“What’s the big deal?” some say. “So what if a parent beats their kid? I was beat and I turned out all right.”
Well, no. No, you didn’t. You’re not all right, because you think it’s OK to beat kids. 
There are many things our parents and grandparents did that are not all right. For instance, there used to be no law against raping your wife. She’s your property, right? The fact that your parents thought this was just fine does not make it just fine.
At the same time, there certainly are people who go way too far in the other direction — I’ve had cases where parents were charged with neglect for the most ridiculous of things (“You left your kids alone for ten minutes while you went to the store!”) I am not falling for the slippery slope argument here. But beating your kid? I mean, really beating them so it hurts? No, we should be past those days now.
My parents would whap me with a flyswatter on my butt. That was the extent of their “beatings.” It only hurt psychologically. But even so, that was in the 60s, and things have changed. I don’t want to open the door and make distinctions (“If you hit your kid with a soft flyswatter, that’s OK, but a hard one? No way.”) I think we should be telling parents not to hit their kids at all.
An assault is an assault. It doesn’t become a “not-assault” simply because it was your child. Your children are not your property.
It is wrong to hit your wife; it is wrong to hit your husband; it is wrong to hit your friends; it is wrong to hit strangers; it is wrong to hit your pets; it is wrong to hit anyone.
And it is especially wrong to hit a small child.
As I write this, there is a murdering gunman loose in my area. He stalked a state trooper barracks and then killed one who was merely going to work, and critically injured another. Schools have closed, and everyone is in a panic, worrying where he could show up next.
If I told you that it was a white guy who hates the government and loves his guns, you wouldn’t be at all surprised, would you?
Yet no one is saying we should round up all the white guys, close down their churches, and declare war on libertarian extremism. I mean, come on, it’s not like the guy is Muslim.
I refuse to put the killer’s picture up. This is Trooper Bryon Dickson. (He looks familiar; I’m trying to remember if I’ve had any cases with him.)
The fact is that we are much more likely to be a victim of crazy anti-government white guy attacks in this country than we are from any Muslim terrorist group. It was only a year ago that another one of these extremists shot up a local government meeting just a few miles from my house, killing three.
And then there’s last June, with those Las Vegas killers who belonged to a white supremacist group.
And let’s not forget Timothy McVeigh. And that guy who flew a plane into an IRS building. Then there’s the guys who shoot abortion clinic doctors in the name of Jesus. But for restraint on the part of the US government, I’d probably be including Clive Bundy on this list as well … Just a long list of angry white guys who hate the government and only know how to take action with violence against innocent people.
Terrorists, that’s what they are.
So the next time a friend talks about how we should be suspecting every single Muslim person in America, ask if we should be doing the same for every single white conservative, because you’re much more likely to be killed by one of them.
The last few elections saw Republicans attacking Obamacare, saying how awful it was and how it would ruin the economy and make people die and cause the earth to leave its orbit and careen into the sun. “It’s the worst thing to happen to America since slavery,” they actually said. 
Here’s the funny thing: None of the bad stuff they predicted would happen actually happened. I know, right? Who would have thought that the Republicans had lied and exaggerated? Shocking.
The uninsured rate keeps dropping. Approval of Obamacare is at its highest. Insurance cost increases have even gone down. (Yeah, they’re still rising — they were doing that before Obamacare, you know, by huge numbers — but percentage-wise, they are not rising as fast as they were, and in some places they’ve even gone down.)
And the GOP knows this. That’s why they’ve finally stopped scheduling “repeal Obamacare” votes and why you don’t hear them talking about it any more.
I mean, it’s not like they had a real reason to be against it. Obamacare was, after all, originally a Republican plan. They liked the idea of keeping the insurance companies happy. It was called “Romneycare” at first, you know. They only opposed it because Obama supported it, because all that party knows how to do these days is to oppose anything the Democrats favor.
But that’s all in the past. Conservatives have always been against social progress, and they’ll scream and yell as they’re being dragged into the present but eventually they’ll shut up. They did the same thing with worker’s safety, minimum wage, child labor laws, racial integration, medicare, medicaid, environmental protection, voting rights, women’s rights, gay rights … (need I go on?)
Tony Auth was the Pulitzer-prize winning editorial cartoonist for the Philadelphia Inquirer. He passed away yesterday at age 72. I’ve posted his cartoons many times on this blog. Below are a few samples of some of his work … not necessarily his best, but a few recent ones that show his talent. His wit and art will be missed.
“No religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.” That’s in the United States Constitution (Article VI, paragraph 3).
The US Air Force doesn’t care. They swear an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States, and then they ignore the parts they don’t like by demanding that the oath include the words “So help me God.” 
This clear violation is surely headed to court, and we’re going to hear the same arguments they always make: But this is a Christian country and the majority should rule and blah blah blah.
I’ve debated this issue with True Believers and it’s a waste of time — they never seem to accept the fact that it’s unconstitutional discrimination. Since it’s discrimination they agree with, how can it be wrong?
Imagine if they argued this:
“This is a white nation and the Founding Fathers supported slavery. The majority doesn’t want blacks in the military, so they should abide by tradition. The minority shouldn’t be allowed to dictate to the majority what the laws should be.”
“This is a straight nation and the Founding Fathers supported heterosexuality. The majority doesn’t want gays in the military, so they should abide by tradition. The minority shouldn’t be allowed to dictate to the majority what the laws should be.”
“This is a male-run nation and the Founding Fathers supported men being in charge. The majority doesn’t want women in the military, so they should abide by tradition. The minority shouldn’t be allowed to dictate to the majority what the laws should be.”
So, yeah, I’m upset whenever there is discrimination. Like the current fight for gay rights, the people who want to discriminate can’t see past their own biases to understand what is wrong with their position.
And, for the record, I would be just as upset if the military was requiring an oath that denied the existence of God. The government has no right to discriminate based on religion or lack thereof.
