Where Is The Outrage?

In sixth grade, Mrs. Signori asked us to define "freedom." What does it mean to be "a free country."  

"Yes, Suzanne?" Suzanne Bronsard lived across from my grandparents. We saw each other after school, but weren't what you'd call "friends." I liked her. "Um?" Suzanne started. "It means we could do what we want? Um...when we want?" Hm, I thought. That sounds dangerous.

No matter who you are, where you grew up or what lessons stuck with you from what age, your idea of "freedom" has been shaped by untold influences. When and how do we learn the concept of freedom, or any other tenet of the social contract for that matter, is lost to us in later years. I dearly wish this were not the case, because I would do anything to go back in time and observe myself learning what is freedom. And why not, since we're time-traveling, observe myself learning all of the trickier of life's lessons that all add up to who you are as a person, each new learned thing one more fiber of your moral code. When did we learn how to share? Can you pinpoint the day that you first understood honesty? What does it mean to be grateful? Is there such a thing as a selfless act?If I could remember these watershed life lessons, maybe they would be easier to pass forward to the kids.

Back in sixth grade, Mrs. Signori introduced us to Martin Luther King. We had our Saturday morning Schoolhouse Rocks. We got graded on our ability to memorize key historical dates. We scribbled out homework essays and in class we gave stilted, index-card-laden presentations on the Boston Tea Party, on President Lincoln abolishing slavery, Rosa Parks taking a stand by keeping her seat. We were also sold a bill of goods known as "freedom of religion" that might, depending on who you are, just might be the very first thing to later turn us into cynical as teenagers. When we first realize that religious freedom exists as a concept. It's not real. You can't have religion and freedom and politics. It doesn't work. 

Politics and Religion

Back in sixth grade, we never did learn how it's even possible, let alone tolerated, to wield one's "freedom of religion" as a weapon aimed at abolishing another person's same religious freedom. That is to say, abolishing another person's freedom to practice religion or not! Elected officials dictating policy based on privately held religious beliefs is an outrage. The instant anyone with a microphone and a bid for public office starts to crow about "it says in the bible," that should warrant an automatic disqualification for the job. It's one thing to have strong personal beliefs as a private citizen, but to force your own religion upon the public sector when you are in a position of power should be considered abuse of that power. The hypocrisy is downright unlawful.

Valarie Hodges. This too-outrageous-for-satire state representative from Louisiana was at the center of my absolute most-favoritest-ever news story of the summer. I wish that this story had gotten a lot more attention than it did, because it was delicious. It was like an after-school special about bigots. It was like the last ten minutes of Dirty Dancing.

Here's what happened. In the late spring of 2012, Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal pushed for a taxpayer-funded voucher program that would benefit schools. "HB976, now signed into law as Act 2, proposed, among other things, a voucher program allowing state educational funds to be used to send students to schools run by religious groups," reported the Livingston Parish News. Act 2 was passed in June, largely due to the enthusiastic support of Valarie Hodges. Other state reps, also Republicans like Hodges, opposed the program, citing that public school funds should stay with the public schools, not be given to any religious schools.

I agree with those Republicans. They were absolutely right. Use taxpayer money to make the public schools awesome, please, but if a school is geared towards a certain religion, then that school is private. No taxpayer funding. The conservatives fighting against funding private schools correctly identified Act 2 as mis-use of taxpayer-funded education.

But Valarie won, the other conservatives lost and I'm sorry, it was a good fight. Act 2 was signed into law by majority vote, among those cheering its victory, of course, Mizzuz Hodges. But soft! Soon after Act 2 was passed, someone apparently must have taken Valarie aside and informed her that there are, um, other religions. You see, a Muslim school applied for the program, and she flipped out. Honestly, I wish I could have seen her face. The state rep who had waved the flag hardest for state funding religious schools immediately launched a furious reversal campaign, a whole raft of inane blather that essentially amounted to: I thought 'religion' only meant "Christian." A grown woman is so under-educated and narrow-minded that she hears the word "religion" and never even considers for a split second that it doesn't always mean her personal religion. To think nothing of voting bills into law, specifically to allocate taxpayer money to further her own private, right-wing extremist something-something-Christian agenda. How do you live with yourself as a public official to think it's right to vote in favor of religious freedom and then renege when you're informed that it doesn't only apply to you? Seriously? Where is the outrage? A gasp of incredulity should have swept the nation in the face of such discrimination from Valarie Hodges. This was another blatant, in the bright light-of-day and quotable, provable bigoted slap-in-the-Constitution from yet another so-called patriotic "conservative."

I have a question. Where the hell are all the normal, nice, educated Christians? They God squad haven't all gone full-tilt crazy, have they? Get in touch. I just want to talk.∎