Perestroika

Perestroika

HBO’s award winning mini-series version of the Pulitzer Prize winning play Angels in America, tells the story of three disparate gay men whose lives are connected by the AIDS epidemic. One of the characters, who is in the middle stages of the disease, ( although this post is not about AIDS, it is worth it to note the rate of infection is increasing in a way it should not be this late in the game), offers the idea that it’s necessary to go through a time of incredible horror in order for real, profound, societal restructuring to occur.  A watershed.

In context, the character, Prior Walter, who has caused harm to no one except himself, perhaps, yet finds himself on the truly shit end of the stick (sick & alone) is trying to come to terms with the senselessness of and the unfairness of his incredible suffering and inevitably painful death.

It is not a particularly bad rationale to give  deep suffering purpose, especially if that anguish, despite being in plain sight, is met with the callous myopia of the unaffected majority.

Unfortunately, you don’t have to look very hard around the world to find circumstances that qualify. Angels opens with the funeral of a Holocaust survivor as the framing device.  A scene worth checking out, not just for the idea, but also for Meryl Streep. The mini-series is an ensemble piece and the actors play multiple roles. Emma Watson and Jeffrey Wright are also pretty awesome in their subtlety and slyness.

The idea has stuck with me since I saw Angels, and as much sense as it might make sense, by and large these horrors are 100% preventable.  Who wants to be the one to look the refugee, the kidnapped, the dying, and on and on in the eye, and say, sorry it’s just a thing you have to go through so the rest of us can move forward?

 

Onanism

Onanism

“And Onan knew that the seed should not be his; and it came to pass, when he went in unto his brother’s wife, that he spilled it on the ground, lest that he should give seed to his brother.” (Genesis 38:9 King James Bible)

Note: This post talks about abortion as a choice in a favorable way.

Last Sunday, January 15th was Sanctity of Human Life Sunday. I know this because it was announced during a church service. I had no idea, at the time, whether it was a national occurrence or something specific to the church. It was either an observance either

(a) I had never heard of it before or;

(b) It was mentioned, I grit my teeth and forgot all about it after the service, or;

(c) Around the same time, in 2016, I slept late and didn’t go to church

The Sanctity of Human Life Sunday has been around it seems since Ronald Reagan, so I probably had heard of it before which means that (b) and (c) are the most likely. I was also reminded that the church I attend is probably much more conservative than I am. When a male member of the congregation walked on stage to share his abortion experience, I considered walking out. I didn’t. At least this time it wasn’t a guy lamenting his role in paying for an abortion.

Ironically, last Sunday thousands of people, in fear of losing their health insurance with the intended repeal of the Affordable Care Act (without anything to replace it), were holding demonstrations across the country. It shouldn’t be ironic as good, healthcare that the maximum number of people can access would ensure a greater quality of life, preserve the sanctity of life for everyone. Common Sense. And yet…

And yet, you will find a good many of the people who celebrated the sanctity part of last Sunday would not be caught dead at any of the ACA rallies, or yesterday’s historic Women’s March.

As Ben Franklin said, “An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.” While Onan and his situation is perhaps a crude example, (he worked with what he had), it illustrates a point we continually fail to grasp.

For all the lamentation of abortion as a choice, I rarely hear any passionate appeals or see graphic signs aimed at sperm owners to be a little more careful about where they make deposits. Once something is freely given away, don’t you lose primary say in what happens after?

 

 

Planned Parenthood

ACLU

Evil

Evil

“It was the best of times, it was the worst of times…” (Charles Dickens, A Tale of Two Cities)

For the most part, we can all agree on what it means when something is the best or something is the worst. Each year’s end brings no shortage of best and worst lists. We sort of revel in sharing what we believe to be the best or worst of anything.

While the specific things we believe to be best/worst is subjective, for example, if Nocturnal Animals is nominated for anything when the Oscar best film contenders are announced on January 24th, I will consider it one of the worst films they could have chosen. Scenes with Jenna Malone and Amy Adams look like they were costumed by Zoolander’s Mugatu. This of course is only my opinion, completely subjective, and definitely not a hill I need to die on.

Other definitions are a little less open to subjectivity, or at least they should be. Oxford online dictionary defines evil when used as an adjective as “profoundly immoral and malevolent” That seems pretty straight forward, and yet we are hard pressed to actually use the word evil seriously, non-ironically.

It might be because it sounds like passing judgment and intolerance instead of merely naming a thing as it is. Used as a noun, evil is defined as “profound immorality, wickedness, and depravity, especially when regarded as a supernatural force”. So, while I am a dog person, and therefore think cats are evil, by definition cats are not, in fact, evil. Maybe, that is why it is so easy to say they are, because it is not actually true.

While most of us will readily admit we are not perfect, we do for the most part think we are “possessing or displaying moral virtue (honor, honesty)” in other words, good, as defined by the Oxford online dictionary. Perhaps that is where the problem starts.

As good people, if cats were truly evil would it be our responsibility to do something about them?

As they are only just creepy, what with the bringing dead things to your door, I mostly  avoid them.

It’s probably the latter part of the definition that keeps us from using evil seriously, “…especially when regarded as a supernatural force.” Like best and worst, what constitutes a supernatural force or whether one or more exists is subjective.

Whichever definition of evil you choose, on January 20^th, evil will take control of the highest office in the United States. What are good people going to do?

Link to Full Dickens Quote