Recently, the fact that gay people are born with their orientation has taken off in the media. It’s increased prominence can be seen in the popularity of the song “Born this Way” by the singer-songwriter, Lady Gaga, and the rise in the number of articles and blog-posts dealing with the subject. In many ways, this is a good thing. It can be seen as an affirmation of the fact that there’s nothing wrong with being gay and as a celebration of gay identity. However, as a defence against conservative attacks, I think that it is a rather weak argument.

Stating that gay people were born with their orientation seems like the perfect counter to the conservative argument that being gay is a choice, but this life-affirming rebuttal opens the door to other attacks. Following this exchange conservatives will rightly point out, though rarely eloquently, that paedophiles are most likely born with their “orientation”, but that being born so doesn’t make their behaviour justifiable. The most common response to this is that the the two orientations aren’t equatable. The problem is this: If you base your argument that being gay is perfectly acceptable on premise that gay people are born with their orientation, then these two orientations do become equatable. In fact, if you base your argument on such a premise, then heterosexuality and paedophilia also become equatable. After all, anyone of either orientation were born the way they are.

Fortunately, there is a simple way to eliminate this problem: Unlike paedophilia, neither being gay or being straight are intrinsically harmful. Therefore, there is nothing wrong with being either gay or straight as there is with engaging in paedophilia. I hope that this analogy will expand this line of thinking:

 Both baseball and war involve tactics and strategy. However, unlike war, baseball is not intrinsically harmful. Therefore, there is nothing wrong with playing baseball.

 The beauty of this argument is threefold. Firstly, it neatly side-steps any unfortunate comparisons. Secondly, it’s a rather libertarian argument, which conservatives purport to support in other matters. Thirdly, it eliminates the choice argument that conservatives put forward by making it irrelevant if being gay is a choice or not. It boils the whole think down into a debate about freedom. Something that conservatives, if they believe their own rhetoric, should support.

Frankly, I think that this is a far superior argument than simply stating that gay people are born that way.

What makes this situation even more intolerable is that I hate waking up too. For me, waking up involves roughly the same amount of willpower as it does to climb Mt. Everest. A slow, sluggish journey through the hellish terrain of semi-conciousness, occasionally accompanied by a sharp, short headache and blurred vision.

Another aspect of sleep that gets on my nerves is the sheer waste of time involved. Those 6-9 hours? I could be doing something with them! Something important, something fun, something interesting. Well, as a serial procrastinator, perhaps not. I’d probably end up bouncing from website to website, cursing my luck for having nothing to do. So, it’d be more accurate to say that I hate that sleep gets in the way of me possibly doing something worthwhile, rather than it actually getting in the way of me doing something worthwhile. Despite this, it still gets on my nerves.

Well, what if we could reduce our need for sleep or even eliminate it completely? The idea isn’t as far-fetched as it sounds. Thai Ngoc, a 68 year old Vietnamese farmer, has gone without sleep for nearly 40 years. He gained this strange ability in 1973, following a bout of fever. Even more remarkable is that he has apparently suffered no detrimental mental or physical effects from his sleepless hours. What if we could replicate these conditions in others? What if we could create people that need no sleep? What of we could create a society that needs no sleep?

As in turns out, we can… To an extent. Recently, there has been a lot of time and effort put into researching a class of drugs known as eugeroics. These nifty chemicals have become known as wakefullness-promoting agents due to their ability to stave off sleep in those that use them. More importantly, these drugs, unlike other stimulants such as caffeine, are virtually non-addicting and do not result in the formation of a sleep debt. This means that with eugeroics you can go without sleep for two days and then sleep for your normal 6-9 hours and feel fine, whereas with caffeine you may spend 16 hours slumped over the side of a couch and feel terrible after it too. Of course, these drugs are mostly used to treat disorders such as narcolepsy. However, as I’m sure you can see, they have other applications as well.

Military usage is one of the more obvious applications. A soldier that never sleeps? I think that was the basis of an X-Files episode. Another application is for work. I mean, who wouldn’t want to reduce the hours that they sleep to put in a few extra hours to impress the boss? Who wouldn’t want to earn more commission? The problem is that once this starts there’s no going back. Pretty soon you could be frowned at for only working 20 hours a day. What are you? Lazy? Don’t tell me that you need to sleep. The potential abuses of these drugs, especially in a corporate centred culture, are immense.

Another problem with these drugs is that they don’t replace sleep. They trick your brain into thinking it has slept. The subtle effects of sleep deprivation, such as immune dysfunction, metabolism issues and potentially depression, will still be present. To be precise, eugeroics have allowed for the future possibility of a world populated by sickly, fat, depressive workaholics. Great job, science!

The truth, as much as I hate to admit it, is that sleep is important. As long as we do not fully understand the human brain and body, then we are stuck with sleep. So when the logo-emblazoned mountebank on the street corner tries to sell me their miracle cure, I’ll declare my opposition, pull out a pillow and try to will myself to sleep.

A good portion of speaking will consist in knowing how to lie.
~Desiderius Erasmus

Welcome back to a new chapter of Exploring Morality. In this chapter we will be discussing truth, lies, and deception. A complex subject full of grey areas. Again I will try to keep it as simple as possible, since I myself am new to the subject, and maybe provide a few funny quotes underneath some pictures. I will provide as many links as possible so anyone wishing to pursue this topic further can gather some information. So let’s begin.

There many types of lies, ranging from seemingly harmless white lies to to ethically questionable “big lies”. The reasons for lying are far more numerous. Sometimes we just don’t want to reveal certain information to someone and, though we don’t want to outright deceive the person, we may choose to not venture the full truth. We lie to save people grief and we lie to visit grief on people. On the outside lying may seem to have a dichotomy to it, allowing it to be used for good, but some argue that even well intentioned lies add to a sense of distrust that can only harm the whole of society. Many kids learn a lesson in deception early on when they discover there is no Santa Claus/Easter Bunny/Tooth Fairy. It is very much a harmless white lie intended to give children a sense of wonder and “magic” in the world. Most children figure things out for themselves and often times no damage is done. Some psychiatrists think children are more focused on the act of gift giving and when they realize their elderly, red suited benefactor is actually their parents, they don’t really seem to care.

 

Mostly because children have an implicit trust of their parents. Anyways, lying is a natural development in all of us. Many psychologists believe children begin developing what is called,  Machiavellian intelligence, at around the age of 4 and a  half. The ability to lie convincingly. Before this age they have little ability to judge whether a statement will be thought truthful or not.  They just expect everyone to see things the way they do. But once they do begin to understand how lying works, they still don’t have the moral framework to best decide when and how to use it. Children could be classified as borderline sociopaths but, they’re just children. They don’t know any better. Lying to avoid punishment is all that matters. Lies that hurt or damage other people are never thought through because they have no understanding of their actions. Children do have great memories though.  Our memory loses some of it’s punch as we age and we retain our highest volume of information as a child. This, combined with a very active imagination, can lead to some very amusing stories standing over a broken vase.

 

"I keep telling you. No one is buying the story about Gandalf showing up and leading you on a magical adventure across the bedroom."

 

No one is really taught how to lie. You can learn how to lie well, but the concept of lying comes to everyone naturally,  pretty early in life. It seems to be a natural part of our development and we have to take this into account when discussing the moral boundaries of lying. Philosophers from Aristotle to Immanuel Kant have all declared lying to be absolutely immoral. The argument is that any lie perverts speech and diminishes overall trust in society. Even if it meant facing death or torture, they believed you should never lie. This is  a form of moral absolutism. The belief that the immoral act of lying is wrong no matter the intention and, therefore, one should never lie. There are utilitarian and consequentialist   schools of thought which hold that lying is morally good if it achieves a morally correct end.

A very well known, and often cited, example of this is the ordeal of Anne Frank and the Frank family.  For 2 years she and her family were hidden from Nazi soldiers and police inside secret rooms in her father’s office building in Belgium. Many, many times various people lied and deceived the Nazi forces looking not just for her but many Jewish families hidden all over Europe. At some point, someone told the authorities the truth and they were taken away to a concentration camp. According to Aristotle and Kant, the “betrayal” of the Frank family was actually a morally righteous act and the hiding of these families was the true immoral action. But, anyone not locked in a tiny room for years on end, praying for their life, has plenty of freedom to decide who is right and who is wrong.

Immanuel Kant: Brilliant philosopher. Kind of a dick.

 

Let’s  talk about deception. Deception isn’t necessarily lying.  You can deceive people with the truth. Or, the amount of truth you wish them to know at that time. Half-truths and lying by omission are examples  of “lies” that may contain some truth in them. A half-truth is just what it sounds like. It’s  a lie that has pieces of truth in it. Lying by omission is a standard form of lying in the corporate world. Again, it’s a way of concealing something while still providing bits of truth. Take the Iraq war. Saying that Saddam Hussein HAD WMDs is not a lie. But it was framed in a way to lead yo to believe he still possessed them. Certain facts where omitted in favor of a more agreeable narrative. Deception. But, as Sun Tzu said; “All war is deception.”

 

And it’s true. Most of our logistical power in WW 2   was centered around deceiving Axis forces.  Blinding them to troop movement and positions, disseminating false assumptions among the opposing leadership,  and good old fashioned sabotage. Deception is a part of everyday life though.  Sometimes for good,often times for evil. A placebo is a kind of deception. The drug itself does nothing. It’s just sugar water. But you don’t know that. It’s all an attempt to fool you into believing you are being healed. The overwhelming success of placebos has led many to believe that the mind, and a person’s attitude, play a large role in recovering from injury and disease. Physical therapy and rehabilitation is just as much about improving mental conditions as it is physical conditions.

Half truths are the tool of the politician. A seemingly truthful statement that carries some bit of deception with it. For example, when Republicans say the country has amassed more debt under President Obama than the entire previous decade, the statement appears true. But they fail to mention that most of that debt pertains to policies from the previous administration. A half truth. It’s a common ploy in politics. Like talking about SS  and debt in our economy when SS has few ties to the federal debt. It’s deception with the “truth”.

Is there such a thing as a “necessary lie”? I’d like to pull an example from pop culture if you’ll indulge me. In the movie Dark Knight Gotham District Attorney Harvey Dent’s face is horribly disfigured by fire and it drives him insane. He “falls from grace” and begins killing people he feels are responsible. The only people who know what is really happening are Batman and police commissioner Jim Gordon. In the end Dent is killed in a final confrontation with Batman. To keep peace and stability in the city Batman assumes blame for all of Dent’s crimes and the tragic circumstances of his death are covered up. Dent is buried as a  hero to the people of Gotham. It was a necessary lie. A case where the truth  could have been 100 times more damaging than the lie.  It’s not uncommon to allow people to believe something that isn’t true simply because it will maintain peace or the truth is so benign or similar that it it irrelevant  in the end.

So now I would love to know what you think.  Is lying always wrong or can good be accomplished by it? It seems that lying develops naturally, very early in our lives. Does that mean lying is just a natural thing or is it a perversion of language as some would say? As usual, being a consequentialist, it all depends on the ends. If lying will help you achieve a noble goal, lie your ass off. Do you lie often? Would you consider yourself an honest person? And yes, we’re counting white lies.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Have you ever been to Costco on the weekend? If not, you are missing a great opportunity to view a regularly scheduled allegory for American society.

On the weekend, sample trays and exhibits for a variety of foods and products are set up on various aisles throughout the store. From pot stickers to lime yogurt, from swiss cheese to coconut water, a diverse cornucopia of free food is presented to the public, intended to convince the public of what they should buy.

Who doesn’t like something being offered for free? In fact, many people eat samples of things they don’t really like simply because it’s free (“Aw, what the hell, I’ll try the green tea flavored seaweed crisp!”). It would be an interesting social experiment to set up a stand there offering samples of “Cardboard Quesadillas”, cardboard sandwiching melted cheese, just to see how many people would try it despite being fully aware of what it is.

There is a kind of hunter-gatherer thing going on with people at Costco, once they realize or remember that there is free food to graze, they’re casually spying around corners, cruising up towards a sample table as if they don’t need a free snack then snapping it up without making eye contact with the preparer. People are magnetically attracted, waiting in swarms for the next plate of samples to be offered. When the samples are ready, hands swoop in swiftly like eagles snatching up prey…with some bewildered eagles left momentarily hovering over the barren plain below.

Some folks act casually, as if it’s no big deal if they get a paper cup of scissor-cut chimichanga or not, others roll their cart past those waiting and just snatch a piece as they roll on (often older ladies). Some allow others to go first, others take several samples for themselves, leaving none for others.

Our Weekend at Costco is a ready allegory or at least sample of our consumer society, particularly when it comes to how people interact with the society around them.

Primarily, there is the ready consumption of whatever is freely offered. This aspect of consumerism isn’t necessarily confined to one type of product or another, whether at a sample table at Costco or on one’s television. For example, whatever the MSM offers as news to the public, is just as immediately consumed without much discernment. After consuming, the result may be, “That left a bad taste in my mouth” but no matter how bad that “byte” of news  was, it is still consumed and is still being digested.

So, the public consumes things sometimes solely because they are readily available. This can be bad for one’s physical or mental health as the old adage, “You are what you eat,” is quite accurate, as anyone who’s seen McDonalds frequenters who’ve squeezed their Big Mac shaped body into a bathing suit at the beach can attest.

Consuming something based on it’s availability instead of the quality of it’s ingredients or the reputation of its manufacturer necessarily puts the decision making of what one consumes into the hands of the entity that can make it most available. Such an entity may have little  concern for what substance is in what’s being consumed. In fact, it means greater profit for that entity to manufacture a product as quickly and cheaply as possible regardless of the value of its content. Investing time to improve the quality of a product, when the key selling point of that product is availability, would appear to most businesses to be a waste of resources and a loss of profits.

So, applying this to the MSM news industry, the cheapest way that they can fill their “sample tray” with tasty treats for the public makes the most sense. Analysis, investigative reporting and critical thinking invested before presenting the free news-nibblies for the public is seen by the corporate management as wasteful and they’re proven right each time the public devours their empty-caloried offerings. There is little incentive to produce a higher or more conscientious quality of news for consumption if what can be produced cheaply and of minimal quality is always gobbled right up.

Pundits seem to be most like the folks who cut lines to grab the samples ahead of others, selfishly intent on just filling their own bellies. They thrive on the cheapness of news, with so little substance or perspective in it, they happily fill that void with their own ego.  And the public is ultimately left to watch such self-centered people happily continue on while the public is left with nothing of substance.

The way people respond, individually and as a group, to certain stimulus can be consistent despite the difference in the specifics at hand. When it comes to consumption, of food or information, there are similarities in how people behave and are motivated to consume. The billions that have been spent over decades, through market research and through measuring the results of consumption through profits and ratings, have made the corporations that sell to you (as consumers and voters), experts in knowing what buttons are most effective to push to get the desired response from people.

The one thing that sabotages all of this is awareness. Once a person or the public becomes aware that their behavior is being triggered or exploited intentionally by others or they become critical of how they’ve allowed themselves to behave, they can retake the power that’s been robbed from them.

When it comes to news, one can’t watch nonstop coverage of Weinergate then complain about the media spending time on it instead of far more important and urgent matters. If folks choose to pass by the sample table when childish flirting “scandals”  were being offered and instead gathered around the Climate Change demo table or another table with something of more substance to offer, there would be tastes of more worthwhile things in the following weeks.

Consumers ultimately have control over what is sold to them based upon what they choose to consume…or not consume.

Just something to chew on…

I read Marion’s recent article, Bageant and Webb: Virginia Will Miss ‘em, several times and failed to come away with the same sense of regional attack that others did. Perhaps, coming from the South, I viewed the comments filtered through a certain culture lens.  (Or perhaps I’m just slow.  You know how we Southerners are.  )  In either event, I recognized the views expressed about ‘coastal elites’ as those as expressed by people with whom I grew up. Marion’s article generated a good deal of comment and it brought back some long-buried memories. I’d like to share a bit about my upbringing in good ol’ boy country… southern Mississippi during the 1950’s and 60’s.

I found this definition of good ol’ boy on the web: a white male Southerner with an unpretentious convivial manner and conservative or intolerant attitudes and a strong sense of fellowship with and loyalty to other members of his peer group. These are the people around whom I was raised – a mix of contrasts, a study in gentility and grace one moment juxtaposed against virulent racism and violence the next.

Children were schooled in manners from an early age. I remember when my uncle introduced me at the ripe old age of 8 to one of his associates; I subsequently received a harsh lecture about the importance of not giving a limp handshake. I remember my uncle’s words clearly. “When you shake a man’s hand, you shake it. By God, you grab ‘hold of him and let him know that there’s a “man” on the other end of that handshake. Do you understand me, boy?” I had embarrassed my uncle within his peer group. I had never, ever in my short life been spoken to like this. My uncle was visibly angry. I had violated the ‘code.’ More lessons would follow.

In many respects, my aunt and uncle did more active “parenting” than my biological parents. My uncle had a firm code by which he lived, a work ethic and unshakeable conviction of what it meant to be a man. He was determined to instill the right character traits in me early on – to make sure I grew up to be a proper Southern man.

I got my first job at the age of ripe old age of 8 or 9. My job was to water my uncle’s chickens. He raised premium fighting cocks. Upon showing myself dependable, I was given $40 dollars at the end of the year in a small ceremony around their kitchen table. I’d never seen so much money. It never occurred to me when I accepted the job that I was going to be paid. Not only was I paid, but I was promoted.

The next year I got to mow my aunt and uncle’s lawn AND the half-acre of land housing the chickens. The thing about chickens is they poop a lot. And this poop will make the grass grow so fast you can almost see it happening. Chicken manure is powerful stuff. I probably weighed all of 70 pounds and I was pushing a Big Wheel Yazoo mower through chicken poop-enhanced Johnson grass using a mower that weighed as much or more than I did.

I understood that my uncle raised, sold and gambled on his fighting cocks. I understood the sport (and what he did) was illegal, although I did not witness my one-and-only cock fight in the Mississippi Piney Woods until I was much older.

I understood from my uncle the concept of honor… doing the right thing. I noted the contradictions, but they did not seem to be contradictions at the time. You could be an honorable man and break the law, too – like when he took me to buy his daily bottle of Jim Beam whiskey at the local bootlegger’s. Our county was “dry,” but there was always whiskey – even for me when I got a cold. Peppermint candy dissolved in whiskey makes a beautifully syrupy drink that soothes a sore throat. And besides, my uncle and the sheriff were buddies at the local Shriners Hall and EVERYBODY there had whiskey. Thus, I learned there were laws that it was OK to break and laws that should not be broken. I decided all this ‘code’ stuff was pretty complicated.

When new neighbors moved in across the street, the moving van was still in front of the house when my aunt immediately began baking a casserole to take to them. It was just what one did. And when one of my aunt’s black housekeeper became ill, my aunt cooked for her. But — the food she took over was delivered in special dishes. I learned that it was important to keep the dishes of white folk and black folk separate. And my uncle, too, would work side-by-side with the ‘minority help’ and treat them sternly, but respectfully – even though my uncle was a fierce racist and would belittle Blacks when none were present. As long as Blacks followed the ‘code,’ (did not call at the front door, behaved in a subservient manner, etc.) my uncle played the role of benevolent overseer.

In 50’s and 60’s Mississippi, the races operated within prescribed boundaries. “Whites Only” water fountains were to be observed. Blacks were not allowed in the white section of the movie theater. White women were to be treated with the utmost respect by Black men. And for Blacks that did not conform to the established code of behavior, well there were other “remedies.”

When I was in the seventh grade, my family’s TV repairman was arrested for firebombing a black family’s home. There were no survivors. His son told me at school shortly thereafter that he could not wait until he was 18 so he could be the best Klansman he could be. Frankly, I was stunned by his confession and shocked by the violence. Neighbors would shake their heads in obvious sadness. Some were upset at the violence. Others were upset, not so much at the violence itself, but at its ‘necessity.’

My second run-in with the Klan was at another Uncle’s home. He was a high school principal and was in the process of complying with the Federal Desegregation order. The Klan called that night and threatened to “come kill us all.” I still recall the image of rifles and shotguns stacked next to the door and all of the adults sitting solemnly around the kitchen table… waiting for the possibility of death. (As an aside, when Haley Barbour says things weren’t that bad in Civil Rights era Mississippi, take it from me; he’s either lying or doesn’t want to admit the truth to himself.)

We moved further out into the county after I graduated from middle school. At my first day in the 10th grade, I could not believe how many pick-up trucks in the school parking lot were sporting a Johnny Reb bumper tag that read, “Hell, no! We Ain’t Fergettin.’” It was here, in 1960’s Mississippi, that I learned the Civil War was not quite over.

On my bus route, there was a family with the last name of Knight. They were infamous throughout the county for reportedly being of mixed race. Not that you could tell from looking at them; they were perfectly white. But like Hester Pryne of the Scarlet Letter, they wore a mark of shame. This original Southern sin of mixing-of-the-races actually took place a few years after the Civil War ended,  but the Knights were known to be not of pure blood and so time did not matter.

As the five Knight children boarded the bus, the bus would remain deathly silent as all the other children on the bus watched the ‘N-word-Knights’ take their seats. Watching the Knight kids be ostracized was both painful and surreal. The following is a picture of a Black slave, Rachel Knight, who after the end of the Civil War married her owner, a former Confederate soldier, by the name of Newton Knight.

For a fascinating story of war, love, courage and racism, please visit: http://mshistory.k12.ms.us/articles/309/newton-knight-and-the-legend-of-the-free-state-of-jones

My immediate family never talked about race. If I heard my parents use the “N-word,” I do not recall it. (For that I am eternally grateful.) But not all racism in Mississippi was overt. I first learned about my father’s racism while my soon-to-be wife and I were planning our wedding. We had invited a Black ROTC classmate of mine to attend. My father promptly said he would not attend if there was a Black present. My friend came to the wedding. My father also attended and wept like a baby during the ceremony. But I also had relatives who never spoke to me again… ever. Perhaps my dad was just embarrassed by our Black friend being on the guest list. He was a proud man and by inviting my friend, I had shamed him and broken the ‘code.’

After college, I served a number of years in the military during which I had my ‘sorry butt’ (as we Southerners would say) looked after by some truly wonderful people of color. For a time, these people were my family. To be honest, I liked them better than most of my biological family.

Upon leaving the military, I found that my extended family remaining in the South had passed the poison of racism on to their kids. The use of the N-word in my relatives’ homes was so rampant that I simply couldn’t stand it. After repeatedly asking that they not use that word in my presence, I finally gave up; I left. I could no longer go home. I have no intention of returning.

Are there things I miss about the South? Absolutely! I miss the sound of cicadas in the evening.

(If you’ve never heard a cicada, there are audio clips at the following website: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cicada#Cicada_song The recording from Greece is closest to what I remember.)

I miss catfish fries at the river camp we used to visit. I miss seeing painted turtles sunning on logs in the river. I miss Southern “hospitality.” I miss the biscuits and the corn bread and fried okra… and there’s nothing like a nice bowl of steaming hot grits on a cold winter morning. And I miss the five or six dogs that would invariably bound off the porch and run to greet me when I visited friends and relatives.

I miss the manners… the “yes, ma’am” and “no ma,am” expressions of respect I found to be so comforting during my youth. And I miss my uncle (now deceased) and his sense of honor. I miss all these things but choose to live far from the Deep South. I choose to live elsewhere not because the South I grew up in remains unchanged, but I prefer to remain apart from the South because of the painful memories it evokes.

The “Rednecks” with whom I was raised are just another species of good-ol’-boy folk who are ‘brought up’ with a ‘code’ and a powerful sense of belonging to a group. They reinforce each other’s beliefs and hold to these beliefs with tremendous sense of pride. Belonging to this community is critically important to them. I know this place. I was raised there and I have found communities with similar traits all over the country.

My father was never accepted as a good ol’ boy. He liked to wear ‘fancy’ clothes more suited for church than working in the field. When I accompanied him into the local coffee shop, the good ol’ boys would look up, greet him coolly, but not invite him to join them. He was not one of them and it was evident from the way they looked at us that we were tolerated but not truly welcome. They, in their blue denim overalls, boots, and John Deere baseball caps, lived in their own world and we were not a part of it.

If you’ve never lived in or belonged to one of these closed communities, their ways and beliefs can be difficult to understand. The members of these groups will sometimes cling to a disproven belief with incredible passion… a belief that the South will rise again… that Northerners are not to be trusted. Why would anyone willingly hold to evidently misguided or false beliefs? It is easy to explain, but much more difficult to understand and accept.

Good ol’ boys hold to their beliefs, both true and false, because these beliefs are their buddies’ beliefs and their loyalty to their good-ol’- boy buddies can be stronger than blood – and certainly more important than something as tenuous as Truth. They would rather be wrong together than right alone. It is part of the ‘code.’

This is not the story of the entire South. Not everyone in the South is intolerant of race. This is simply my story… or a part of it. When I read Marion’s post, it took me back home… to a place I no longer visit… to recollections I rarely call up… and to memories of a different time, a different place and a different code of life.

Author’s Note: I grew up in Jones County Mississippi.  Believe it or not, but Jones County actually seceded from the Confederacy.  The story of Newton Knight, his slave and later wife, Rachel, is a fascinating one.  Do check out the weblink provided above for a unique taste of southern history.  If you want to learn more, there are numerous books available through Amazon.com about the Free State of Jones.  See: http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_ss_c_1_19?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=free+state+of+jones&sprefix=free+state+of+jones

Photos courtesy of Wikipedia.

Related articles

• Haley Barbour refuses to denounce Mississippi license plates commemorating KKK leader (crooksandliars.com)
• Ongoing Supremacy of White Supremacy by Steven Jonas, MD, MPH (dandelionsalad.wordpress.com)