Equality?

It's a strange thought; We're all different, yet we fight so desperately to all be treated the same.  It's quite the oxymoron, I must say.  If something is so unique, shouldn't it be treated in accordance to its individuality or distinctness?  Our race, our religion, our hair colour, our beliefs, our gender, our social class, our sexual preference, our culture, our jobs, our everything; the list of what separates us into individuals drags on for eons, down to the tiniest of moles and freckles.  So this equality we're striving for, is being constantly interrupted by the fact that we're just our uniquely human selves.  But, perhaps by being unique individuals we're technically the same...  We all share that common uniqueness, which alters this oxymoron into more of a correlative statement.

For all differences or for all similarities, the question still remains:  What does equality mean?

This topic is something I've explored before.  The idea of what equality means to most of us.  Generally speaking, to be treated with equality is to be treated the same despite your differences from those in comparison to you.  We tend to consider treating others with equality as tolerating their differences.  However, I don't agree with this idea.

To be tolerated. It insinuates that we're pretending the differences aren't there anymore - that they're just the same.  They're not the same.  They never will be the same.  In my eyes, to tolerate is the same as ignoring, pitying, stereotyping, judging, victimizing or showcasing an individual because of those differences.

I'm suggesting that as an alternative, we should always accept, never tolerate.  Every being deserves to be unconditionally accepted for what they are.  To be accepted means that instead of having to understand and tolerate something, it's immediately accepted for what it is - no questions asked, no judgements. Unlike ignorance, we know it's there and we can appreciate it.  Be that difference negative or positive, it doesn't matter.  We accept it sans judgement or stereotype.

Revisiting the question, what is equality, the answer is acceptance.  Only through acceptance can equality truly exist, not tolerance.

What do you think?

$$$

Robin Hood and Little Jon walkin' through the forest, oo-de-lally oo-de-lally golly what a day!

Incase you didn't already know, I'm a huge Disney fan - as juvenile as that might seem.  Given the topics of my blog entries, it would only make sense that Disney's Robin Hood is one of my favourites.  To steal from the rich and give to the poor...  One of the many twisted morals in our world.  Not only does this movie make me sing-a-long, but it makes me think about the act of stealing.  It is bad, and at that a crime as well as a violation of a Commandment.  Yet, what if you were a real life Robin Hood?  Breaking the law with the best of intentions to help those who 

fortunate and suffering - then would it still be bad?

Since my last post touched upon how laws and morals are twisted together into a knot of contradiction, I'll be venturing more into the realms of poverty in this post (still relevant to Robin Hood, yay).  

For rich, or for poor; does our class alter our morals when it comes to money, status and materialism? I think it's most certainly safe to say: It absolutely does.  In Americanized societies, where some of the richest of the rich can be found, materialism is thriving and in constant growth.  The need for what's next is more urgent than the fundamentals of basic living.  Ever noticed how that acquaintance of yours can't afford to buy their own lunch, yet sports around that flashy iPhone 5?  Where the necessity to own a product is more important than having enough to send your children to college or even pay the water bills?

But how does it work on the other end of the spectrum?  How are the morals and values of those in poverty affected?  Well, when an anthropologist confronted a group of children from an african tribe and offered them a proposition, the children had an interesting response.  The anthropologist had placed a basket of fruit beneath a tree and told the children that whoever got there first could have the fruits all to themselves.  The children, however, all linked arms and marched over together simultaneously, then shared the goods equally amongst themselves.  The children claimed that "How can one of us be happy, if the others are sad?".

Interesting how materialism and money almost blinds us in regards of the basics of life.  We forget about those around us and their happiness.  All that matters is what other people think about us, and if its a positive judgement, we're happy.  We completely forget about those who are suffering and less fortunate, be it near or far .  We're in a society where "All for one, and one for all" is misinterpreted to just all for one and we hoard our riches to ourselves, rather than acting upon the idea of being able to work collectively towards one common goal and share the wealth equally. 

I believe this video is important for you too see, in relevance to my entry.  However, *DISCLAIMER* it has some vulgar language, so prepare your virgin ears if you decide to view it.

Funny how the problem is only there when we want it to be...  What do you think?

References:

http://www.tigweb.org/youth-media/panorama/article.html?ContentID=7355

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-judith-rich/ubuntu_b_1803189.html

The Grey Area

What separates us from the good and the bad?  An orange jumpsuit?  Three dirty, soul depleting cement walls and a set of iron bars?  Wether religions are implemented or not, the law is the principal means of moral enforcement in any civilized (or so-called civilized) society.  The Ten Commandments, the law, human rights and morals are all based upon similar premisses.  Being so similar in their nature and the promotion of good intentions, it can be pretty mind boggling to consider the contradictions webbing them all together.  Though it has never really crossed my mind before, this idea has however been recently brought to my awareness.  I can't stop contemplating all the complications, the injustices and the denials arisen from this idea.

Here, a perfect example of said contradiction:
An individual murders an innocent victim.  The murderer is proven guilty and either sentenced to life in prison or in many cases given the death penalty.

For some, this is justice - to me, it doesn't make sense.  In a society where we fight so hard to enforce the moral principle that every human has the right to live and we therefore shouldn't kill them, how does it make sense to then execute the murderer who is also human and deserves to live?  This is a very complicated and in-depth topic.  Of course there are many things to be taken into consideration, like wether the murderer is mentally well and such.  The law states that it is illegal to kill another person, yet this law is excused in order to enforce itself.  In other words, there is a rule.  That rule is given however an exception in order to make that very rule.  There are many other examples of this throughout the justice system, not only in our society but around the world.

This is prevalent throughout numerous religions as well.  If morally we are all equal, despite race, age and gender, how is it that some religions consider women to be lesser or mistreat them, deeming them to be almost sub-human?

More recently in the news, a interesting contradiction of morality and law has arisen.  Nineteen year old pink haired mother, Catalina Clouser from Arizona, recently drove her car for nearly 12 miles while stoned, before finally realizing that she had left her baby on the roof of the car.  Miraculously the baby went uninjured.  The child has since then been taken out of Catalina's custody. When the law got involved, Clouser pleaded guilty to child abuse and DUI, avoiding jail time and only being sentenced to probation.  However, an unemployed Arizona mother of two, Shanesha Taylor, who left her children locked in her car while she attended a job interview was sentenced to nearly 8 years in jail.  Although both of these mothers did commit felonies, Shanesa's intentions were morally right, striving to ameliorate her life and the lives of her two young children.

I don't like using the word justice.  To me, it doesn't seem right, it makes me feel uneasy.  Its meaning has been lost - or rather can't exactly exist in such a contradictory and intricate world of rules and exceptions.

What do you think?


Referenes:

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/2012-06-02/baby-left-on-roof-of-car/55349990/1
http://www.myfoxny.com/story/25142271/mother-allegedly-leaves-young-children-in-car-during-job-interview
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/30/mother-leaves-her-kids-in_n_2217766.html

Paradoxical Beginnings

So where does it all come from?  All of these morals?  The base, the origins?
Perhaps, the 10 commandments? The Five Precepts?  The Torah?  The Commands of Islam?
Whatever their title may be, together religions all present the same general ground rules for what is considered good and bad.

Practiced since the beginning of time, through rituals, sacrifices and traditions, religions have kept the people of earth grounded and conscious of morals within their actions.  The threat of eternal punishment by a supreme being has been enough to keep people in line for millenniums (1), guiding them through the gardens of good and evil.

All religions in their entirety, for the most part, are there so we as people and followers always do what is morally right.  Although we find honouring and worship of idols of exactitude through religion, we can also find many negative things.  No religion is perfect, obviously.  They all posses their own faults like the oppression of women, the intolerance of those who are different and violent and sexual abuse, to name a few.  Above all, a fault that can be found present in any given society of our world are religious wars.

No, not all wars are cause solemnly by religion - in fact, religion is merely a catalyst or one factor among many in the grand scheme of wars.  Thats not to say there aren't any significant wars due to religion.  The French Revolution, the Crusades, the Lord's Resistant Army, WWII, the Islamic Revolution, the Lebanese Civil War and so many more wars have throughout history been caused or based on religious differences (2).

Its odd to think, that the true nature of religion is to be faithful and most of all to be a good person, yet so much of it has been contorted into negativity.  I'm not saying religions are the root of all evil or the cause of all wars.   I see it more as the practitioner's who've taken the nature of religion out of context.

I myself am not religious in any way.  I sometimes do however envy those who have such a strong faith, because I find myself scared sometimes - wondering who will take my destiny into their hands and redeem me for all of my poor decisions and actions.  Yet, when I think of all the controversy that comes along with religion, I can't help but wonder why, as humans in a society which strives for peace, we can't all forget about the differences and superficialities in various religions and rather just focus on being a morally good person.  Rather than fighting for some supreme being's acceptance, I'd rather focus on striving to one day be able to accept the best version of myself and to be able to put that version out into the world.

What do you think?

"I thank whatever gods may be or my uncomfortable soul, I am the master of my faith.  I am the captain of my own soul"

-William Earnest Henley

(1)http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/religion-science/

(2)http://www.lepg.org/wars.htm

How Much is that Doggie in the Window?

The best friend, we've all had one.  For some, its someone we can confide in and tell everything to; someone we can stay up all night with talking about the deeper meaning to life and giggling madly over nothing; someone who knows what you're about to say just by looking at the expression on your face.

Super doggy and I

Wether that best friend is a person or an animal, does it really make a difference?

Growing up, we had chocolate springer spaniel named Nubbers.  He was my guardian, my companion and above all, my best friend.  Sleeping was impossible without his heavy breathing and chubby chest rising and falling at the foot of my bed.  I'm sure everyone likes to think that their dog was the best, but Nubbers really was the most incredible companion I've ever had.

Sure he had his moments, like when he bit the mail man, or got hit by that car, or when he broke through the screen door and chased my mom's Minivan all the way down the street, but what dog doesn't?

All the good memories, however, overshadow all the dark moments.  At the time, its not like we could've trained my baby brother to go fetch the newspaper, or dig holes in the snow for me to hide in.  When the neighbour kids would come over to play, our favourite fort building spot was way into the tall corn fields.  My dad would tie a rope from Nubbers' collar around each of our waists, that way when we went too far into the fields, all he had to do was whistle and Nubbs would drag us back home -- dirtily, but safely.

Now, when the years started to add up, the "Velvet Pup" could no longer fetch the newspaper, or chase us through the yard.  He rapidly went blind, followed by deaf, then eventually both hind legs became paralyzed with severe arthritis.  There was no doubt that he was in pain.  After falling down

No winter blues here!

the stairs and breaking and fracturing many bones, all he could do was lay there.  He had to be carried outside and basically spoon fed.  His end was approaching and it was inevitable.  At 11 years old, looking at his sad body laying on the floor, I knew he was in pain.  When I came home from school one afternoon, however, his bed was gone and his heavy breathing could no longer be heard.  Dad explained to us that he'd taken Nubbs to get put down, taken out of his misery.  It was heartbreaking, yet so relieving knowing that he was no longer suffering.

If you've been lucky enough to experience a such a relationship with a pet, like my Nubbers, you understand that they're basically considered family.  Losing a pet can be just as difficult as losing a close family member.  Seeing your own mother, brother or grandfather suffering in pain, knowing that their time is near is absolutely heart wrenching - knowing that they're pleading for recovery even though it'll never come, and knowing that there is nothing you can do about it.

What I'm getting around to is the topic of Euthanasia.  In other terms, it can be called assisted suicide, signifying to painlessly end one's life with the assistance of a medical practitioner, in order to relieve pain and suffering.

For our pets, we see Euthanasia all the time.  When we can no longer stand to see them suffer with no hopes to spare, we realize that its time for them to be put down - sparing them, and us from the heart wrenching pains.

Yet when a family member, one who is even closer to us than a pet could ever be, is suffering tremendously knowing that they will never recover, there is no end - other than waiting for the mournful morning when they don't wake up.  The psychological, emotional and even physiological tolls taken on family members of those who are suffering, go beyond compare to any broken bone or stressful week at work.  The effects can even be long lasting, such as loss of appetite and weight loss, mental instability and anxiety.

So, why is it okay to euthanize our pets for their greater good, yet it becomes unthinkable when a loved and loving human being is suffering?  I believe there should be a choice, an option for severe cases - not all.  Cases such when they keep someone alive one more day, and then another day,  and then another day, just to watch them suffer even more on their deathbed, when their goodbyes have been said long ago.

I do not wish to upset or offend anyone with my approach to such a sensitive subject.  If I have, please don't neglect to let me know.

Otherwise, take a moment to think about this topic, the pros and cons, the humane and inhumane side of things and let me know, what do you think?

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/euthanasia