The 26th of June 2015: Today I Am Proud to be an American

My Oklahoma License Plate featuring Human Rights Campaign's Sticker (edited for personal privacy)

In all honesty I did not think that this type of progress was possible in the current political and social landscape present in the U.S. However, what I have witnessed in the US, in the past three days, has solidified my hope that positive change will happen in my lifetime. In the past three days, monumental change has taken place in America:

1) Two Days Ago: Southern States, that have have histories of violence and discrimination towards minorities, finally began recognizing the racist and hateful nature of the 'Confederate Battle Flag' and are working to remove that horrible symbol from state buildings, dismantle ill-conceived war memorials commemorating Southern traitors, and solidifying the social stigma that needs to be associated with that flag.  Without delving too deep into a history lesson, and ignoring the fact that the continuation of slavery was the second most emphasized cause for the South’s secession, I will briefly dispel the whole ‘the South was no more racist than American society of the time’ argument. The Confederate States of America (CSA), in its founding documents, clearly emphasized racist intent. Yes the USA had slavery, but it was defined as “Person(s) held to Service or Labour”. By contrast, in their new Constitution, the CSA used the term 'Negro Slaves' in Article IV. Section 3. The CSA made a clear distinction of highlighting the colour of the slaves’ skin - a definitively racist maneuver. The common refrain I heard growing up was “Heritage not Hate”. Even more absurd is when those who still uphold ‘Southern Heritage’ often claim that racism no longer exists since slavery and segregation are in the past. Yet the very past they are telling Black people to let go of is the exact same past some Southerners are clinging on to when displaying the Confederate Battle Flag or the Stars and Bars. While history is important to learn and should not be forgotten, in the case of the CSA, that Heritage is Hate.

2) Yesterday: The Supreme Court ruled to uphold the Affordable Care Act, colloquially known as 'ObamaCare', which added to the long list of victories for that piece of legislation - including over 50 failed challenges to defund and/or repeal by the House of Representatives and a prior Supreme Court case that likewise upheld the law. Adding to these legal victories are the costs of the legislation coming in under budget, numerous success stories in patient coverage and care, and a drop in the number of uninsured Americans. In contrast to the intended policy outcomes from the legislation, a majority of Americans (55%) still disapprove of the law.

3) Today: In an historic day for the United States of America, the U.S. Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision, has found that state bans on marriage for homosexual couples are unconstitutional. Their ruling effectively legalizes gay marriage in all 50 states in the union. The 26th of June 2015 will be a date that lives forever in history. Those who have opposed equality for LGBTQ persons are now officially on the wrong side of history. I have been an avid supporter of marriage equality for my entire adult life:

"To deny a fellow human being the right to express their love for a fellow human being, in an adult and consenting fashion, just because they are a homosexual, is nothing short of hateful and vitriolic. Make no mistake, opposition to marriage equality is nothing short of hate, regardless of how you try and justify it. Opposing homosexuality may be part of your religious beliefs, but you have absolutely no right to make someone else submit to your beliefs in such an arbitrary manner." - Excerpt from my 2013 Article on Marriage Equality

What always baffled me was the fact that the Marriage Equality issue has nothing to do with individual churches or their procedures. The argument is just to extend equal protection under the law (See: 14th Amendment) to the LGBTQ community, for rights already enjoyed by straight couples.

(My girlfriend and I during our 2014 road trip to California)

Intolerance that arises from discrimination against someone for something they cannot themselves choose (i.e. Sex, Race, Ethnicity, Sexual Orientation) is not the same as intolerance against those who discriminate by cognitive choice. Thus, based on a choice, bigots who justify discrimination by citing their religious beliefs or political platform are discriminating, by choice, against something for which a person cannot choose. Characteristics of a person that are indivisible from their DNA, and are not arrived at by choice, will always outweigh the characteristics that people elect to either hold or believe. Intolerance or discrimination against someone for an innate characteristic they have no choice or control over is inherently wrong and negative. Just as in the early to mid 20th century, when Government mandates against discrimination based on race, ethnicity, or skin colour were issued, it was similarly the ultra-conservative right wing religious community clinging to "Religious Freedom" and "State's Rights" that served as the last bastion for discrimination and bigotry. It comes as no surprise that those opposing the rulings for love and equality today are largely the same ideological demographic that so opposed the rulings for race and gender equality all those years ago. Furthermore, there are largely no differences between today's arguments against marriage equality verses the arguments against non-whites and interracial marriages from the 1850's up to the late 20th century.

The idea of a Democracy Society is to not allow the majority to disenfranchise and discriminate against the innate characteristics of a minority. Enabling discrimination under the guise of 'Freedom of Religion' is not protection of the First Amendment but rather a thinly veiled attempt to enable homophobic bigots the ability to deny fellow decency and equal protection under the law towards homosexuals - and frankly anybody they deem to not be in accordance with their own interpretation of religious beliefs, including Muslims, atheists, Sikhs, Hindus, Buddhists, etc. However, intolerance towards those who discriminate against someone for characteristics they neither choose nor control is a positive social element. This form of social intolerance is the positive force that enabled women's suffrage, the civil rights movement, and equality based on sex, race, ethnicity, or disability - as well as today's victory for marriage equality.

Yes the U.S. still has its flaws, especially when compared to other developed nations, but this recent series of events has served to lessen that divide. Extreme income inequality and an exorbitant amount of intentional homicides still plagues the U.S. Issues like those still have yet to be adequately addressed. Make no mistake, the long march ahead for true equality remains an ominous challenge, but today, the 26th of June in the year 2015, love wins.

Closing Note: This amazing three day stretch follows President Barack Obama's interview on Marc Maron's WTF Podcast. At just over an hour long, I have already listened to the interview, in its entirety, multiple times. The news cycle picked up on one tiny element of the conversation, but the President gives a candid and very nuanced overview of the political landscape in the US. Click here to listen to Marc Maron's WTF Podcast with President Barack Obama


Connect with TheNolanK on Social Media:

Dinesh D'Souza Indicted For Campaign Financing Fraud

     Known adulterer and noted documentarian Dinesh D'Souza has been charged with campaign finance fraud. If his name sounds familiar, it is probably from his immensely popular documentary 2016: Obama's America, which grossed over 33 million dollars in its box office run.

     Conservatives and Tea Partiers alike have been crying foul at this indictment. They continue to criticize the IRS and are accusing the FBI of this being another political targeting scheme from the Obama administration. Considering the fact that a major Tea Party principle is either lowering or eliminating taxes, investigating these groups further to make sure they are not already following anti-tax policies before they are even legal sort of makes sense. Nevertheless, Obama's opponents are still quite disgruntled. The new wave of alarmist calls citing totalitarian tactics on behalf of the Obama administration are misplaced. What Dinesh is accused of is quite plainly a crime - and enough evidence was gathered to proceed with the prosecution. In this case, the U.S. Attorney for Manhattan, Preet Bharara, was appointed by Obama. However, accusing the Obama administration of breaking rules in the name of cronyism, whilst absolving Dinesh by ignoring his connection to the former senatorial candidate, is a blatantly hypocritical double standard.

     In the (so far alleged) case of Mr. D'Souza, the investigation has a considerably more significant levels of justification. Here are the facts concerning the case and character of Dinesh D'Souza. He has been a staunch conservative, both religiously and politically. During the Reagan administration, Dinesh served as a policy advisor. An extremely vocal defender of traditional marriage, in October of 2012 he was exposed for having an extra-marital affair with a married woman. D'Souza tried to defend his actions, but regardless, they still eroded the sanctity of traditional marriage. In his defense, D'Souza did write an Op-Ed defending his actions, but ultimately the scandal cost him his job as President of The King's College in New York. D'Souza and the candidate in question, assumed to be Wendy Long, have a long history together. They both attended Dartmouth College and have been friends for a few decades now. Dinesh has been charged with (1) one count of causing false statements to be made and (1) one count of making illegal contributions in the names of others.

     Those charges stem from his alleged actions in Wendy Long's unsuccessful run to unseat Senator Kirsten Gillibrand. At that time, the maximum total for campaign donations, per private person, was $5,000. While actively campaigning on behalf of Wendy Long, D'Souza donated around $20,000 to the election efforts. He was able to bypass the $5,000 limitation by claiming other people were the source of the extra $15,000. If he simply was acting as an aggregator for campaign financing, there would be no issue - but that is simply not the case. What Dinesh allegedly ended up doing was reimbursing the donors with his own personal funds. He participated in fraud, essentially in the form of money laundering 101: obscuring the source of monies, especially when in circumvention of a law. Knowing that the limit was $5,000, he was able to overcome that obstacle by way of shell donors. Dinesh's lawyer released a statement claiming that there was not "any corrupt or criminal intent whatsoever ... at worst this was an act of misguided friendship by D'Souza." For a man that is so familiar with governmental policies and is often cited as a leading public intellectual, his alleged ignorance of the law has zero standing. Claiming innocence via ignorance once caught, in the case of marriage practices or campaign finance laws, illustrates a disturbing trend of willful disregard for the law.

DISCLAIMER: Since this is an ongoing case, these claims and accusations are predicated on the indictment and charges currently facing Mr. Dinesh D'Souza. As with all criminal cases, the accused are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. In the context of this article's verbiage, this contingency must be considered and incorporated in reading this article.

Human Rights Campaign Graphic for Marriage Equality Goes Viral

I would like to thank everyone that helped share my article, the Human Rights Campaign, PolicyMic, and everyone else who endeavors to put an end to intolerance. Gay rights and marriage equality is the seminal issue for the millenial generation. I stand up for the marginalized, abhorred, and persecuted whether it is in the battle of Civil Rights or the the battle for freedom from a despotic dictator in Libya or Syria.

Originally I wrote this for PolicyMic.com. Often times I will write a piece for TheNolanK.com and then republished it in whole or in part on PolicyMic. However, this time the tables are turned. Here is my most successful article ever:

Human Rights Campaign Graphic for Marriage Equality Goes Viral

"You might have woken up this morning to find your Facebook or Twitter news feed covered in a pink and red equal sign and been curious as to the image's origin. Well, here are the details.

The Human Rights Campaign is the nation's largest advocacy group for the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered communities. Their logo is a yellow equal sign set on a blue background. The current incarnation is meant to bring awareness to the cause for marriage equality in light of the Supreme Court hearing arguments for two groundbreaking cases in the fight for marriage equality. For the next two days, Tuesday and Wednesday, proponents of marriage equality are also encouraged to wear red to show their support. Also, using popular Twitter hash tags like #Equality, #UnitedforMarriage, #SupremeCourt, and #Love will help your tweets launch into the discussion taking place on social media.

Personally, I have never understood why a person should have to fight so hard just to be considered equal to the majority. But this view also comes from an American son raised by Canadian parents ... I am lucky to be a dual citizen. LGBT rights in Canada are a model for the world. Canada was the fourth country in the world to legalize same-sex marriage and actually the first country in the world to perform a same-sex marriage.

However, if you are in the constantly shrinking minority of those who oppose same sex marriage, then you will go down in history alongside those opposed to gender equality and race equality. Your picture will be in the history books next to those who were assaulting marchers with fire hoses and police dogs. Frankly it does not matter if you view marriage in the context of your theology, the aim of marriage equality is not to influence policy in your church or place of worship.

Rather, the fight for marriage equality is strictly a matter of state or national legal policy and the application of equal protection under the law. To deny a fellow human being the right to express their love for a fellow human being, in an adult and consenting fashion, just because they are a homosexual, is nothing short of hateful and vitriolic. Make no mistake, opposition to marriage equality is nothing short of hate, regardless of how you try and justify it. Opposing homosexuality may be part of your religious beliefs, but you have absolutely no right to make someone else submit to your beliefs in such an arbitrary manner.

Now some pessimists may write this graphic off as nothing more than slacktivism or pointless, but they are completely wrong. The belief is not that doing this will have an effect on the Supreme Court's decision, but rather that it will help sway the general public's opinion. Many people who are ignorant or perhaps just unsure of where they stand on gay rights might be surprised to see everyone dressed in red or may inquire about your new profile picture. This is a great foot in the door for discussing the case for marriage equality.

I myself have already had a few conversations on the topic and have explained the graphics meaning to numerous inquisitive Facebook friends. If people just see how many people support equality and civil rights, they may reconsider their negative views or become involved themselves. Don't believe me? Change your profile picture to this graphic and see how quickly you receive positive feedback and curious inquiries."

-----------------------------------------

Shortly after I wrote this piece it absolutely caught fire and went viral. My article quickly racked up tens of thousands of views and thousands of shares on social media. The current totals, a whole 48 hours after I originally published this piece on PolicyMic, currently stand at over 568 Tweets, 28,000 shares on Facebook, and over 57,000 unique views.