Today, I watched a segment on The Newshour about the Texas Municipality (a side note: I was unaware that Alaska was a Southern state, somebody slept through geography and possibly english, too) that's fighting the Voting Rights law and then later on CBS, CSI: NY dealt with neo-nazis and nazis. It's not like it was planned at all. But I found it especially interesting that on the same day that lawyers are in court arguing that we, as a country, have surpassed any possible reversions to decades-old racist practices, a TV show illustrates that we still have people here in our country who see some people as, to quote the neo-nazi from the show, "animals." I don't think I'm alone in thinking it'd be nice to be able to say we've completely moved beyond racial discrimination, but I think that we'd be deluding ourselves. We haven't eliminated any of the discriminations and prejudices that plague our country. Not completely. As I mentioned last week, women still don't receive equal pay for equal work. Women are still a minority in both house and senate. And the possibility of Roe v. Wade being overturned has loomed in recent years. (But that's another controversial subject all together.) The existence of hate crime laws shows that prejudice has not been eradicated. And it's not limited to race. It extends to sexual preference, gender and religion. The case Citizen B spoke of last week is a prime example of the prejudices that are still alive and well here in our country. The other side of the coin, of course, was also raised, that the voting law says some states are less capable of governing themselves. And while I concede that is a valid point, I'm still inclined to side with the other side. Maybe it's the mountain of statistical evidence that Congress compiled in 2006 to support their extension of the law for the next 25 years. That former President Bush signed. That says to me that there's a good reason it was kept on the books. But I'll admit, I'm also influenced by the fact that the plaintiff in this case is doing this all so they can move their election location from a garage to an elementary school. Nobody in the state government in any of these states is fighting this law. Is the law actually prohibiting them from making that location change? Or do they just not think they should have to ask for permission? As I understand it (and I could be wrong), it's the latter. In which case, I honestly find the whole thing ridiculous and trumped up. But then, what do I know?
No comments:
Post a Comment