kayyebeeh-blog - Tumblr blog

[kayyebeeh-blog]

Amen

[kayyebeeh-blog]

No Justice, Just US.

Today I get on Facebook and the first thing I see is a fellow high school alum SHOT and killed in the city I grew up in. The first thing I thought was this man was a dedicated husband and father who would ever harm him. Lost for words I read tons of RIP post left on his page and I start to cry. Remembering last year…See just last year I lost a friend. He was murdered in Canada. He was playing professional football there. His team decided to go out and celebrate a teammate’s birthday with drinks at the bar one weekend. He was not someone who liked confrontation he was a peace keeper. He loved being around positive energy and good vibes. After enjoying a good time with his team he leaves the bar and where he was gunned down in cold blood. KILLED.

The right to bare arms---but what do we do when people do not properly use their firearms? I respect protection and self-defense, however in society now people are using them for foul reasons.

In this 2008 Supreme court case District of Columbia v Heller, The Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to possess firearms. Going through the necessary process of obtaining your gun permit, taking gun safety course and buying a gun legally should be enough…right? Nope no one should be able to have guns in their home, well that’s what the District of Columbia believed until this case come through the Supreme court. In this case Heller a special policeman requested to carry a handgun for self-defense purposes. District of Columbia currently had a law that banned handgun possession which made it a crime to carry an unregistered firearm and prohibited the registration of handguns. There was a way to still practice your second amendment though. You just have to go to the police chief, who’s easy to meet with, and request the police chief to issue 1-year licenses. Then once you get approved you are required  to keep your firearm unloaded, dissembled or bound by a trigger lock. Heller applied to register a handgun he wanted to keep at home, but he was denied. He filed a suit, on Second Amendment grounds, “to enjoin the city from enforcing the bar on handgun registration, the licensing requirement insofar as it prohibits carrying an unlicensed firearm in the home.” The courts ruled in favor of Heller expressing that the city’s total ban on handguns, as well as its requirement that firearms in the home be kept nonfunctional even when necessary for self-defense, violated that right.

Did they make the right decision? I would have to disagree. I’m pretty sure majority of handgun owners are not following keeping their firearms at home yet alone keeping their firearms nonfunctional. I know I would keep my gun loaded living in this society. Who can blame them when every time you turn around you hear about a violent incident involving firearms.

As a social worker how am I suppose to support a law that has not supported the wrongful murders of so many people. If we truly have policy that is for self-defense why don’t justice serve those who are using firearms innapporiately?

Right to bare arms---needs to be reexamine in this society.

Rest peacefully to all the people who are impacted by a loss of a loved one through gun violence. Prayers to you.

-K.Brown

 For more information about gun laws and gun control please check out the link below:

https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/554/570/

https://www.smith-wesson.com/safety/product-safety-information

http://blacklivesmatter.com/about/

[kayyebeeh-blog]

Where do we draw the line?: Freedom of speech

Healthcare is a hot topic right now in the court as it has always been. This subject of healthcare is something people feel strongly against or supportive for. The first amendment is one that shows up in court cases often. I personally believe in everyone having freedom of speech but what are the limitations that come with that right? I think this amendment becomes a problem when people are forcibly sharing their opinions to others who did not ask to hear them. One thing that is always up for discussion is Planned Parenthood and anti-abortion opinions. A lot of people fail to mention when debating Pro- Life opinions that it is a requirement to inform patients that are receiving an abortion. Patients have to go through counseling to understand all your options available for pregnant women. These options being discussed in counseling are the same “opinions” Pro-Life protesters are trying to speak about. A lot of situations they try to persuade their values in order to stop women from getting abortions. In the past a lot of states experienced continuous incidents involving violent and aggressive behavior outside of abortion clinics because of Pro-Life protesters “act” on their first amendment right. However freedom of speech and violence are too different things. Massachusetts is one of those states that has experiences multiple violent incidents outside of abortion clinics and that’s probably why this court case received a lot of attention.

In the case McCullen v. Coakley, Eleanor McCullen and the other petitioners are individuals who attempt to engage women approaching Massachusetts abortion clinics in “sidewalk counseling,” which involves offering information about alternatives to abortion and help pursuing those options. They claim that the 35-foot buffer zones have displaced them from their previous positions outside the clinics, considerably hampering their counseling efforts. Their attempts to communicate with patients are further thwarted, they claim, by clinic “escorts,” who accompany arriving patients through the buffer zones to the clinic entrances. The amended version of the Act makes it a crime to knowingly stand on a “public way or sidewalk” within 35 feet of an entrance or driveway to any “reproductive health care facility,” defined as “a place, other than within or upon the grounds of a hospital, where abortions are offered or performed.” The attorney argued that “the government may impose reasonable restrictions on the time, place, or manner of protected speech, provided the restrictions ‘are justified without reference to the content of the regulated speech, that they are narrowly tailored to serve a significant governmental interest, and that they leave open ample alternative channels for communication of the information.” The courts ruled against Eleanor’s favor. Do you think this was the right decision?

As a social worker I completely understand both opinions and values both sides have however personally I wish people would stop expressing that Planned Parenthood is strictly an abortion clinic. Planned Parenthood provides a variety of reproductive services and in reality abortions are only about 3% of services they provide. As a social worker I understand that no matter what your values are that should not affect the services you provide for others. Also continuing to oppress these women through determining what they can do with their RIGHT of their bodies is not ethically acceptable. I think this court case showed an understanding of the Planned Parenthood organization and made the correct ruling in this case. Finally, the overall well-being of individuals social services serve is important to remember in this profession. Protesters outside of these clinics could threaten the well-being of these women who are seeking services from any abortion clinic. It is our responsible to make the environment of our clients as safe as possible and I believe the courts did that through ruling against Pro-Life protesters in this situation.

Food for thought:  If you are going to share your values, opinions, and views on a topic do accurately. Also forcing people to listen to an opinion they do not want to hear is not OKAY. Let people live and make decisions for themselves. Find another way to express your “Freedom of speech”…write in a journal or social media works lol.

If you want more information regarding the case or services Planned Parenthood provides click the links below:

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/13pdf/12-1168_6k47.pdf

https://www.plannedparenthood.org/

https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/12-1168

-K.Brown

[kayyebeeh-blog]

...with liberty and justice for SOME.

I remember my mom teaching me to never say the Pledge of Allegiance in school.  “’With liberty and justice for all’ is bullshit, Juliana. It’s bullshit. This country doesn’t care about everyone. Sure, there’s liberty and justice for some, but not for all. Don’t ever believe that.”

That stuck close to me. That stuck close to me when I saw white people fawning over the golden shade of my brown skin while simultaneously asking if I “belonged” in the accelerated classes. I was that kid in class that never stood up for the Pledge. There were those few teachers that made me stand, and I would say “with liberty and justice for some”. Heads would turn, eyes would roll. They just didn’t understand, and I didn’t expect them to if their liberty and justice was never in jeopardy, or never would be.

Glossip v. Gross. Oklahoma State Penitentiary. April 2014. Clayton Lockett , a black man, was executed using a three-drug lethal injection procedure.  Lockett awoke after being injected and didn’t die for almost an hour instead of dying immediately. Over twenty death row inmates sued the state and argued that execution protocol violated the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment.

Half of the death row inmates in Oklahoma are black men. 

The Supreme Court voted and declined to grant the petition. One of the inmates that sued the state was executed in the same manner shortly after. His last words? “My body is on fire.”

Justice was not served.

“Why would the Supreme Court care though?” “Someone’s loved one was taken from them.” “They’re on death row for a reason - justice WAS served.”

….

No. Justice was NOT served. A human being suffering for almost an hour at the hands of the state is a clear violation of his civil rights and of the law. But somehow, the American people have forgotten that inmates are human beings. The American people have forgotten that inmates have rights. The American people have forgotten that for every 9 people executed in this country, 1 is innocent. The American people have forgotten that those who kill white people are more likely to be sentenced to death than those who kill black people. Clayton Lockett was someone’s son, maybe someone’s husband. I think that being in federal prison for life is enough punishment for any crime committed. I am completely against the death penalty in this country and find the act in itself to be cruel and unusual. I can’t wrap my head around taking one life as punishment for the loss of another. 

Capital punishment does not deter crime, nor does it revive anyone back to life. it repeats a vicious cycle of violence and vengeance. Those who are imprisoned are not a threat to our citizens. I don’t think that there is really any way to pay reparations to the families and loved ones of murder victims. So why would we risk the mental health of correctional offers involved in these executions, and the families and loved ones of those being executed, in an attempt to do so?

For more information on this Supreme Court case:

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/us/major-supreme-court-cases-in-2015.html

https://www.oyez.org/cases/2014/14-7955

https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/race-death-row-inmates-executed-1976

[kayyebeeh-blog]

Don’t Let Our Hair Divide Us – poem by Carolyn Hopkins

We as black women should not let our hair be the dividing element that destroys our development. Our hair is a unique blend of the diverse experience we have experienced in America.

It is an expression of our horrific history that at times, the white system has used to destroy Sister Unity. Yes, our hair defines us, but it should not deny us the right to wear it any way we want.

After all, when we look into the magazines of America, we see what has been believed to be beautiful, and then wonder if we are okay– yes, we may say we are okay, but when we search within and find that dilemma that makes us wonder if we should blend the nappy with the straight in order to relate to a world that has denied our beauty from the very beginning, then our hair still is a difficult and complex issue.

Deep down we wonder if our men like it straight and blowing in the wind, and then after feeling its awesome texture, we fall in love with that glorious natural; yet when we stand against the world, the eyes of society don’t often see our natural halo as beauty.

And then we rush back to the straight hoping that this will dictate that we must compete in a competitive world; but blackness is a state of mind– the color or length or texture of our hair really cannot be defined; the decision is ours– we might plague it for hours, for in the end what should really matter is the genuine love we have for our God-given hair.

Carolyn Hopkins

[kayyebeeh-blog]

Hair Problems? Nah player

When you’re getting ready to go to a professional meeting, job interview, or even school what’s your process for preparing for it? I pick out my clothes, iron the wrinkles out, and find what shoes I’m wearing. Of course I do my make up for about 45 minutes because I need my face to be BEAT! Then I face a dilemma with my hair. To a lot of y’all this might not sound like a problem at all but to a BLACK woman in America people have a hard time accepting our natural hair. In many workplaces there are certain grooming policies that discriminates against race, culture, and appearance. You may think race does not play a factor at all but it’s REAL. Jobs tend to use terms like “neat” and “professional” which we often see natural black hairstyles not fitting in those terms based on subjective definitions.  I read stories on social media too often regarding discrimination due to appearance in professional environments. Since I was a young girl my mom taught me to conform to society’s standard regarding appearance when it comes to potential jobs and careers. So I pull it to the back in a bun or straighten my hair which I may add, I HATE doing. But I continuously do because I never was to experience how it feels to be denied an opportunity I am qualified for because of my appearance.

In a Massachusetts high school two girls were suspended from school for their hair being in braids which violated the schools policy against hair extensions. One of the young girls expresses, "The school doesn’t appreciate my culture which is my hair and it makes me feel like they just want us out more than just for the reason of our hair. It’s our skin color that they want out of the school.” Sad...I know right. Sad that society continues to not accept different cultures.

In 2013  the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed Jones’ Equal Employment Opportunity Commission regarding a policy forbidding dreadlocks in the workplace. Dreadlocks trace back culturally to people of African descent. Dreadlocks have showed up in stories more often than other hairstyles including extensions and hair color. I personally think since majority of the people who wear dreadlocks are black these policies were formed to deny jobs to people of color. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission claimed, “hairstyle can be a determinant of racial identity.” 

Minorities continues to experience discrimination due to appearance. A Muslim woman wore a head scarf to a job interview at Abercrombie & Fitch and was denied the job because of it. The 2015 case Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores, INC. They solely denied this woman a job due to her appearance never thinking about if her head scarf was a part of a religious practice. Title VII protects those who requires religious accommodation for a religious practice and this employer did not even attempt to determine or simply ask if she would require religious accommodation resulting in the decision to not hire her. 

After reading about these cases and stories I can’t help but wonder if men who embrace their culture feel discriminated against. I wonder if jobs enforces grooming policies of bare face (no facial hair) like the army does. What else does not fit into society’s norms of “acceptable” and “attractive?” Finally, Why do we have to conform to society’s standards to make us look “professional?” So let me ask you, “Does my natural hair offend you? Nah player

-K. Brown

If you want to learn more about these cases and stories check out the links:

http://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/files/201413482.pdf

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14pdf/14-86_p86b.pdf

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/nbcblk/parents-outraged-over-school-s-discriminatory-racist-dress-code-n759821