The Sins of the Father

I was disheartened to learn that the Jackie Robinson West Little League team has been stripped of its Little League World Series American championship because of the cheating proclivities of the adults who run the league.  It's never a good thing for a team to bring in ringers in order to bolster their chances in any sport, but to do it in Little League takes it to a whole other level.  What are we teaching our youngsters?  It's okay to cheat as long as you don't get caught?

I feel even worse for the youngsters who had nothing to do with the scheme.  Unfortunately, it all boils down to a bunch of adult cheaters doing their thing and resulting in a group of young, impressionable kids having to pay for the misdeeds.  What a sad commentary on today's society--win at all costs.

The problem with youth sports--be it baseball, football, soccer, or whatever--is the adults.  The kids are out to have fun; the adults, mainly parents, are out to guarantee success for their kids.  Not all parents are antagonistic and obnoxious.  But there is that minority of parents who want their kids to be stars.  They berate umpires, refs, and even coaches when their kids do not succeed.  These, along with the hierarchy of the Jackie Robinson West team, should not be dismissed as only wanting to win.  They should be excoriated for the example they are setting for the next generation.  

Letter to the Editor re: Same-Sex Marriage

The following letter was written to the editors of the Bradenton Herald and the Sarasota Herald Tribune this past weekend:

Eight same-sex couples and the ACLU filed suit in federal court to make Florida recognize same-sex marriages performed in states where such marriages are legal—19 states and the District of Columbia.

Attorney General Pam Bondi says that to compel Florida to recognize such marriages would disrupt existing marriage laws and “impose significant harm.”  The love and companionship of any truly loving couple should trump anyone’s or any state’s “inconvenience”.  I’m sure the Virginia attorney general felt like Ms. Bondi does in the case of Loving v. Virginia when the Supreme Court ruled in 1967 that interracial marriage bans were unconstitutional.  Virginia’s marriage laws were not disrupted (other than being unable to ban such marriages) and I’m quite sure no harm was done.

Ms. Bondi apparently fails to recognize Article IV, Section 1 of the Constitution, the Full Faith and Credit clause, which states that each state must recognize the public acts, credits, and judicial proceedings of every other state.  In addition, Section 2 states that the citizens of each state shall be accorded the privileges and immunities of citizens in all the other states.  Apparently those in power in Tallahassee wave the Constitution in everyone’s faces when it serves their purposes but conveniently ignore it when it is at odds with their purposes.  Ms. Bondi, being an officer of the court, has a duty to make sure all laws are applied equally and fairly.  When the basic law of our society states that Florida must recognize the acts of Washington, New York, Minnesota, Illinois, or the District of Columbia, it means just that.  No state is allowed to pick and choose which laws it wishes to honor.  It must accept all state laws of another state.  Florida agreed to do so when it decided to petition for statehood and again later when it rejoined the Union after the Civil War.  The Constitution is the compact that binds us all together, like it or not.  Let all honor that compact rather than trying to pick it apart when it suits our purposes.

If Florida persists in fighting this fight rather than conceding that the Constitution trumps any conflicting state law I would hope that, not only would the suit be won for those involved but also follow the current legal and societal trends of overturning Florida’s ban on same-sex marriage and recognizing all marriages, regardless.

 

It has yet to be published in either paper, but I am optimistic that it will be soon.

Denying Voting Rights in Florida

The lead story in this past Tuesday's Bradenton Herald was about the Supervisor of Elections, Mike Bennett's plan to reduce the number of polling places in Manatee County, FL.  Bennett, a career politician who was unable to run for re-election to the Florida House due to term limits, was elected to replace the former elections supervisor who was retiring.  Bennett, a Republican, is one of the most useless politicians it has been my displeasure have anything to do with--the most useless being Tommy Thompson when he was Governor of Wisconsin.  Marching alongside Florida Governor, Rick Scott, he is doing what he can to eliminate voting opportunities for minorities who live in the county. 

Unfortunately, the four Republicans on the County Commission voted to accept Bennett's plan while the sole Democrat voted against the plan.  Such is the life of a progressive in a blue collar Florida county.

The following is a letter to the editor which appeared in this morning's paper. 

Dear Editor:
I was disappointed, but not  surprised, upon opening Tuesday's Bradenton Herald to the news that Mike Bennett is planning on closing 30 polling places throughout Manatee County.   Walking lockstep with Republicans, both in Tallahassee and Washington, he is working on a plan to disenfranchise voters.  Voting is a right, not a priviledge reserved for WASPs like myself.

My dad was a member of the Greatest Generation.  I am a Vietnam veteran.  Never, in his wildest dreams, did Dad think he was fighting against Hitler and his goal of Aryan supremacy so that minorities could be hindered in that most basic of American freedoms--the freedom to vote for the people of one's choice.  I never thought that while enduring the Tet Offensive. 

If anything, the number of polling places and opportunities for early voting should be increased, not reduced.  To add to the confusion, Bennett wants to renumber the voting precincts.  Such a proposal does not streamline anything.  It only leads to more confusion and disenfranchisement.

Bennett says he was "quite surprised" at the reaction of others to his proposal.  When, Mr. Bennett, was this proposal widely publicized before it was presented to the County Board?  If this is the way you want to treat voters--the ones who elected you--then perhaps it will be time for you to look for a new job, come election time.
Dave Hilsheimer

The Democracy of Quakerism

Having found the Quakers some twenty-five years ago in Madison, WI, I cannot cease but to be amazed at how their business and decisions are carried out even though, to use a lay term, consensus is the only decision making process used.

The basis of Quakerism, as opposed to other churches is that decisions are made from the bottom up.  We have no hierarchy to tell us what to do—no minister, head priest, or priestess (or Pope!)—just numerous Quaker meetings made up of like-minded individuals who make the decisions for their particular monthly meeting.  Individual, or “monthly”, meetings in a geographic region are all part of a yearly meeting; the various yearly meetings make up one of the two national organizations—Friends United Meeting (FUM), the evangelical, or conservative, branch of U.S. Quakerism; and Friends General Conference (FGC), the un-programmed, or liberal, branch.  Some yearly meetings are members of both national organizations.

The decisions or “leadings” that bear fruit in the monthly can spread to the yearly meeting and, possibly, to one of the two national organizations.  A prime example of this is when the youth of the Sarasota Friends Meeting (my home meeting) became involved with the Coalition of Immokalee Workers (CIW), an organization of migrant workers in South Florida that is working for better pay and working conditions for their workers.  Our youth took their message and activism to the annual gathering of Southeastern Yearly Meeting.  The youth of SEYM became quite active and involved in the plight of the migrant workers and spread the word to the youth of FGC, through the annual gathering this past summer in Colorado.  As a result, that sense of activism has sprouted roots in other areas of the country—thanks in large part to the young ones in our own monthly meeting.

Un-programmed Quakers operate with a sense that God (Divine Spirit; Friendly Presence; or however one defines their sense of a higher spirit) is present within us all.  We believe we have a direct connection with that spirit and that we need no intermediary to tell us what God wants us to do.  It is that sense of continuing revelation that guides us, not only in meetings for worship and business, but in our daily lives, as well.

There is no “majority rule” or leaving any decision up to a single person.  It is a total and complete meeting of the minds on how to proceed on any particular issue.  Each person brings their bit of Light to the matter being discussed in much the same way as several spotlight beams come together on the stage to make them one where they intersect.  This is known in Quakerism as “sense of the meeting”, as opposed to the secular term of “consensus”.  To me, sense of the meeting also means that God has a voice in the decision-making process.

Conversely, if one of the light beams does not intersect with the others and illuminates a separate spot on the stage, there can be no convergence of all the light being cast on that stage.  As is Quaker practice, if one person has an objection to a particular feeling or direction in which the meeting for business is headed, they can voice their reservations and not allow a sense of the meeting to prevail.  A good example of this happened in the Sarasota Friends Meeting many years ago.  When it began, the meeting was a nomadic one, gathering in several places for worship throughout Sarasota over the years.  A group within the meeting felt it was time to build their own meetinghouse and the idea spread.  A building fund was established and started to grow.  However, there was one member who felt it frivolous to spend money on the construction of a meetinghouse until, at long last, he finally came around.  The proverbial straw that broke the camel’s back was when the meeting was asked to vacate their regular worship space in one of the old Ringling brothers’ mansions (now a part of New College of Florida).  The recently installed college president wanted it for his office.   The surprising comment to the other members was, “We need a meetinghouse!”  Thus, the “weighty” Friend’s Light merged with that of the others and the present meetinghouse was built in 2001.  Although it took over twenty years, sense of the meeting was finally achieved.

One way a person who’s Light is not in sync with the others in a Quaker meeting for business, but does not wish to stand in the way of a particular decision or action, is to “stand aside” and let the rest of those in the meeting agree to carry out the decision.  In the minutes of the business meeting’s proceedings, the person can either remain anonymous or be recorded as standing aside. 

The democracy of Quakerism is a singular example of people working together to reach a common goal.  Each member of any particular meeting has an equal voice in the decision making process.  We have been referred to, over the years, as a “peculiar people”—ones who operate under the principles of divine guidance and sense of the meeting.  We have no need for intermediaries; we feel that compromise is not the giving in of one’s conscience but the seeking out of divine will; we believe that all persons’ thoughts and utterances on a particular subject should be given equal value.

Yes, we are peculiar people, but I wouldn’t trade the Quakers’ way of conducting themselves or their decision-making process for anything else.

Reflections on Nelson Mandela

During silent worship this morning at the Sarasota Friends Meeting (Quakers), one member stood and gave a message about what a loss it was to mankind that the voice of Nelson Mandela had, at long last, been silenced.  That got me to thinking about Mandela and his message.

While he started out as a non-violent opponent of apartheid who advocated civil disobedience as a member of the African National Conference (ANC), he came to believe that armed insurrection was the only way to achieve change.  He was ultimately sentenced to life imprisonment in 1963 for his actions.  In 1985 he was offered his release from prison by South African President P.W. Botha, an offer Mandela flatly refused.  When Botha suffered a stroke and was replaced by F.W. deKlerk, discussions geared toward his release from prison progressed and Mandela was released on February 11, 1990.  I recall watching his release in the middle of the night with my wife, Pam.  We were both so happy to be witnessing such an historic event.  Upon his release from prison, Mandela renounced violence and set the stage for a most wonderful final almost 24 years of his life.

In reflecting on him during worship this morning, it struck me that he was the Abraham Lincoln; the Mohandas Gandhi; and the Martin Luther King, Jr. of South Africa.  The only difference was he was able to live out his natural life rather than having been assassinated.  South Africa, much like the American South, was a very divided society--a society in which the native African people were subjugated to third class citizens and were looked on by the whites as being akin to something they would wipe off their shoes, had they the misfortune of stepping in an unpleasant deposit on the sidewalk.  Mandela and deKlerk were jointly awarded the 1993 Nobel Peace Prize for their work in dismantling apartheid and in 1994 Mandela was elected the country's first black president.  His work in transitioning his country from white minority rule to that of the black majority left his mark on South Africa.  He remained active after retiring from the presidency in 1999, raising money for various needed projects, building schools and furthering the educational opportunities for his nation as well as promoting nonviolence as the means to an end.

His dedication to non-violence is and will remain his legacy.  The world has seen very few people who can affect not only their country but the entire world.  He was such an inspiration to so many people.  A good friend wrote to me about her thoughts on his passing:  "I think we all have it in us to approach life from a place of love and compassion.  We all have it in us to put ourselves on the line in the name of justice, real justice for all, to speak up and out.  We may not all have the charisma or the desire to be on the front page, but we can and MUST be like Nelson Mandela, the Dalai Lama, Desmond Tutu...  I feel like I spent the 8 years under Bush/Cheney saying, 'Where are the leaders?'  WE are the leaders, we have to be!!  And we have to be the monkey wrenches that stop the wheels from turning, when that is called for."

My prayer is that we all take a bit from Nelson Mandela's lessons and use them to make a better world for all and especially, our children.

Because of Winn-Dixie

I am a regular at the nearby Winn-Dixie supermarket and much prefer it over the other big Florida chain, Publix.  This morning, I stopped there to pick up some meat for dinner.  Upon entering the store I was met with a toy display of dolls, cars, trucks, and half size M16s.  I was immediately turned off by the display because it appears W-D is endorsing gun use by offering up toy assault rifles, advertised as "machine guns", as an appropriate "toy" for a youngster.

As I was checking out I asked the cashier to let her management know of my concern that these are inappropriate items to be marketed for children.  A man, who overheard me tell the cashier I felt it was "disgusting" hollered at me, "Why?  Are you anti-gun?" to which I replied I was and that our children are exposed to too much violence as it is.

Upon returning home, I sent the following to Winn-Dixie via their customer comment page on their website:

I am a regular shopper at store #656 and really enjoy the selection and prices Winn Dixie offers as well s the Fuel Perks card.  This morning, however, I was quite put off by one of the products you are offering for sale--namely a toy machine gun in the toy kiosk near the front entrance.

We have more than enough violence in our society and our youngsters are exposed to much more than they should be.  Don't get me wrong.  I grew up in the 1950s and played G.I. Joe and cowboys and Indians with my buddies.  The most violence I recall was seeing the Lone Ranger shoot a gun from an outlaw's hand.  I had no video games to play.  Nowadays, though, there is massive violence portrayed on TV and the movies; uber-violent video games; and mass shootings--from Columbine, through VA Tech, to Newtown, to the D.C Navy Yard, and beyond.

As a person who has seen war firsthand in Vietnam and who is saddened at the daily violence I see on the news and in the local newspapers, I feel your fine company is sending the wrong message by offering these violence-based "toys" for sale in your stores.  Winn Dixie is much better than that.

Thank you for your consideration of my concern.  I will remain a loyal customer.

Hopefully they'll hear and act on my concern.

Take Me Out to the Ballgame

I almost got involved in a soap opera at this evening's game between the Bradenton Marauders and the Palm Beach Cardinals.  It was Cancer Awareness Night and pink Marauders jerseys were up for auction.  I was bidding on Willy Garcia's jersey for Debbie L., his future mother-in-law, who lives in Beardstown, IL.  I had placed in a bid of $200 for her and, as the bidding was about to close, I went to check on her bid.  A friend of mine, Mike S., put up a $230 bid, so I upped the bid to $240.  A mutual friend, Keith, asked me what I was doing and I said I was bidding for Garcia’s future mother-in-law.  Keith got really incensed, telling me Garcia was not engaged to anyone—that he had a girlfriend he is living with here in Bradenton.

He then went over and told Mike what I had said.  Apparently the “girlfriend” was hovering near him and heard what Keith told Mike.  Perhaps she was in the group with Mike, Keith and their wives—I don’t know.  Anyway, Keith comes over to me, a bit pissed off telling me the “girlfriend” was in tears and that there was no one else in the picture.  He told me I had to come over and let her tell me the situation, to which I replied I was not going to get into Garcia’s domestic affairs and to please don’t kill the messenger.  I then called Debbie to tell her she had the winning bid.

A little bit later, I called Debbie and asked her what her daughter’s name was (Robin) and was she down here, living with Garcia.  She said no, that Robin lives in Pennsylvania.  She asked why I was inquiring and I told her there apparently is a situation down here involving Willy and another girl.  She asked me if the girl has long dark hair and is a bit on the chunky side, which I confirmed.  She told me the girl’s name is Heather and that she is a “cleat-chaser”.  Apparently Debbie and Robin had a confrontation with Heather when they were down here in June (when I first met Debbie).  In the meantime I could see Heather sitting, rather stoically, over near the Marauders dugout, apparently stunned over the entire episode.  Garcia hit a double and all Heather could do was sit there with her arms crossed and had no reaction whatsoever.

While I didn’t feel I owed Keith an explanation, I told another mutual friend, Pat, that if he wanted to relay the truth to Keith, he could feel free to do so.  He did and reported back to me that Keith was a bit taken aback by the situation.  No doubt Willy is in deep doo-doo this evening.  If so, that’s his problem.  One might say he made his own bed and now has to sleep in it (if not on the couch).