We hear this question a lot these days. Most of us struggle with the difference between what we think is fact and what is offensive. What is ‘politically correct’ juxtaposed to hate speech? This country, and our state, wrestles with how we communicate with each other to progress, or truncate, ideas and opinions. It would appear the distinguished senator from Utah has given us a clear marker to judge by.
On December 10th, Sen. M. Lee (R-Utah) blocked new national museums for Latinos and Women. His shallow argument centered upon the ‘last thing we need is to further divide an already divided nation’. That, these museums would ‘weaponize diversity’ and ‘especially at the end of such a fraying and fracturing year, Congress should not splinter one of the national institutional cornerstones of our distinct national identity’.
‘Our distinct national identity’ used to be the proud idea that this country welcomed all and was the ‘great melting pot’ of cultures and nationalities. It would distinctly appear Sen. Lee considers or ‘national identity’ as white and male, with a strong hint of religious singularity as well.
Let us just brush aside the fact we are celebrating women’s suffrage 100th anniversary. Let us look past that the Latino community represents over 18% of our nation’s population. Let us try not to consider the historic contributions women and Latino’s have made, in the arts, culture, public service and science. These, unheralded contributions ensure our country is better and stronger. Let us just put all those aside.
Apparently, the best way for this country to heal its frayed, and fractured condition is to either avoid recognizing our differences or to only recognize those who are like Sen. Lee. If we simply do not acknowledge these groups maybe, just maybe, they will go back to the fields and/or stay in the kitchen. With these sentiments it is no wonder the Equal Rights Amendment has never passed and is not part of the Constitution. It is no wonder our racial and gender tensions are so extreme.
Why can’t the national dialog be on inclusion, acceptance, and respect? If we are free-thinking individuals, none of us can ever totally believe as anyone else. Our experiences, observations, and interpretation of events are all unique. Down deep we know we all think differently. We are not clones, or sheep. We should not act as if we are. Group think, tribes, and mob mentality are extremely dangerous for our representative republic and civil dialog. It’s alright, in fact it’s great, to disagree. Have a civil dialog and discourse. It is alright to argue passionately for your convictions. But just as you demand that right so does everyone else.
How about a different approach? How about recognizing everyone as you would want to be recognized. Not by your race, gender, or religion; but by who you are, what you can do, what you have done, and the potential of what you will do. If you feel like you are losing your power maybe you did not earn it but gained through privilege.
When is it discrimination? If you had to face the same conditions you would not be asking the question. The answer would be self-evident. #NeverFeartheDream
simplebender 