Oppression Is Evil

from Martin Luther King, Jr.'s "I Have a Dream" speech

 

I share Martin Luther King’s dream.

Earlier today I read a tribute, from someone who had visited MLK’s historic home in Montgomery, Alabama. She quoted something from that tour, offered in a recording of his voice: 

“It was around midnight. You can have some strange experiences at midnight,” he says through the recording. It was January 1956 at the time, and Dr. King had just received yet another threat. The voice on the other end had called him an offensive name, followed by, “[We] are tired of you and your mess now. And if you aren’t out of this town in three days, we’re going to blow your brains out and blow up your house.”

Dr. King's voice shares how that message shook him to the very core.

“I sat there and thought about a beautiful little daughter who had just been born…. She was the darling of my life. I’d come in night after night and see that little gentle smile. And I sat at that table thinking about that little girl and thinking about the fact that she could be taken away from me any minute…. And I discovered then that religion had to become real to me, and I had to know God for myself. And I bowed down over that cup of coffee, I never will forget it…. I prayed a prayer, and I prayed out loud that night.

“I said, ‘Lord, I’m down here trying to do what’s right. I think I’m right. I think the cause that we represent is right. But, Lord, I must confess that I’m awake now. I’m faltering. I’m losing my courage. And I can’t let the people see me like this, because if they see me weak and losing my courage, they will begin to get weak.’ Then it happened: And it seemed at that moment that I could hear an inner voice saying to me, ‘Martin Luther, stand up for righteousness. Stand up for justice. Stand up for truth. And lo I will be with you, even until the end of the world.’… I heard the voice of Jesus saying still to fight on. He promised never to leave me, never to leave me alone. No never alone. No never alone. He promised never to leave me, never to leave me alone.”

I’m afraid right now he must be rolling over in his grave. Among civil society, his dream has come true. It’s not acceptable for anyone to hate because of race. Except—that voice he heard, so full of hate that they were willing to kill him, that voice is still speaking. And it’s coming from the people he was trying to help. His people. Their descendants and others seeking to oppress.

I wrote about this last week; at our school board meeting, newly elected school board member Scott Henry had the courage to say that the equity audit report’s suggestion that we hire more black teachers—not because of qualification, but because of race, wouldn’t work.

It wasn’t enough that he was lied about and mischaracterized. It wasn’t enough that they called for his removal from the school board. It wasn’t enough that they got the media to lie about what he’d said. It wasn’t even enough that they made threats to his life and the lives of his family members—just like the oppressors did to MLK. (This is especially ironic following the National School Board Association letter to the Biden administration in September led to Attorney General Merrick Garland’s admission that they were investigating conservative parents as a threat to school board members—not because of any actual evidence of threats from those parents, but because of that letter; are these actually threatening pro-racist Democrats going to be investigated?) None of that would satisfy; they had to seek out his employers and shame them into firing him; what is oppression, after all, if not the ability to take away a person’s means to make a living?

How did the employer, San Francisco-based software company Splunk, explain the sudden firing?

 "We viewed the employee's conduct as inconsistent with who we are as Splunkers and the individual is no longer employed by our company," they tweeted. What he said was that our school district should not use racist hiring practices. That is what Splunk finds inconsistent with who they are? 

Scott Henry called for us not to be racist. He commented,

Because I dared to disagree that it equates to high retention rates, there have been threats upon my life, and my wife and my children have been targeted. I will take responsibility for not saying it more eloquently.

For that he is being called a racist. One tweet put it this way:

This racist Texas #CyFair school board member just said that more Black teachers leads to worse student outcomes. He must resign. And be called out. And maybe sued….— Demanding Liz (@ehanks2208) January 12, 2022 

Did he say that? No. Did he say anything negative about black teachers in either CFISD or HISD? No.

Henry wanted CFISD to hire based on “the content of their character,” and their qualifications to teach, rather than simply the color of their skin, something MLK would approve. But the world has been toppled over.

Harris County Judge (administrator) Lina Hidalgo told the media: 

What we saw the other night was the racism said out loud. And if we allow this kind of thing in a public forum by a public official that represents a school district, what are we allowing?

Did Lina Hidalgo hear his full comments? If she did, what part of “let’s not hire based on race” offends her?

When asked to explain, Henry wrote a statement:

I was defending our school district against attacks from an out-of-state political organization that claimed our schools were failing our students because we did not [have] one pre-determined diversity metric. This political organization claimed that one metric—the percent of black teachers in our schools—determined the quality of education our students receive.

So, if they needed clarification (which they shouldn’t have needed, if they’d heard his full statement), that should have settled it. Someone at the school board meeting called that “walking back his statement,” and said we shouldn’t accept it.

The lies don’t stop.

I don’t know who it was at the Monday night meeting that gleefully spread the word that there was something said they could distort—but whoever did that is evil. I don’t know who the instigator is, but I’m going to call out a couple of the speakers, because of their power and influence, which carry their lies further than others.

Odus Ebbagharu speaking at
CFISD school board meeting January 13.
screenshot from here

One is Odus Ebbagharu, Harris County Democrat Party Chair. He was welcomed with calls of “Odus! Odus! Odus!” from the Odus-friendly crowd. Claiming unanimity with the community, “Republican, Democrat, doesn’t matter,” he says, “To sit down here and listen to what I just heard, this is not the community I know.” Then he called out the school board members and followed with a Desmond Tutu quote:

School board members, when these comments were made, not one of you spoke out. Desmond Tutu said, “If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor.”

The reason no school board members called out Scott Henry at the meeting was because he hadn’t said anything to call out. He brought forth an opinion, based on the data in the report, and made a recommendation, which they would be discussing at some future point. How horrifying! More on the side of the oppressor in a minute.

The other person I’m calling out is Dr. and Pastor Evelyn Ogletree. She says something I fully agree with:

I know teachers of all races. And you cannot determine whether they’re good or bad by their race.

Dr. Evelyn Ogletree speaking at
the CFISD board meeting January 13,
screenshot from here

Scott Henry agrees with that sentence. That was the point he was making. We shouldn’t hire based on race; we should hire good teachers, because their race doesn’t matter. Everyone in support of Scott Henry believes that. Many of the “useful idiots” who were stirred up to hate Scott Henry believe that. We’re in agreement.

Except—those who are spreading the lie that that’s not what Scott Henry believes really do want hiring based on race. They want racist hiring practices. And they want racist treatment of students. But they don’t call it racist if it’s blacks committing the racism.

Dr. Ogletree used the term “African-American” nine times in her sanctimonious 2½-minute speech. She says, “I am appalled at what was said. I am hurt. I am just, really just cannot believe that this is happening in our district.”

You know what does not appall her? The racist tweets her husband sent out on the regular—her husband, Dr. and Pastor John Ogletree, one of the three board members we ousted in the election, and the one who wrote the Resolution that called for the equity audit recommending that our district use racist hiring practices. (We were reminded of these in my friend Bill Ely's excellent public comments Thursday.) To refresh your memory, here are a few:

·       “Yesterday’s Ku Klux Klan members are today’s police officers.”

·       “White Evangelicalism is nothing but slaveholder religion.”

·       “Riots are the American way” (in reference to police killings).

·       “This country was built on bad theology with White men holding bibles!!!”

·       “White Evangelicals… are complicit in Madness, Divisiveness, and Evil.”

·       “If you want to understand white privilege just watch the videos of the insurrection on the US Capital Grounds.”

·       “When will the white pulpit be as repulsed by the taking of an innocent Black life as it is by the taking of the life of an unborn fetus.”

Who’s divisive? Who’s racist? Who’s a religious bigot? Her co-pastor and husband.

But she calls on parents, teachers, and the community to speak out against a school board member for saying what she said: that you cannot determine whether a teacher is good or bad by their race.

So what was that Resolution her husband wrote about? It wasn’t about making sure we treat our students and teachers of all races equally; it was about segregating out blacks and privileging them—and oppressing anyone who stands in the way of that goal.

If you have the power to make a phonecall and intimidate a corporation into firing an employee who disagrees with your political aims, you’re not the oppressed; you’re the oppressor.

If you have the power to make a phonecall and have the government and the press appear at your beck and call and spread whatever message/lie you put out there, you’re not the oppressed; you’re the oppressor.

If you use your race as a threatening weapon against people don't look like you or don't think like you, you’re not the oppressed; you’re the oppressor.

This is evil. The people who perpetuate it are evil. Particularly evil are the ones who lie about anyone standing in their way, insisting they're the evil ones. Sowing discord. Persuading people that they’ve got to stand up against evil racism—by denigrating people who aren’t racist while wielding the threat of labeling them racist to ruin their lives.

One more quote, from the scriptures:

Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness’ sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake.

Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for great is your reward in heaven.

—Matthew 5:10-12.

Scott Henry is being persecuted for speaking the truth and doing his duty, which includes preventing this pernicious racism from taking over our schools. I pray for him that he does not need to wait until heaven for the blessings.

I’d love to see someone out there with connections to a company that could use a good data analyst—to quietly step in and restore this good man’s ability to make a living for his family. Make his life better than it would have been if he’s stayed with a company so quickly willing to give in to the oppressors.

I expect there’s more persecution coming. Brace for it. Because there’s plenty of evil right here in our community.

Still Dreaming

The other day Mr. Spherical Model was commenting on how much he enjoys working with a particular client. The main person who brings him in on projects is especially pleasant. She’s high energy, has a good sense of humor, works well with others—on top of being good in her field of expertise.

They had an exchange over the weekend about postponing a scheduled meeting because of a family emergency, and Mr. Spherical Model said he’d be praying for her. And she thanked him and said that, because he’s such an angel, she’s sure the prayers would be answered.

Martin Luther King, Jr.
image found on Facebook

Other people at that company are also great to work with. They’re kind of our favorites right now.

For whatever reason, the company appears to be a majority black, plus a fair amount of Hispanic, at least here at the office we’ve worked with. But color doesn’t seem to be an issue. It has never come up in any of our discussions. Since we are the minority there—one that the media would tell you is privileged and all kinds of negatives—it’s nice to be treated as though we’re just additional great people to work with.

In other words, it’s about content of character, not color of skin.

Politics have never come up. Family values may have come up at times. Respect for co-workers and customers comes up frequently as part of the job. Part of the company’s ability to prosper depends on workers treating customers with respect—even when, or especially when, they have complaints.

Everybody prospers when people treat one another as valuable human beings.

Skin color is so irrelevant that we never talked about it, except looking at the situation around the time of Martin Luther King, Jr.’s birthday. Our experience is that his dream is reality, which is worth saying.

The irrelevance of race is our experience, in general. We encounter a pretty wide array of races and ethnicities in the very cosmopolitan salad bowl that is Houston, Texas. In church. In Scouting. In community organizations related to politics or service. In business.

That’s why it’s so puzzling when the media story is that the country is so hateful and racist. I don’t believe it. It’s not that the evil of racism is non-existent; it’s just that it is anathema to civilization, so you don’t find it except where savagery wins.

We saw an example this past weekend, at the March for Life. A group of Catholic students from Kentucky was gathering near the Lincoln Memorial after the march, and after some sight-seeing, to wait for their bus.

screenshot image found here

A group of adults came at them, shouted vile epithets at them, tried to provoke them (unsuccessfully). A Native American man, playing a drum, walked into the group, banged the drum in the face of a young man, whose personal space was invaded, but the boy was respectful.

This is all on video. But the media attacked the boys, falsely telling the story, editing video to create the negative story about them they wanted, claiming the chant was done as they surrounded and attacked the Native American man to taunt him. (There’s a good retelling of the entire story here.) 

There were two racist elements in this kerfuffle involving Catholic boys who favored ending abortion. One was that the adult group attacking the boys was black. Not a typical black group, but what some have referred to as a cult of black supremacists called Black Hebrew Israelites. They are a known group; they do this kind of attack frequently. Any journalist who has spent time in New York or Washington, DC, has likely encountered these people and knows exactly who they are and what they do, so they would have known without any confusion that they were the ones attacking the boys, not the other way around.

The other racist element was the Native American, Nathan Phillips and those with him. He used his race to lie about being a victim when the boys had done nothing wrong—and in fact were very respectful to him, considering his purposeful entering of their group and playing his drum in their faces. One of his companions shouted at the boys, apparently trying to provoke them, and told them they had stolen the land and should go back to Europe.

I don’t know about the black group’s protest purpose for the day, but it was footage from their video—an unedited hour and a 46 minutes—that shows them shouting vile things at the boys, and records the boys shouting only school cheers in an attempt to cover up the vile words being hurled at them.

The Native Americans were there for a demonstration, completely separate from the March for Life, that just happened to coincide nearby. Whether the man with the drum actually thought the boys were attacking the black men, or was simply lying, is hard to know for certain. But his actions and those around him show no evidence of racism from the boys—only towards them.

Social media attacked the boys. One of their chaperones was on Glenn Beck Radio this morning. If I understood her story, their school website was hacked in an attempt to get the boys’ names and private information to “dox” them (which included boys who hadn’t even been on the trip).

The media, aided and abetted by social media, served as accuser, judge, jury, and executioner for some boys on a school trip. Young boys. Teenagers. Who believe in protecting the unborn. Based on a brief video clip—purposely clipped to prevent showing context—that in itself shows them doing nothing wrong, but is used to foment hate towards them anyway.

This attack happened on the very steps in front of the location where Martin Luther King, Jr., gave his “I Have a Dream” speech.

Two things can be true simultaneously. One is that, for the vast majority of Americans, MLK’s dream has come true. The other is that, for those who want to find racism, they’ll create it where it doesn’t exist and use it for their own racist purposes. What we need is for that second thing to be even more rare.

Maybe we all need to make it a practice to take a step back, from any media story—or any anecdotal story we encounter—and wait. See if more context or detail comes out. In the meantime, give people the benefit of the doubt. Because most of America is made up of people who like each other and don’t even understand what the anger is about. In our civilized lives, racism is not part of our personal experience.

Standing Up

The MLK Memorial in Washington, DC,
viewed from near the Jefferson Memorial

I had my flag out for Martin Luther King’s Birthday today. I keep thinking we’d do better to have school and other ways to educate his message on this day than just having a long weekend. So, to that end, here are some thoughts from and about a man who stood up when it took bravery and strength to do that.

“A man dies when he refuses to stand up for that which is right. A man dies when he refuses to stand up for justice. A man dies when he refuses to take a stand for that which is true.”—Martin Luther King, Jr.

Evil may so shape events that Caesar will occupy a palace and Christ a cross, but that same Christ will rise up and split history into A.D. and B.C., so that even the life of Caesar must be dated by his name. Yes, “the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.”—Martin Luther King, Jr. (quoting 19^th Century abolitionist Theodore Parker)

I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.—Martin Luther King, Jr., “I Have a Dream”

 

The stone marking where MLK gave his
"I Have a Dream" speech,
in front of the Lincoln Memorial

In 2013 I wrote this in honor of Martin Luther King’s birthday:

MLK, like Gandhi, valued non-violence as a strategy toward change. He stood up for what he believed and was willing to spend time in jail to show his seriousness. That willingness to stand up for principle no matter the unpleasant consequences is something to admire.

MLK was a conservative in many ways that I am. Our Constitution says it guarantees the rights God has given to all human beings. It was not the Constitution that was wrong, but the people in the country who hadn’t opened their eyes to the validity of human rights for all races. So the Constitution was worth conserving. MLK was a Republican, because that party was (and has been, since Lincoln or before) the party ideologically aligned with applying the Constitution to all citizens. Conservatives, half a century ago as well as today, look at MLK’s words, and find resonating truth.

Last year I shared Martin Luther King’s Ten Commandments for those joining him in the nonviolent movement, which bear repeating: 

1.       MEDITATE daily on the teachings and life of Jesus.

2.       REMEMBER always that the nonviolent movement in Birmingham seeks justice and reconciliation—not victory.

3.       WALK and TALK in the manner of love, for God is love.

4.       PRAY daily to be used by God in order that all men might be free.

5.       SACRIFICE personal wishes in order that all men might be free.

6.       OBSERVE with both friend and foe the ordinary rules of courtesy.

7.       SEEK to perform regular service for others and for the world.

8.       REFRAIN from the violence of fist, tongue, or heart.

9.       STRIVE to be in good spiritual and bodily health.

10.   FOLLOW the directions of the movement and of the captain on a demonstration.

It was an advantage that this man was willing to stand, and also had the talent of speaking words that persuaded good people to stand with him. Here are a few more beautiful words from MLK:

There comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular, but he must take it because conscience tells him it is right.

Darkness cannot drive out darkness: only light 

can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate: 

only love can do that.

Faith is taking the first step, even when you don’t see the whole staircase.

The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy.

On the wall of the MLK Memorial in Washington, DC

MLK's Ten Commandments

It’s Martin Luther King Day today. Yesterday I came across a Wallbuilders post in honor of the day. David Barton of Wallbuilders pointed out that he was the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.  There are schools that remove the “Reverend” title out of some misguided idea that mentioning a historical person’s religious affiliation is somehow “establishing” a national religion.

Ten Commandments of Nonviolence
image from here

If that is true of some school—yet another reason to homeschool.

But David Barton went on to share Martin Luther King’s Ten Commandments for those joining him in the nonviolent movement. If we share nothing more about the man today, these Ten Commandments of nonviolence ought to be repeated.

1.       MEDITATE daily on the teachings and life of Jesus.

2.       REMEMBER always that the nonviolent movement in Birmingham seeks justice and reconciliation—not victory.

3.       WALK and TALK in the manner of love, for God is love.

4.       PRAY daily to be used by God in order that all men might be free.

5.       SACRIFICE personal wishes in order that all men might be free.

6.       OBSERVE with both friend and foe the ordinary rules of courtesy.

7.       SEEK to perform regular service for others and for the world.

8.       REFRAIN from the violence of fist, tongue, or heart.

9.       STRIVE to be in good spiritual and bodily health.

10.   FOLLOW the directions of the movement and of the captain on a demonstration.

So, the tenth is directly related to the movement, at that time, in a particular city, so we may not need that right now. And the second is worded as time and place specific as well, but the idea of seeking justice and reconciliation rather than some nebulous idea of victory is still valid.

Not everyone is Christian. Nevertheless, I believe it is true that meditating on the teachings and life of Jesus. The remaining commandments are a pretty good description of what a regular person might work on to be more Christlike—to live a more truly civilized life.

There’s a lot in there about love—even when love isn’t offered in return—and about being kind, courteous, self-restrained, and selfless toward others.

The list I use most often to describe civilized behavior is the summary of the original Ten Commandments: honor God, family, life,property, and truth.

And another good list comes from the description of charity, the pure love of Christ, in I Corinthians 13:

4 Charity suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is    not puffed up,

 5 Doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil;

 6 Rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth;

 7 Beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things.

 8 Charity never faileth

I love the King James English language, but if you need a quick translation, the list is

·         Long suffering

·         Not envious

·         Not self-centered, no over-inflated ego

·         Well-mannered (courteous, kind, modest)

·         Not self-serving

·         Controlled temper

·         Controlled thoughts to avoid evil

·         No joy in doing bad, but joy in finding truth

·         Tolerant and long-suffering

·         Positive, believing, and hopeful

·         Enduring in goodness through life

As Peter taught, “God is no respecter of persons” (Acts 10:34). In the Book of Mormon, Nephi taught the same principle, that God “inviteth them all to come unto him and partake of his goodness; and he denieth none that come unto him, black and white, bond and free, male and female; and he remembereth the heathen; and all are alike unto God, both Jew and Gentile” (2 Nephi 26:33).

The required bahaviors of civilized behavior—leading to the comforts and joys of true civilization—apply to everyone. Live that way, among others who live that way, and you can fully enjoy civilization.

Live that way even when not among others who live that way—and work, as Rev. Martin Luther King did, to persuade others to live that way as well.

That is still a movement to get behind.

Being Extreme

It’s Martin Luther King, Jr., Day. It looks like a good way to celebrate—or educate yourself on the story of the man—is the movie just out called Selma, which focuses on that Alabama city during the civil rights struggle which he led. The previews look good. It got nearly passed over for Academy Award nominations. Some cry racism. But I’m pretty sure that’s not it (refer to 12 Years a Slave last year and The Help from a couple of years back). Glenn Beck surmises that it’s because the hero of the socialist war on poverty, LBJ, is characterized unpleasantly (which historically is probably accurate, even if the actual conversations in the movie are fictionalized).

That's me, standing with MLK

So, enough said for the holiday. I’m going to talk about something else. It’s confession time. I am an extremist. This is news to me, since what I really am is pretty normal except for my willingness to put time and effort into a blog that isn’t on homemaking skills.

Last week I came across a piece listing the various ways the Obama administration has officially warned about domestic terrorism. So I thought I’d helpfully go through the list. (And so there is no mistake, this is to illustrate the absurdity—or frightening intrusiveness into free thought—of this list, rather than to let anyone suppose I have anything but civilized intentions.) I’ll go through the list in order; it’s long, and redundant—not my fault. So you have permission to skim as needed (or take plenty of time and follow all the links). We’ll find out as we go just how many ways the administration deems me, the grandmother/author of The Spherical Model blog, extreme:

1.      √I talk about “individual liberties.” Yes. Yes I do. So does the Constitution.

2.      √I advocate for states’ rights. Yes. I do that too—as is spelled out in the 10^th Amendment, for example.

3.      I do “want to make the world a better place,” but I might not qualify as extreme here. It’s just a general principle, like when you go camping, leave things better than you found them. More suspicious here would be journalism students, who almost unanimously list wanting to make the world a better place as their reason for choosing that field—rather than gathering and sharing truth, which would be a better motive. (Admission: there was a bit of snobbery among English majors toward journalism majors, who would be inferior writers and also less in touch with the themes affecting humanity. Not meant toward individuals, just the overall sense of team superiority.)

4.      √I do believe the colonists mainly came here to “free themselves from British rule.” I think historical documentation from their journals backs that up.

5.      √I’m interested in “defeating Communism.” As an ideology that destroys civilization, and practically defines tyranny, poverty, and savagery, yes, I’d say Communism should be defeated. By word wherever possible. By defensive war where necessary.

6.      √We're considered extreme if we believe “that the interests of one’s own nation are separate from the interests of other nations or the common interest of all nations.” Um. Obviously. Until we have the whole world choosing freedom, prosperity, and civilization—and living by the rules that bring about those positive things, we do our best to get those things locally, statewide, and nationally.

7.      Finally we have one where I don’t qualify: I don’t hold a “political ideology that considers the state to be unnecessary, harmful, or undesirable” per se; I only believe the state/government has a proper role that is limited for good reason. Within the limits, government at its various levels should be both necessary and helpful.

8.      Again, I don’t possess an “intolerance toward other religions.” In my faith, we say, “We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.” (Articles of Faith11)

9.      I do not “take action to fight against the exploitation of the environment and/or animals.” I don’t put metal in trees so that loggers will be harmed or killed during tree harvests. I don’t throw paint on people wearing fur coats or leather. I even agree that those people are wacko extremists. I believe in being a good steward over the earth and the abundance God gave us here, not in attacking people who don't see things my way.

10.  I am not “anti-Gay.” I am, however, pro-traditional marriage, so sometimes people like me get unfairly labeled. Oh well. Marriage is worth standing up for.

11.  I am not “anti-immigrant.” I am, however, pro-border enforcement and pro-LEGAL-immigration. Sometimes people like me get unfairly labeled. No me importa.

12.  I am not “anti-Muslim.” I am, however, very much against what appears to be purposeful misinterpretation of that religion for the sake of murder for power.  I think we should call that Islamist Extremism, and not mislabel it or ignore the obvious.

13.  I don’t know what the administration means by “the patriot movement,” but I am a patriot. I am patriotic. I love my country. I think that’s normal, not extreme.

14.  √“Opposition to equal rights for gays and lesbians” is on the list. As in #10, I’m for equal rights for all Americans. I believe those with same-sex attraction should be allowed to marry any person of the opposite sex who is not married to someone else, who is of age to make the choice freely, and who is not too close a relative—just like the rest of us. I do not think we should change the millennia-old definition of marriage to make a small subset of the population “feel” more included.

15.  I’m not a “member” of the Family Research Council. But I think they’re one of many newsletters I get for my research and information.

16.  I’m not familiar with the American Family Association, but the name sounds appealing.

17.  I do not believe that Mexico, Canada and the United States “are secretly planning to merge into a European Union-like entity that will be known as the ‘North American Union.’” And someone pushing for that strikes me as extreme too. But that doesn’t mean they sound like probable terrorists.

18.  I am not a member of the American Border Patrol/American Patrol. I’m not sure if this refers to actual law-enforcement officials or volunteer groups. But, since the federal government has failed to protect our borders, someone has to do it. Texas as a state is putting big budget toward border protection, as needed.

19.  I am not a member of the Federation for American Immigration Reform, or the inappropriate acronym FAIR, which seems to me more pro-illegal-immigration than pro-American.

20.  I am not a member of the Tennessee Freedom Coalition. I don’t know what it is, and this list is too long for me to spend time finding out right now.

21.  I am not a member of the Christian Action Network. I don’t know what it is, but it doesn’t sound threatening to “truth, justice, and the American way.”

22.  √I am opposed to the New World Order—if that means some kind of world government or controlling entity that is intended to surpass our national sovereignty. Seems like being “for” such a thing might qualify as extreme, though.

23.  I don’t engage in “conspiracy theorizing.” I spend some energy debunking conspiracy theories. Nevertheless, there probably are some conspiring people, and we ought to be constantly vigilant.

24.  √I oppose Agenda 21. I wrote about it in February 2013.

25.  I’m not “concerned about FEMA camps,” but I hope there isn’t reason to be concerned. FEMA wasn’t exactly stellar during the hurricane aftermaths that I have lived through.

26.  √I would resist any “impending gun control or weapons confiscations.” But I live in Texas, so I’m not particularly fearful of that happening.

27.  I’m not part of a “militia movement.” I am in favor of armed citizens, for both hunting and self-protection.

28.  I’m not part of the “sovereign citizen” movement; I don’t know what they mean by that. But I may understand sovereignty and individual rights better than the fretful makers of this list.

29.  I pay taxes, and think we should lawfully do so. I also think the government should return to something like the maximum 7% promised when the income tax was instituted. Or something else more fair.

30.  √I do complain about bias. The extreme socialist “mainstream” media is clearly biased. The evidence is overwhelming. The Eric Holder Justice Department has been clearly biased as well. Being in favor of truth, rather than bias, is a good thing.

31.  I don’t believe in “government conspiracies to the point of paranoia.” Although I am also aware some paranoiacs are being followed.

32.  I don’t know what is meant by “frustrated with mainstream ideologies.” I’m not at all frustrated with Constitutionally limited government, allowing for freedom, prosperity, and civilization; I just think those long-standing ideas should be tried. If by “mainstream” they mean “socialist” or “progressive,” then, yes, I’m fed up with those failing ideologies.

33.  √Do I visit “extremist websites/blogs”? By whose definition? Since this one just got unjustly defined as “extremist,” then, yes. I even venture out to Townhall.com and TheBlaze.com. Oh my!

34.  √And just to rub it in, yes, I have established this blog. Not to establish extremist ideas, but to express truth as best I can. But, by their cockamamie definition….

35.  √I’m not really an attender of “extremist rallies,” but I regularly attend Tea Party meetings and occasional larger rallies, and GOP conventions. (You’re aware terrorists plotted against a GOP convention but were fortunately ratted out? It wasn’t the Republicans who were terrorizing.)

36.  I don’t exhibit extreme religious intolerance. Does this have to make the list in addition to #8?

37.  Am I “personally connected with a grievance”? Don’t think so. That sounds like just about anyone involved in certain aspects of most lawsuits. Right now the answer is no.

38.  What is meant by “suddenly acquires weapons”? If you buy your first gun, for any sporting or safety reason, suddenly you have a gun. If you buy another, maybe a year or two later, suddenly you have acquired another. If they mean suddenly stockpiling trailer-loads of rifles with ammunition, that might qualify—and they should say so, so there’s no misinterpretation damaging to regular law-abiding citizens.

39.  √I’m not planning on organizing a protest; I’m not a “community organizer.”

40.  I’m extreme if I support “militia” or “unorganized militia,” but I already answered #27.

41.  I’m not a “general right-wing extremist.” I’m not even willing to define “right-wing” the way the government does. I think they mean the Nazi version of socialist tyranny, rather than the communist version of socialist tyranny, which would be left-wing. But I’m against tyranny altogether. [See The Spherical Model.]

42.  I don’t have bumper stickers that are “patriotic” or “anti-UN.” I don’t have any bumper stickers, except the one that says “proud parent of a soldier.”

43.  √I do occasionally refer to “army of God,” mainly when we sing the hymn “Onward Christian Soldiers.” But the government has nothing to fear from that. It’s about fighting evil—unless the government does have something to fear from our willingness to fight evil.

44.  I am not “fiercely nationalistic (as opposed to universal and international in orientation).” I believe in using the appropriate viewpoint for any situation—which always means the most local at which an issue can be handled. But who know what they mean?

45.  Nor am I “anti-global”—see #44.

46.  √I am “suspicious” of centralized federal authority—because that’s necessary when the federal government has drastically overreached it’s proper role.

47.  √I am “reverent of individual liberty.” I think that’s a lovely way to put it. And not extreme.

48.  I don’t believe in untrue “conspiracy theories.” See #23, #31. (Are they unnecessarily lengthening this ridiculously long list—which doesn’t even mention “believing in Islamic terrorist jihad?”)

49.  √Do I believe my “personal and/or national ‘way of life’ is under attack”? Yes. Obamacare, for starters.

50.  √I try to be prepared. We have food storage. We have camping equipment. My Church has been preaching preparedness for about a century. It helps us during all kinds of disasters, and helps us have resources to help others following disasters. Am I poised for paramilitary response? No.

51.  Am I a fundamentalist religionist who would impose religious laws on society? I don’t think so. I’m against Sharia; I’m for the Ten Commandments as guidelines for our laws.

52.  Am I one who would “insert religion into the political sphere”? They interrelate. That’s what The Spherical Model is about. But I believe we need to decide our laws as locally as possible, based on the choices of those in the community, and based on principles that bring about civilization (again, start with the Ten Commandments.) I don’t think we should prohibit the mention of religious beliefs in public. And a politician without religion is pretty much just a power monger.

53.  Nor do I want to politicize religion. Big no.

54.  √I don’t know what is meant by “supported political movements for autonomy.” I think I would have favored the American Revolution, to gain independence from Britain.

55.  √I am anti-abortion. As are a majority of civilized mainstream Americans, including a growing percentage of young people. The list makers are worried about people who want to protect the innocent unborn, but they’re not worried about baby killers? Really?

56.  I am not anti-Catholic. But, according to #55, the government is against Catholic anti-abortion beliefs, so…

57.  I am not anti-nuclear. I’d be in favor of greater use of nuclear energy. It’s the government that halted permits for building nuclear plants for 30 years. Does that put the government on the domestic terror watch list, then?

58.  I’m not a “right-wing extremist.” I reject the right/left model in favor of the Spherical Model. And I am against all forms of southern hemisphere tyranny. See #41.

59.  I am not a returning veteran. I have a son deployed overseas in the Army. When he returns, I expect he’ll be safe, patriotic, and pro-American. (Although I couldn’t speak to his possible loss of respect for the current commander-in-chief; I know I lack respect for that person.)

60.  √I am concerned about “illegal immigration.” I live in Texas. And the federal government has failed in its basic role of border security. I would like to see legal immigration improved, less bureaucratic, less onerous to those willing to come legally and become true Americans.

61.  √I believe in the right to bear arms. It’s one of those God-given rights that went without saying, but that got put into the Bill of Rights, just in case there came a time when power seekers tried to rule over this free people.

62.  No, I don’t think I have what would qualify as an ammunition stockpile.

63.  √I don’t know what “exhibits fear of Communist regimes” looks like. I don’t think I “exhibit” such fears. But I think communist and any other type of tyranny is dangerous and to be resisted.

64.  I’m anti-abortion; I don’t think I qualify as an “activist.” I already answered #55.

65.  √Again, I’m against “illegal immigration”—because it’s illegal. I already answered #60.

66.  √If I were to talk about the “New World Order,” it would be in a derogatory manner. Because there’s nothing good there. I prefer American Constitutional freedom to succumbing to world domination. Until the Second Coming when Christ reigns personally upon the earth; I trust Him as my just ruler.

67.  √I have a negative view of the United Nations. I think it’s a perverse joke. (Extremist Charles Krauthammer agrees, and wrote why way back in 2003.)

68.  I’m not opposed to the collection of federal income taxes. But, like I said, they should be much much much less than they are. I already answered #29.

69.  Apparently I’d be dangerous if I had supported former presidential candidates Ron Paul, Chuck Baldwin, or Bob Barr. I like a lot about Ron Paul on economic issues and for discussions about the Constitution, but we disagree on foreign policy. I don’t know who Chuck Baldwin is. But Bob Barr I believe was the Libertarian Party candidate in 2008 (maybe other times). Considering your choices were Barack Obama or John McCain, Bob Barr might have been a reasonable alternative—especially someplace like Arizona, where it would count as a protest vote without helping Obama. Lots of mainstream Americans look at things that way, without veering toward terrorism.

70.  I don’t actually display the “Gadsden flag,” “Don’t Tread on Me.” But it’s historical, part of the American Revolutionary War. I wouldn’t be ashamed to display it. It was reinterpreted into a little flag used for campaigning by now-Governor Greg Abbott some years back, which I kept as a souvenir of that year’s state GOP convention.

71.  √I do believe in “end times prophecies.” I don’t happen to know when the end is coming. So for me, living a good life every day seems like a good plan, so I can see it as a “great” rather than “dreadful” day (Malachi 4:5.

72.  I’m not an Evangelical Christian. I’m a Mormon. Some Evangelicals try to define me as not even Christian, but they’re wrong. But for the most part, I think they’re good, mainstream family-oriented Americans, and not worthy of the terrorist label.

So, it’s hard to tally. I make the watch list at least 28 times. Roughly 39% of the possibilities for domestic terrorism. Even though I’m about as non-violent as they come, and as in favor of peace, freedom, prosperity, and civilization.

What I am is a mainstream American thinker. I pay more attention than many, and therefore have more reason to complain about what we see the federal government doing, beyond its proper role.

There is no end of irony to a government which would come up with a list that totally fails to include the source of 99% of terrorism in the world today. The enemy cannot be mentioned, but we’re labeled as enemies of the state—for having opinions in line with our beautiful founding documents.