Mississippi Burning Again

Mississippi’s history is a colorful one, but a new law signed on April 05, 2016 in the Magnolia State, threatens the rainbow, allowing businesses to discriminate against same sex couples on moral grounds and plunging the state right back into the era of Jim Crow and its devastating human rights violations.

The Way It Was

In many respects, Mississippi was the poster child for black slavery and the accompanying human rights abuses so prevalent in a fledgling America. Formerly part of a vast expanse of Indian lands, Mississippi became the twentieth US state in 1817, and by the 1830’s, it was a powerhouse in the cotton trade. Cotton was king, making the Old South the ninth largest economy in the world, with Mississippi the king of kings, commanding considerable influence among her less affluent peers.

The cotton trade (White Gold) made the Old South. During its heyday, there were more millionaires in Mississippi than anywhere else in the world. Mammoth plantations fed a worldwide frenzy for cotton. And none of this would have been possible without the backbreaking servitude of black slaves under barbaric conditions. In 1861, Mississippi became part of the Secession Movement, breaking away from the Union over disagreements about state’s rights in the republic.

Fast forward several generations, and Mississippi would become known as a hotbed of civil rights conflict and home to the notorious 1955 lynching and mutilation of Emmet Till and the 1964 murder of three civil rights activists that would form the nucleus plot of the Academy Award winning movie Mississippi Burning, starring Gene Hackman and Willem Dafoe, released in 1988.

The Way It Is

Gambling aboard paddle boats amid a sweltering sun. Home to blues pioneering greats such as BB King, Bo Diddley, and Willie Dixon. Residents speaking with a drawl reminiscent of time slowly passing. The Bible Belt, and an equally religious passion for college football. These all describe Mississippi today.

As firmly planted as one foot is in the past, so too is the other foot marching forward. There is an air of sophistication among Mississippi’s simpler way of life that is uniquely placed. Most would be startled to learn that the world’s first heart and lung transplants were performed at the University of Mississippi Medical Center. Or that Jackson, Mississippi is the only North American city to host the International Ballet Competition. Or, that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Waterways Experiment Station in Vicksburg, Mississippi is the world's largest hydraulic research laboratory.

Despite their advancements in culture, science, and medicine, Mississippi and Mississippians cannot seem to shake its Rebel heritage. Thumbing its nose at international covenants and federal law, Mississippi Governor Phil Bryant signed into law House Bill 1523, or more formally, Protecting Freedom of Conscience from Government Discrimination Act, that paves the way for widespread discrimination and human rights violations against a broad swath of people.

Protecting Freedom of Conscience from Government Discrimination Act

Mississippi House Speaker Philip Gunn claims House Bill 1523 does not enable discrimination, but rather promises that the state government will not punish people who refuse to provide services to people because of a religious opposition to same-sex marriage, extramarital sex or transgender people.

To some, HB1523 protects religious freedoms. For others, it’s just another Jim Crow law painted in the colors of a rainbow.

Governor Bryant took to Twitter in response to the explosive backlash against signing HB1523 tweeting that he did so, "to protect sincerely held religious beliefs and moral convictions ... from discriminatory action by state government."

Mississippi is a state that is already known for its extremely narrow protection of human rights. Mississippi legislation protects only three beliefs or convictions: that marriage is between a man and a woman, that sex is "properly reserved to such a marriage," and that words like "male" and "female" are "objectively determined by anatomy and genetics at birth." This bill appears to constrict any remaining legislated human rights in the state.

Governor Bryant’s full statement regarding the signing of HB1523 is as follows:

A link to the Protecting Freedom of Conscience from Government Discrimination Act in pdf format is listed below.

What It Shall Be

Tyson Foods and Nissan North America, both with major holdings in the state, called on Governor Bryant to veto the bill. He didn’t listen. He also did not heed the pleas from international conglomerates such as Time Warner and The Walt Disney Company.

Mississippi’s ally is North Carolina, who also adopted a new law violating LGBTQ rights recently. The consequence to North Carolina was immediate, when PayPal nixed its planned expansion into North Carolina that would have provided 400 jobs.

It would not be out of line to suggest court challenges to HB1523 and its similar legislation in North Carolina. In commenting on the Mississippi bill, the ACLU said, "It's a sad day for Mississippi".

In brighter human rights news, Georgia's Governor shot down a similar bill in the Peach State.

The Protecting Freedom of Conscience from Government Discrimination Act becomes law in the Magnolia State on July 01, 2016.

Links

House Bill 1523 Official Act

Contact Mississippi Governor Phil Bryant

OJ Simpson vs Jian Ghomeshi

The legal systems of Canada and United States are similar in many ways, particularly as it applies to criminal matters. The recent acquittal of Jian Ghomeshi on four counts of sexual assault sparked deep division among Canadians in much the same way as OJ Simpson’s double murder acquittal did in United States, which should not come as too much of a shock, given the similarities between the two.

It would be difficult to laud the same degree of celebrity on Jian Ghomeshi as that enjoyed by OJ Simpson. Still, in Canada and anywhere within the reaches of CBC’s airwaves, Jian Ghomeshi was their brightest star. Handsome, well-paid, and very much in the public eye, Ghomeshi attracted throngs of eager and willing sexual partners for all the same reasons as did OJ Simpson and other celebrities.

Nobody died in Ghomeshi’s cases. However, the sexual assault allegations made against him was about to lay waste to five individuals (Ghomeshi himself and the four alleged victims) who were at the center of this melee.

What is strikingly similar between the cases of Ghomeshi and Simpson was the absolute floundering of the prosecution team to vet their own witnesses, and arguably, it was this pivotal point on which the justice system failed any victims, and further impeded the likelihood of future sexual assault victims of any perpetrator coming forward to endure the trial process.

In Simpson’s case, Mark Fuhrman, a Los Angeles Police Detective, lied on the witness stand, and then pled the fifth on the direct question of did he plant evidence. It would be a crucial hurdle for the District Attorney to overcome, and a point that distracted the jury from maintaining any focus on the double murder for which they had been convened. If one of the key LAPD Detectives planted evidence and lied in court, then how can any evidence presented be untainted? Marcia Clark, lead prosecutor against Simpson ought to have known. On the Fuhrman perjury alone, Marcia Clark failed the Goldman and Brown families.

With Ghomeshi, Crown prosecutor, Michael Callaghan, equally failed in his duties bringing forth a high profile case against one of Canada’s most celebrated broadcasting personalities with alleged victims who were not as innocent as one might expect. In allegations against Ghomeshi claiming that he sexually assaulted four women, his brilliant defense counsel, Marie Henein, was able to prove that his alleged victims engaged in behavior that would be difficult to assimilate to that of one being sexually assaulted. One woman sent him flowers after being allegedly sexually assaulted. One messaged Ghomeshi practically begging for another date. Prosecutor Michael Callaghan failed all legitimate sexual assault victims in his quest for glory with little regard to the impact his personal agenda would have on Canadian society.

Due to double jeopardy laws in Canada and United States, we will never truly know whether OJ Simpson and Jian Ghomeshi participated in the crimes for which they were accused. Everybody will have their personal beliefs, but in the eyes of the law, both men are not guilty of those crimes. We can thank the respective prosecutors of these cases for wasting millions of dollars in taxpayer money in bringing cases before court that were not sufficiently vetted, and for which there is no accountability.