So I Write Letters....

I write letters to the editor of the local newspaper, and I'm delighted they print them. 
Here is my latest:


"Recently, we elected people to our state legislature because they promised: “We will create jobs!” They said this so often, you might think they were experts in the field of job creation. Or the economy, because they promised — over and over — they could fix that.
So we elected them, because we thought we should send “experts” to Indianapolis — “experts” in job creation and economy-fixing.
Now, they have magically become experts in women’s health, completely forgetting about their “expertise” in jobs.
“I need to have an abortion,” says a woman. Her medical doctor agrees.
“Hold on,” says the new “expert” in the field (the Indiana legislature). “You do not need that. But if you insist — think it’s your ‘right,’ then fine. You need two ultrasounds.” “That’s not medically necessary,” says the medical doctor. “Yes, it is. Do it,” orders the new “expert.”
“But I do not want a transvaginal probe,” protests the woman. “I do not want that in my body.”
“But we know what’s best for you,” says the new “expert.” And the Indiana legislature orders the doctor to sexually assault (Look up the definition. You’re a grownup; you should know these words and understand the meaning) the woman. Twice.
Because Indiana legislators are the all-knowing, powerful “experts” in women’s health. Imagine how great it would be if they actually cared about women.
Last questions: How much jail time will a woman get if she refuses? How soon can we fire the “experts?”"

Unfortunately, my amazing gift did not sway the State Senate (as if!), so I wrote to my state representative this morning.  This is what I wrote:
"Rep. Truitt--I urge you to vote "no" on SB371.  My reasons are many, but perhaps the most persuasive argument is one that you have used before--less government is better.  If you are against government overreach, you have to be against this bill, for it is government intervention at its' worst.

I appeal to you as a husband and father as well--I cannot believe that you would vote for the government to intrude on a decision that should be left to a woman (your mother, wife, daughter) and her doctor.  I also appeal to you as a man--can you imagine having to stand by while the government imposes its will on someone you love?  

Finally, I appeal to you as a pragmatic, thoughtful person.  Bills like this do not "end abortion".  They just make abortions more unsafe.  Women will die.  

Make a good government decision, based on your Republican principle of limited government, and what you know to be right . 

Vote against SB 371."

Granted, it was "written on the fly", but I thought it was pretty persuasive.  I certainly expected a thoughtful response, because this bill has such real ramifications for women.  You cannot get more real than a transvaginal ultrasound.

 This is what I received: 
"Thanks for your comments and thoughts on this bill.  This is a bill that has passionate positions on both sides.  We will wait and see what the bill is like once it gets through Committee (assuming that it does). Thank you for being part of the process."
Am I wrong to expect more from an elected official?  I guess it would be different if he had already expressed himself in the media, but he hasn't.  It seems that, over and over, men don't want to talk about these "women things", but are perfectly willing to vote on them.
Shame on them.

In Which I Disagree with My Friends, But Still Love and Respect Them

One of the keys to our survival--the human race, that is--is our ability to communicate effectively with one another.  We have to be able to speak clearly and precisely about our needs and desires, and we need to do so in a way we will be heard.  We need to be able to listen to others, to hear what they are communicating to us. 
I fear we are losing this ability.
Turn on the television or the radio at any time on any given day, spin the dial, and I guarantee you will find at least two adults, shouting at each other about something--they may be "experts" in their field, but their chosen method of communicating their ideas and thoughts certainly does suck.  "Surf" the internet (actually, I find myself queasy at the thought of telling you to do so, so use protection before proceeding), and you will find conspiracies, repeats of said conspiracies, ultimatums about said conspiracies, and then "officials", at all levels, repeating nuggets from the internet, in their efforts at adding to the public discourse. 

But I digress.
I feel we have become so used to the shouting, we have lost the ability to speak with, and hear, one another.  We have created the monster in this country called "leadership".  And they, in turn, have manipulated us.  It's a horrible, vicious,cycle, and I would like to see if we can break it.
Please?

I'm writing all of this as a prelude to the rest of this blog; the topics are diverse, but the underlying sentiment is:  I love and respect my friends, even if I disagree with them.  And I do.  Disagree.  But because I respect my friends, I am taking time and effort to communicate my thoughts.

First, guns.  I feel I can't even type "gun control" because for some of my friends, those words together are a red flag.  Pity, isn't it?  That our ability to communicate with one another has broken down so badly that certain words, taken together, are a reason to stop reading?
I will try again.  Dear friends and acquaintances--I disagree with some of you on the issue of guns in US society.  That does not mean I want to take away your guns, nor do I want to take the guns of your friends and family.  Not unless you have loved ones with mental health issues.  They really shouldn't have them.  I do believe there should be practical limits.  Guns that shoot a lot of bullets in a very short amount of time (or have "magazines" that hold a lot of bullets) should probably be removed from private ownership.  That way, "bad guys" can't steal them from us.  I do not believe that more guns are the answer.  These are my opinions, and I've thought long and hard about them.  Many Americans agree with me.  We all want to know what you think. We really do.  But it's hard for us to understand what you believe when you hide behind cliches like "Guns don't kill people." or "You can have my guns when you pry them from my dead fingers."  That does not help.  It does not help if you assume "President Obama is coming for my guns, just like "they" [NRA, Glenn Beck, Michele Bachmann, Rush Limbaugh] said he would."  That's illogical, reactionary, and does nothing to help me understand your point of view.  It does nothing to help us, as a society, make good decisions that will help stop the senseless loss of life in this country.  Let's talk, let's disagree, but let's try.  OK?

Next, Jodie Foster.  I like to see Jodie Foster movies.  She is a talented actress, director, and has an eye for a good project (well, most of the time).  In the interests of full disclosure, I have had a crush on her since I first saw her on "Family Affair".  I only know her through what has been written about her, through her films, and on those rare occasions she's been interviewed or given a public speech, such as the Golden Globe speech from a few nights ago.  This speech has been remarked upon by many of my friends, and thousands of strangers--as I'm sure Ms. Foster knew it would be; you don't spend your entire life in the "public eye" and not expect that.  In my opinion, it wasn't a great speech; it seemed to be totally off the cuff and rambled.  As someone who has spoken in public, I would advise her to stick to a script when speaking--that way, you remember all you want to say, and when to say it.  And let us be clear--this was not her "coming out" speech.  I think it was more an "explanation of the person I am" and a "thanks to special people who have helped me": 

"I already did my coming out about a thousand years ago back in the Stone Age, in those very quaint days when a fragile young girl would open up to trusted friends and family and co-workers and then gradually, proudly to everyone who knew her, to everyone she actually met...
But seriously, if you had been a public figure from the time that you were a toddler, if you’d had to fight for a life that felt real and honest and normal against all odds, then maybe you too might value privacy above all else. Privacy.  Some day, in the future, people will look back and remember how beautiful it once was...
I have given everything up there from the time that I was 3 years old. That’s reality-show enough, don’t you think?
There are a few secrets to keeping your psyche intact over such a long career. The first, love people and stay beside them." 

She was being honored for her film career, which began, if you can imagine it, when she was THREE years old.  THREE.  That's a damn long time to be in a career, let alone to be successful.  And it's a damn long time to have people looking at you.  Not only looking at you, but assuming they know all about you because of that movie they saw you in or that story they read that someone else, who doesn't know you, wrote about you.
Think about what you know about Jodie Foster.  Is she out at every public event, drinking and being photographed by anyone with a camera?  No.  Is she married to a man, or a string of men, in an effort to "hide"?  No.  Is she even seen, at all, hanging on anyone, in an effort to be noticed, or to "publicize" who she is?  No.  
What she has done is give acceptance speeches, and has used this time to let us know what SHE wants us to know--what she feels safe to share with the very demanding public.  She does not whine, she does not ask for pity.  She shares a bit of her life with us:
What else has Jodie Foster done?  According to what I've read, she's given money to support LGBT and other projects over the years.  She's been in a committed relationship (assuming that what I've read is true), and has raised two sons.  Quietly.  Like any "normal" person.
But some of my friends want more from Jodie Foster.  They want her to be more "out", to be willing to sacrifice, as others have (their jobs, their families, etc)--to be another public "face" of the LGBT community.  I guess they wanted more from this one speech than Jodie Foster could deliver.
I don't.  I don't want to force ANYONE to be something they are not. I want Jodie Foster to continue to be the person she is--honestly and responsibly.  And I expect her to use her powers (those she has the human capacity to use) for good, and to not deliberately hurt others--just as I would any other human being.
In other words, the reason why I disagree with my friends is this--I do not know Jodie Foster.  The things I do know about her I take with a grain of salt, unless they have come directly from her mouth.  And I do know this--as a college freshman (19 years oldish), Jodie Foster experienced something nobody ever, in the history of the world, has ever experienced--a deranged person tried to kill the president of the United States in an effort to get her attention and "prove his love for her".  Think about it.  And then think about this during a rush to judgement--not one of us has any idea what it's like to be Jodie Foster.  Not one of us.
And in not knowing, we cannot ask for more to be given.
It all comes down to this--our capacity for understanding one another must be based on love, respect, and communication.....
Please.