblower and a patriot has been sentenced on a conviction under the Espionage Act. The government has stretched this archaic and discredited law to send an unmistakable warning to potential whistleblowers and journalists willing to publish their information. We can only hope that Manning’s courage will continue to inspire others who witness state crimes to speak up.

"This show trial was a frontal assault on the First Amendment, from the way the prosecution twisted Manning’s actions to blur the distinction between whistleblowing and spying to the government’s tireless efforts to obstruct media coverage of the proceedings. It is a travesty of justice that Manning, who helped bring to light the criminality of U.S. forces in Iraq and Afghanistan, is being punished while the alleged perpetrators of the crimes he exposed are not even investigated. Every aspect of this case sets a dangerous precedent for future prosecutions of whistleblowers – who play an essential role in democratic government by telling us the truth about government wrongdoing – and we fear for the future of our country in the wake of this case.

"We must channel our outrage and continue building political pressure for Manning's freedom. President Obama should pardon Bradley Manning, and if he refuses, a presidential pardon must be an election issue in 2016."

Indeed. But I shall not hold my breath.

I'm not childless - I'm childfree!

I am not a mother. I never really wanted to be a mother. It never fit into my life's plans, nor those of my ex-husband.

I congratulate and applaud all the mothers who are raising children by choice or by circumstance. It's just not for me.

Some people seem surprised, as if all women are supposed to have a natural yearning for motherhood. They seem to think I'm in denial. Usually they feel sorry for me, which is a huge waste of energy.

But the worst of it is when they refer to me as "childless" - a word that suggests that something is missing from my life.

I don't think of myself as "childless". I prefer "childfree".

Take THAT, GOP misogynists!

Defense Department announces same-sex spouse benefits

Good news: Pursuant to the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling that Section Three of the Defense of Marriage Act is unconstitutional, today the U.S. Department of Defense announced plans to extend benefits to same-sex spouses of DoD personnel. This includes spouses of uniformed service members and civilian DoD employees.

Available benefits will include the DoD's health care coverage, housing benefits, and separation allowances, as applicable. The benefits will become available no later than September 3 of this year.

From the DoD's announcement:

"The Department of Defense remains committed to ensuring that all men and women who serve in the U.S. military, and their families, are treated fairly and equally as the law directs.

[...]

"We recognize that same-sex military couples who are not stationed in a jurisdiction that permits same-sex marriage would have to travel to another jurisdiction to marry. That is why the department will implement policies to allow military personnel in such a relationship non-chargeable leave for the purpose of travelling to a jurisdiction where such a marriage may occur. This will provide accelerated access to the full range of benefits offered to married military couples throughout the department, and help level the playing field between opposite-sex and same-sex couples seeking to be married.

"For civilian benefits administered government-wide to federal employees, the Department of Defense will follow the Office of Personnel Management and the Department of Labor’s guidance to ensure that the same benefits currently available to heterosexual spouses are also available to legally married same-sex spouses."

Take THAT, John Boehner!

Two sad atomic anniversaries this week

Tuesday, August 6, marked the anniversary of the bombing of Hiroshima by U.S. forces.

Friday, August 9, will mark the anniversary of the bombing of Nagasaki.

According to the Hiroshima Day Committee, "About 140,000 +/- 10,000 (including 20,000 soldiers) were dead by the end of December 1945; 90% of these are thought to have been killed within 2 weeks after the bombing."

Of those who didn't die, many suffered serious long-term illness.

Most were innocent civilians - men, women, and children.

The Geneva Conventions were adopted in the wake of World War II, establishing humanitarian standards for war, including the protection of civilians.

Still, innocent civilians continue to suffer and die in our wars.

We never seem to learn. And we never seem to care.

People power - in my dream and in real life

A little while ago, I awoke from a disturbing dream. In it, I was standing near my car at a gas station, and there was a benign-looking man standing next to his car nearby. It was nighttime. A third car drove up, and I had an uncomfortable feeling about it. Then a man got out of it and attacked the first guy. They fought violently, and I felt helpless. All I could do was call 911 and hope that the police got there quickly. Then I sought refuge in the gas station's convenience store, where other people were also concerned about the fight, and had also called the police. At last, I started to feel safe.

I'm thinking that the dream reflects my real-life feelings of helplessness sometimes when I see all the violence and human rights abuses in the world, and the frustration I feel about the fact that I cannot just snap my fingers or put on a red cape and stop it all by myself.

But, in my dream and in reality, feelings of helplessness dissipate when others join in and we work together to solve the world's problems. "People power" is very real, as I've seen in the many success stories shared by Amnesty International and other advocacy groups I've worked with.

Bottom line: Don't feel helpless - get organized!

Rights groups react to Bradley Manning verdict

On July 30, in a military trial at Fort Mead, Maryland, war crimes whistleblower Bradley Manning was acquitted of aiding the enemy (the most serious charge against him) but was found guilty of 19 other charges. While serving as a Private First Class in the U.S. Army, Manning had released hundreds of thousands of classified documents to Wikileaks which exposed U.S. war crimes and other government misconduct. Doing so led to his court-martial.

In response to the verdict, Amnesty International suggested that the U.S. government needs to reassess its priorities: "The government's priorities are upside down. The U.S. government has refused to investigate credible allegations of torture and other crimes under international law despite overwhelming evidence," said Widney Brown, Amnesty's senior director of international law and policy. "Yet they decided to prosecute Manning who it seems was trying to do the right thing - reveal credible evidence of unlawful behavior by the government. You investigate and prosecute those who destroy the credibility of the government by engaging in acts such as torture which are prohibited under the U.S. Constitution and in international law... It's hard not to draw the conclusion that Manning's trial was about sending a message: the U.S. government will come after you, no holds barred, if you're thinking of revealing evidence of its unlawful behavior."

In other words, U.S. policy is to shoot the proverbial messenger.

The lawyers at the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) agree. The CCR had filed a case challenging the lack of transparency around the Manning trial. Now, in the wake of the verdict, the CCR has released a statement condemning the charges against Manning related to the Espionage Act: "[T]he Espionage Act itself is a discredited relic of the WWI era, created as a tool to suppress political dissent and antiwar activism, and it is outrageous that the government chose to invoke it in the first place against Manning. Government employees who blow the whistle on war crimes, other abuses and government incompetence should be protected under the First Amendment."

The CCR statement goes on to question the future of journalism and the First Amendment itself: "We now live in a country where someone who exposes war crimes can be sentenced to life even if not found guilty of aiding the enemy, while those responsible for the war crimes remain free. If the government equates being a whistleblower with espionage or aiding the enemy, what is the future of journalism in this country? What is the future of the First Amendment?"

Indeed. And it's not just journalists and whistleblowers who should be worried.

Will PA court cases overturn state DOMA?

Last week, D. Bruce Hanes, the register of wills for Montgomery County, PA, in the Philadelphia suburbs, started issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couple in protest of a state law that mirrors the now-defunct federal Defense of Marriage Act, defining marriage as a legal union between one man and one woman.

In defending his actions, Hanes said, "I decided to come down on the right side of history and the law."

While I believe that DOMA - whether at the federal level or at the state level - is inherently unfair, my first impression when I heard the news last week was that Hanes was breaking the law. So, as much as I admired his bold act of civil disobedience, I was uncomfortable about it.

Then today happened.

State officials are suing Hanes in hopes of getting a court order to stop him from issuing marriage licenses.

Meanwhile, the ACLU has filed a lawsuit challenging the state's marriage law.

Just as the federal lawsuits against DOMA resulted in that law being overturned, I am hoping that one or both of these state-level suits result in a similar ruling at the state level.

Much of our progress in America through the decades was the result of brave people boldly engaging in civil disobedience. With that in mind, I am no longer uncomfortable with Hanes's actions. Indeed, I applaud him for going there, and I hope to someday shake his hand.

Portugal condemns Texas's 500th execution

On June 26, Texas executed its 500th death row prisoner since a 1976 Supreme Court ruling that reinstated the death penalty as an option in this country.

Texas is the execution capital of the U.S. And the U.S. is one of only two industrialized democracies (the other being Japan) which still have the death penalty. The rest of the world is becoming much more civilized.

Especially Portugal, where the last execution took place in 1846.

Last week, the Portuguese government stood up for human rights and issued the following statement on its website condemning Texas's 500th execution:

Portugal strongly regrets the execution of Kimberley McCarthy on 26th June in Texas, USA. This brings the number of persons executed in Texas to 500 since capital punishment was re-established in the State in 1982.

While recognizing the seriousness of the crimes perpetrated and extending our deepest sympathy to the families of the victim, Portugal opposes the capital punishment in all cases and without exception. Capital punishment represents an irreversible loss of human life and there are numerous studies that demonstrate that it has no deterrent effect.

Portugal calls on the State of Texas to reflect on the continued use of the capital punishment and to reconsider this policy in light of the worldwide trend towards abolition, as was the recent case of the State of Maryland which repealed capital punishment in March this year.

I applaud the Portuguese government for openly condemning this barbaric practice.

Guns for George Zimmerman

A few days ago, there were reports that George Zimmerman would get his gun back - the one he used to kill Trayvon Martin - now that the trial is over and he's been acquitted.

However, in the meantime, the Justice Department stepped in and put all the trial evidence - including the gun - on hold pending its own investigation of the case.

I can imagine that Zimmerman might feel insecure without his gun. But he needn't worry for long. A Florida gun store has offered Zimmerman a free gun.

"We currently have the same model in stock, or he could (choose) another weapon suitable for concealed carry," said a letter from Pompano Pat's motorcycle and gun shop to Zimmerman's attorney.

The letter continues: "We have read numerous reports of death threats against your client and believe no good would come from harming him."

Pompano Pat's wants to ensure that Zimmerman can continue to stand his ground against scary, skittle-carrying teenagers.

Because they care.

</sarcasm>

Texas executed two prisoners this week

Not something to be proud of:

On Tuesday, July 16, Texas executed John Quintanilla, Jr.

Then on Thursday, July 18, Vaughn Ross received a lethal injection in the same Texas death chamber.

That's two executions just two days apart.

The next one is scheduled for July 31.

They like to keep that grisly production line humming.

Would Trayvon be alive if he lived in Pennsylvania?

My home state of Pennsylvania has a "Stand Your Ground" law that was modeled after the Florida law. "Stand Your Ground" laws allow a person to use deadly force in self-defense against someone whom you believe presents a serious threat to you. I opposed the law when it first came before the State Assembly, and I oppose it now. It makes it too easy to kill or seriously harm someone who might not actually pose a threat at all, just because you might be paranoid enough imagine that they look suspicious.

However, I just learned that the Pennsylvania law contains a caveat not present in the Florida law, which might have made all the difference if Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman had lived in Pennsylvania rather than in Florida.

According to Philadelphia's CBS affiliate, the Pennsylvania law "requires that outside the home, a person invoking 'Stand Your Ground' must see a deadly weapon, not merely feel threatened."

So, since Martin was carrying nothing more lethal than a pack of Skittles candy and a can of iced tea, Zimmerman might have chosen not to shoot. Or, if he did, he might have had a lot more explaining to do.

Stop the threats to Zimmerman

I am as disappointed as anyone regarding George Zimmerman's acquittal over the weekend in the shooting death of unarmed black teenager Trayvon Martin in Florida. But, at the same time, I strongly condemn the actions of some other disappointed individuals who are going overboard and wishing harm on Zimmerman.

For example, some graffiti was discovered in the Philadelphia suburbs with the message "Kill Zimmerman". And this is just a drop in the bucket.

Incidents like this will only fuel the right-wing media's sensationalistic speculation about violent race wars in the wake of Saturday's verdict. And these incidents only make the perpetrators look no better than Zimmerman.

Violence and property damage will not change the verdict, nor will they bring Trayvon Martin back to life.

Those of us who feel that justice was not served will get our message across most clearly if we do so in a reasonable, peaceful, and dignified way. I think that's surely what Trayvon's parents - both of them the embodiment of grace and class - would want.

Racial profiling in the post-Trayvon era

The jury in the Florida case of George Zimmerman has found him not guilty of murder or manslaughter in the shooting death of Trayvon Martin. So now Zimmerman walks free, and will likely be rewarded with book deals and other lucrative offers. And people around the country - and the world - have been shown that you can shoot an unarmed black teenager and get away with it.

Zimmerman's acquittal appears to make a case for racial profiling. And that is very, very dangerous. Zimmerman pursued Martin because he thought the young black man seemed out of place in the neighborhood, and therefore threatening. I doubt he would have caught Zimmerman's eye if Trayvon were a white kid dressed in a preppie sweater.

Furthermore, Zimmerman's supporters have been all over social media in recent weeks defending the unfair profiling. For example:

beachcomber @anniebrown00
It is not racial profiling, it is situational profiling. So many blacks are criminals.

FreeDegree @LawatStPenn
@msnbc If NAACP want no profiling, change way young men act n their attire!

The above tweets (two drops in a very big bucket) propagate the myth that blacks are more prone to bad behavior, and that racial profiling is therefore justified. This mindset is not only inaccurate but downright dangerous.

Crime statistics are often misinterpreted and misunderstood, as African-American writer Chauncy DeVega explained in an essay last year:

The black people commit more crime canard is a fallacy of both process and outcomes. African Americans are subject to discrimination in the legal system at every level. As documented by The Sentencing Project, and detailed in such works as Race, Crime and the Law, and The New Jim Crow, African Americans are more likely to be stopped by police without cause, to be more aggressively questioned, receive longer and more severe charges for the same crimes as white defendants, and to have fewer resources to defend themselves in court.

As compared to white neighborhoods, black and brown communities are also subject to more severe surveillance and aggressive police tactics. Moreover, the disproportionate number of minorities in the criminal justice system can be largely explained by the War on Drugs. In total, if white communities were subject to the same type of aggressive police tactics as black and brown communities, the number of white people in prison would skyrocket.

The data is very telling here. While people of color are the prime targets of such policies as "stop and frisk" and racial profiling, it is in fact white people who are far more likely to be both drug users and to be in possession of narcotics at a given moment. This reality signals to a larger social phenomenon: black individuals who commit crimes are representative of their whole communities, crime is racialized, and there is no qualifier of individual intent. All black people are deemed suspicious and guilty because of the deeds of the very few.

In contrast, white people who commit crimes are unique individuals: the criminals who destroyed the global economy, a group of white men, were not taken as representative of the entire white community. There is a long list of crimes such as domestic terrorism, serial murder, child rape, sedition, treason, and financial fraud that are almost exclusively the province of white people. But again, whites as a group are excluded from suspicion or indictment as a "criminal class."

Racial profiling is a waste of time and can make us less safe. Multiple studies have shown that when police focus on factors such as race, they tend to pay less attention to actual criminal behavior. This is a dangerous trend that can inhibit effective law enforcement and ultimately endanger the lives of all persons who depend on law enforcement for protection.

Furthermore, a 2004 report by Amnesty International provides overwhelming evidence that racial profiling is not only ineffective and counterproductive in finding the real criminals, but that it also encourages hate and undermines national unity. The report was based on six public hearings nationwide and more than a year of intensive research. And, given the racial tension we see in the aftermath of Trayvon Martin's death, it is as timely now as ever.

We will be much better protected if law enforcement and security personnel (including neighborhood watch volunteers like Zimmerman) focus on what people are actually doing, and not on what they look like.

Zimmerman was not standing his ground

The jury in the George Zimmerman case in Florida is now in its second day of deliberations.

Zimmerman pleaded not guilty to second-degree murder in the shooting death last year of unarmed black teenager Trayvon Martin, on grounds that he was defending himself under Florida's "Stand Your Ground" law. The problem with that, as I see it, is that Zimmerman was not standing his ground. He was aggressively pursuing Martin.

Even after the 911 dispatcher instructed Zimmerman to stop following Martin, Zimmerman loaded his gun, exited his car, and went out actively looking for trouble.

Therefore, I cannot imagine how the jury could possibly settle for anything less than a manslaughter conviction.

If they do, I will certainly want to hear their reasons why.

PA Attorney General will not defend state DOMA

Yesterday I wrote about a new lawsuit brought by the ACLU challenging a Pennsylvania state law that excludes same-sex couples from marriage.

And today there is already some good news regarding the case:

Pennsylvania Attorney General Kathleen Kane has announced that she will not defend the discriminatory law. (Not unlike how President Obama and AG Holder chose not to defend the federal DOMA.) Kudos to Kane for standing up for fairness and equality!

But the lawsuit doesn't end here. According to Philadelphia's NBC affiliate, "Pennsylvania law says it is the attorney general's duty to defend the constitutionality of state laws. But it also says the attorney general may allow lawyers for the governor's office or executive branch agencies to defend a lawsuit if it is more efficient or in the state's best interests."

Governor Tom Corbett is a conservative Republican, so I expect him to pick up the ball that Kane bravely dropped and run with it himself.

Stay tuned.

ACLU sues for right to same-sex marriage in Pennsylvania

Last month, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down as unconstitutional a key provision of the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). Now it's time to take on similar state-based laws that promote inequality.

To that end, on Tuesday, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed a federal lawsuit challenging a Pennsylvania state law that excludes same-sex couples from marriage.

Below is an excerpt from an ACLU press release about the Pennsylvania case:

The lawsuit alleges that Pennsylvania's Defense of Marriage Act and refusal to marry lesbian and gay couples or recognize their out-of-state marriages violates the fundamental right to marry as well as the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. This lawsuit comes in the wake of the ACLU's victory before the U.S. Supreme Court in U.S. v. Windsor, which requires federal recognition for lesbian and gay couples who are married in their home states. Plaintiffs argue that the court should closely scrutinize this discriminatory treatment because the state's Defense of Marriage Act burdens the fundamental right to marry and because it discriminates based on sex and sexual orientation.

"We only want what every married couple wants - to express our love and commitment in front of friends and family and the security and protections that only marriage provides," said plaintiff Deb Whitewood, who has been together with her spouse Susan Whitewood for 22 years. "Our life is built around our relationship and the family we have made."

The plaintiffs include 10 couples, two minor children of those couples, and one widow who recently lost her partner of 29 years.

>> Read the full press release.

And stay tuned for updates.

Meantime, I hope to see many similiar actions spring up around the country. Currently, 13 states and the District of Columbia legally recognize same-sex marriage. That leaves 37 states to go. That's way too many, so we must get busy!

Amnesty International says U.S. must not persecute Snowden

On July 2, Amnesty International issued the following comments addressing the case of NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden from a human rights perspective:

The US authorities' relentless campaign to hunt down and block whistleblower Edward Snowden's attempts to seek asylum is deplorable and amounts to a gross violation of his human rights Amnesty International said today.

"The US attempts to pressure governments to block Snowden's attempts to seek asylum are deplorable," said Michael Bochenek, Director of Law and Policy at Amnesty International. "It is his unassailable right, enshrined in international law, to claim asylum and this should not be impeded."

The organization also believes that the National Security Agency (NSA) whistleblower could be at risk of ill-treatment if extradited to the USA.

"No country can return a person to another country where there is a serious risk of ill-treatment," said Bochenek.

"We know that others who have been prosecuted for similar acts have been held in conditions that not only Amnesty International but UN officials considered cruel inhuman and degrading treatment in violation of international law."

Senior US officials have already condemned Snowden without a trial, labelling him both guilty and a traitor, raising serious questions as to whether he'd receive a fair trial. Likewise the US authorities move to charge Snowden under the Espionage Act could leave him with no provision to launch a public interest whistle-blowing defence under US law.

"It appears he is being charged by the US government primarily for revealing its - and other governments' - unlawful actions that violate human rights," said Bochenek.

"No one should be charged under any law for disclosing information of human rights violations. Such disclosures are protected under the rights to information and freedom of expression."

Besides filing charges against Snowden, the US authorities have revoked his passport - which interferes with his rights to freedom of movement and to seek asylum elsewhere.

"Snowden is a whistleblower. He has disclosed issues of enormous public interest in the US and around the world. And yet instead of addressing or even owning up to these actions, the US government is more intent on going after Edward Snowden."

"Any forced transfer to the USA would put him at risk of human rights violations and must be challenged," said Michael Bochenek.

But, of course, it seems that the U.S. government pays attention to human rights groups like Amnesty only when it suits a predetermined agenda.