(from https://www.mintpressnews.com/green-party-senate-candidate-margaret-flowers-crashes-two-party-debate/221860/)
". . . Dr. Margaret Flowers, a Green Party candidate for Senate from Maryland, interrupted a televised debate to protest her exclusion from the forum . . .“I’m a candidate on the ballot. I have a statewide campaign. I don’t understand why I’m not up here,” Flowers declared as she briefly occupied the debate stage. . . Flowers is running for the seat long occupied by Democratic incumbent Barbara Mikulski, who announced her retirement earlier this year. . . During the direct action, Flowers took the stage amid loud applause from the audience and shook hands with her opponents, Democratic nominee Chris Van Hollen and Republican nominee Kathy Szeliga, both of whom agreed to debate Flowers. . . Despite being welcomed by her opponents, the organizers of the debate, CBS Baltimore and the University of Baltimore, refused to allow Flowers to participate. . . "
. . . who is threatened by an open debate among ALL candidates?
My latest solo offering, No Frills, is now available at - No Frills
(To Access all Ray Jozwiak - Gonzo Piano music you can copy-and-paste this URL directly to
your browser: http://http://www.cdbaby.com/Artist/RayJozwiak)
A friend recently commented to me that he wished the President had not made those recent comments about race relations to which I, naturally, responded, "Why?" He said that among all of the problems we as a people, society and world currently face, the Trayvon Martin/George Zimmerman situation should not be monopolizing our attention. In short, like a popular song on a top 40 radio station, he was just sick and tired of hearing about it.
Like many other conversations with many people, I was quickly distracted from this one and on to other things. But later that day, after contemplating our short interchange further, I realized what I could have, should have, and hope to tell my friend upon our next encounter. And, in brief, that is: the President's remarks were spot-on. They were NOT political, they were not platitudinous or pompous blather, trite heard-it-alreadies or scolding. They were simply a from-the-heart reflection and plea for US to reflect on how we treat each other. Reflect- probably something very few of us do during our busy, self-absorbed days. He also described how it feels (and felt to him) being a young black man and some of the racist behaviors with which young black men must cope everyday. He mentioned the history of mistreatment to which black people have been subjected and alluded to the anger that results. So many things which white people know, but have somehow tucked away and choose not to think about too much. . . BUT SHOULD!
These are things that middle-aged white men such as my friend and myself do not now, nor have in the past, encountered. If we have a country, and a world, where people must live together, we must, at the very least, be empathetic to these things. This is every bit as important as the economy, the environment, budgets and spending, foreign policy, drones and (do-nothing)politicos. This is our world. It's the only one we've got. We can, and should, certainly make time to help resolve such such relevant and important issues as THE WAY WE GET ALONG!
". . . If it is in the Bible, it must be true. . ."
(from Howard Bess)
". . . In the past this attitude has led to advocacy of slavery, segregation, subordination of women and corporal punishment for children. It has been only when these Biblical teachings were challenged and set aside that justice has prevailed. The latest challenge to Bible standards is the current debate about Biblical marriage and same-sex marriages. The Bible standard advocates are calling for Biblical standards for marriage.
Many of the relevant passages are found in the book of Leviticus. The place of women is set out as a part of the property codes. Women were property. Men were owners of women. A man could own as many women as he could afford. Polygamy was the standard, not monogamy. Men owned women in three categories. They owned wives; they owned concubines; and they owned slaves. All were available to their owner for his sexual use. Most of the women involved were little more than breeding stock. These standards were prevalent all over the Middle East and reflect Mesopotamian and Babylonian traditions.
Over the centuries, custom changed and, while polygamy was allowed and was common, cultural pressures and standards evolved toward monogamy. One standard did not change. Women in Jesus’ day were still seen as property. Marriages were still arranged. A woman had no voice in the acquiring of a husband. A young woman was provided for marriage for what was deemed the best interests of the father.
During the times of Jesus, the life of many women in a poverty economy was precarious. A man could divorce a woman by declaring his freedom from her. The worst scenario for a woman was to have no owner. The so-called prostitutes that hung around Jesus were not prostitutes in a modern sense. They were vulnerable women who had no owner. Evidently Jesus accepted them and provided them with a level of protection and security. One of the criticisms of Jesus was that he associated with prostitutes.
To his credit, the Apostle Paul declared that in Christ there was no longer slave or free, male or female. In spite of the acceptance by Jesus and the declaration of Paul, the early church embraced and perpetuated patriarchal dominance and female submission. The Leviticus standard of male ownership of wives continued in most of Christianity until the 20th century. It now seems incredible that women in the United States did not have a vote until the 19th Amendment was adopted in 1920.
I scratch my head when I hear someone declare that we need to return to Biblical standards for marriage.
Around the world and within the United States the understandings of marriage and marriage practices are hugely diverse. In that diversity a new question has been inserted in the public discussion. Should two persons of the same sex be allowed to marry? It is a subject that is never addressed in the Bible. It is a modern question that has evolved over the past 50 years. The Bible is a collection of ancient writings. I would not expect any of these writings to address a question that is so recent. Bible quotations seem so very irrelevant. . . "
". . . Is there no standard for marriage that can be embraced in our modern world? I suspect that diversity of understandings will win the day. The need to formalize the attractions that we have for a loving companion will not go away. . ."
[The Rev. Howard Bess is a retired American Baptist minister, who lives in Palmer, Alaska. His email address is HYPERLINK "mailto:hdbss@mtaonline.net" hdbss@mtaonline.net]
What
do YOU think?
http://www.rayjozwiak.com/guestbook.html
Also download
your
very own copy of
AMBIENCE & WINE
by Ray
Jozwiak
