Skip to main content

What's not funny...

Trump recently made a comment that was probably meant as some kind of a joke or other light-hearted comment, but was really quite troubling:



Now, I'm familiar with saying stuff that I thought would be funny but it turns out to not be. I've even offended people unwittingly in my effort to be clever. And it's embarrassing. But here's the thing - I'm not running for president, and I would never, EVER suggest that violence is an answer to a problem.

Two things. First, there are people who follow Trump that are crazy. Not all, but some. And they may take his suggestion as something their leader has implied that they should accomplish. (Will no one rid me of this troublesome priest?) (Not that I'm comparing Mrs. Clinton to Thomas Becket - just the off-hand remark which maybe wasn't intended to mean what it sounded like, but which could be interpreted to MEAN JUST THAT...) The second amendment has preserved the right to bear arms, which in this context means to "defend" one's self from threats. Well, if Mrs. Clinton is viewed as enough of a threat....................

Yeah. Not good.

Second, I wonder if Trump would have had the same response if his opponent were a man. There is a lot (!) of violence towards women that is both latent and apparent in our society, and it is one of the most damning aspects of the prevalent sexism that persists, in spite of glass ceilings being shattered. I'm not saying Trump is intentionally sexist (even though he is) in this remark; rather, what I'm saying is that he's pandering to a crowd that AGREES with him - look at the applause and head-nodding he gets as he extols the virtues of the NRA and the gun-totin' agenda... And that it's sexist in effect if not in intent.

I've written a couple of times about how a gun is not for DEFENSE - it's for offense. A gun doesn't make you safer, it just means that you can retaliate when someone has aggrieved you. Guns are inherently and explicitly and singularly violent creations - their only function is to destroy, maim, and kill. And when Trump says that the second amendment people (whatever that means!) could take care of this... Well, it's clear that he's looking for action against a woman. Which ought to scare people to death, the way it does me.

Perhaps on some level he knows that is the only way he'd win - if something tragic and violent were to happen...

I just can't (CAN'T)(!!!) believe that this guy is the leader of the Republican party. I can't. I can't wrap my mind around the fact that someone like this has been chosen to be a candidate for president, with a shot (hopefully rather distant) at actually becoming the leader of our country, the commander in chief of the military... The diplomatic face of our country around the world...

I can't believe it.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Ephesus

Paul got around. Ephesus is right on the Aegean Sea, on the coast of present-day Turkey. Yesterday he was in Galatia, which was much more towards the middle of Turkey. And when he actually wrote these letters, he was in Rome... So the man could travel. He probably walked. Today's item of interest comes from chapter one in Ephesians. Verses 18 and 19 are particularly interesting: 18 The eyes of your understanding being enlightened; that ye may know what is the hope of his calling and what the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the saints, 19 And what is the exceeding greatness of his power to us-ward who believe, according to the working of his mighty power This is not the first time Paul talks about an inheritance. In Galatians he talks about the inheritance that comes of being part of the Abrahamic Covenant. He notes that we are joint-heirs through and with Christ. In Ephesians, he uses the word "adoption" - that we are adopted as the Children of Jesus Chris...

Engaged

Three Dog Night got it wrong.  One is not the loneliest number. They were more accurate when they said Two can be as bad as one.  I really wonder how people can survive Without being fully engaged. How they live through each day Without the intimacy I so very much crave... Maybe I am unusual in my desire  To have this intimacy, To want to feel that soul So close to my own Sharing light and warmth, Sharing love and passion, Sharing life. Alas! Alas! Alas! For when I do seek to share It is often only to be rebuffed Denied Or used up, Sucked dry, And left an empty husk.  I want SO MUCH to share And all I have is the cold, digital world Of typing out a blog.

Excommunication

My heart is heavy this morning. I read that Kate Kelly and others are being brought up on Church disciplinary action. For those who are unfamiliar with the process/proceedings of LDS Church discipline, it can be a bit mystifying. There are several levels of censure that the Church may impose. These range from a simple removal of some privileges for a short period of time to the most severe action - excommunication. When one is excommunicated, the person's membership in the Church is terminated. It is a very extreme measure, and for the faithful it can be a very difficult thing to consider. What people don't understand - what is nearly impossible for someone outside the proceedings to understand - is the amount of love felt. It's discipline. It's intended to be harsh (at times). And it's intended to be unpleasant. But it is done with love and care for the person. Since excommunication is such an extreme measure, it is really only very rarely applied. There are ...