Featured
20 Quotes From Ruth Bader Ginsburg That Showcase Her Immense Wisdom
RBG passed on an incredible legacy and so much wisdom.
13 September 2021
1832
Here are some Ruth Bader Ginsburg quotes that we can learn so much from.
Welcome back
Sign in to comment to your favorite stories, participate in your community and interact with your friends
or
LOG IN WITH FACEBOOKNo account? Create one
Currently
The Presidential Election Is Days Away, Here's How Young Voters Are Making Their Voices Heard
There's no doubt the 2020 presidential election is unprecedented.
28 October 2020
695
With the presidential election looming in less than a week, creators across Odyssey are coming to grips with the 2020 election and their voting choices.
The election has been presented as an existential crisis by both Democrats and Republicans. The Democrats believe there is no choice but to vote against Donald Trump as the future of our world (in terms of the environment and the pandemic) depends on it. While the Republicans are consistent in stating that an election of Joe Biden is an election for more restriction, more taxes, and less freedom.
Some of our creators are voting for the first time ever, like one creator who is voting blue in their hometown of Idaho, which traditionally swings red...
... or this creator, who is voting in their first presidential election but doesn't lean one way or another.
There's no doubt the 2020 presidential election is unprecedented for many reasons. For one, Trump has publicly stated via Twitter that he has ended COVID relief bill negotiations until after the election. Another for the fact that COVID-19 has left our country in a situation where mail-in voting is not only a norm but, for some, the only way they can cast their ballots.
One creator has had to question when and even ifthey will receive their mail-in ballot in Ohio.
All over the country, there are unique circumstances that will prove to be an important part of how the election results will turn out — like the mail-in ballot dilemma in Ohio and across other parts of the country.
Arizona has become a purple swing state. They also boast a top-five rank of Hispanic and Latino population in the country, which is why the Latinos for Trump organization is so crucial.
For a swing state like Arizona, the votes the organization garners could be crucial in keeping the state red after Trump pulled out a very slim victory there in 2016.
In 2020 voting has become a symbolic identifier of what you believe in, what you are willing to fight for, and who you are in America. Nobody so clearly represented that than the late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
After her unfortunate death this year, a new justice was appointed to her seat, Justice Amy Coney Barrett, who identifies as a constitutional originalist.
Ginsburg's death has inspired people across the country to vote and help create the change they want to see. One creator spoke about the impact Ginsburg had on her and why Ginsburg's death inspired her to register to vote.
As the election rolls closer and closer, it is obvious 2020 has changed us a lot and has informed how we will vote even more. And although it is easy to condemn the other side, to champion one ideology over another, 2020 is teaching us that we are all, truly, connected. And that the best thing we can do is talk openly and listen to each other.
* * *
If you're interested in writing about the 2020 election or your voting experience, find our guide about writing for the 2020 election here and feel free to email our news editor at tyler.lyman@theodysseyonline.com.
Keep Reading...Show less
Amy Coney Barrett Said Sexuality Is A Choice By Saying 'Sexual Preferences' — But It's Not
Judge Amy Coney Barrett used a term that many feel implies sexuality is a choice.
14 October 2020
2685
When Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg passed away in September, we lost a remarkable woman who was at the forefront of progressive values. She not only stood up for women, but she supported the LGBTQ community. RBG was the first Supreme Court member to officiate a same-sex marriage ceremony. Her backing the LGBTQ community meant so much to us. It helped push us towards the progress we see today.
However, with that progress comes pushback. Much of the pushback to LGBTQ equality comes from religious extremists. While they might not call themselves extremists, their behavior says otherwise. There have been legal arguments over whether refusing to bake wedding cakes for gay couples is allowed due to religious freedom. While it has been a tremendous victory that marriage equality was mandated across the U.S. in 2015, there's a harsh reality still present.
That reality being the fact that many people in America are unhappy with the decision and want to overturn it.
Justice Clarence Thomas and Justice Samuel Alito released a statement last week which expressed what they see as religious liberty implications due to the 2015 victory. To me, their statement took a threatening tone and raised questions about the future of marriage equality.
It's quite irritating when a group can't enjoy their freedom without worrying about being suddenly persecuted once again.
Donald Trump, our country's president, appeals to these religious extremists. His desire for power and the unhealthy need to maintain it sees him bending over for them constantly. I think it's clear that this is not a man who will put the people first. He will put his own status and power first. Anyone who can help him obtain or maintain that will be prioritized. If you don't fit into that category, you will be tossed aside, even if you're one of his supporters.
It's a real shame they still don't understand that, even when it's painfully obvious.
Therefore, when Trump announced his pick to replace RBG on the Supreme Court, liberals were highly skeptical. His nominee was Judge Amy Coney Barrett, a Catholic who is a member of a group called People of Praise. Vice presidential nominee Kamala Harris claimed Barrett is a pawn by Trump to strike down the Affordable Care Act. Others on the left felt uneasy due to her religious and conservative views, believing this will affect her view on social issues.
Barrett spoke Tuesday in a marathon session before the Senate Judiciary Committee. She attempted to assure people she wasn't Trump's pawn and prove the perceptions others have of her untrue.
On one hand, she said the right things. Barrett spoke about racism and incidents caused by police brutality. She talked about how she wept with her daughter, who is Black and adopted from Haiti, over the murder of George Floyd. She said, "Racism persists in our country," while condemning white supremacy. She also said there is implicit bias in the criminal justice system.
On the other hand, she said something that didn't quite come out the right way. When asked if she would roll back protections for LGBTQ people, Barrett said she "never discriminated on the basis of sexual preference and would not discriminate on the basis of sexual preference."
It's important to read between the lines when it comes to a statement like this. Barrett says she won't discriminate because of someone's sexuality. However, one has to wonder if she will discriminate because of her religious views. Homophobic religious people will often say things like, "I don't hate you because of your sexuality, I just believe it's a sin."
This question is what led to outrage over her choice of words.
Senator Mazie Hirono scolded Barrett for using the term "preference" as opposed to "orientation." Hirono called the term "offensive and outdated" due to the fact that it implies sexuality is a choice. Barrett later apologized for using "a term that would cause any offense in the LGBTQ community."
The term "sexual preference" has been widely used by many people in the past, including those supportive of the LGBTQ community. However, there has been a change in recent years, and GLAAD advises against its use:
The term "sexual preference" is typically used to suggest that being lesbian, gay or bisexual is a choice and therefore can and should be "cured." Sexual orientation is the accurate description of an individual's enduring physical, romantic and/or emotional attraction to members of the same and/or opposite sex and is inclusive of lesbians, gay men, bisexuals, as well as straight men and women
Perhaps Barrett was merely using a term many people (both liberal and conservative) have used over the years without considering the implications. For example, during a May roundtable, Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden claimed he would "rebuild the backbone of this country, the middle class, but this time bring everybody along regardless of color, sexual preference, their backgrounds."
The difference is, Biden is a Democrat, and that party has been far more progressive on social issues. Biden was the vice president during the Obama administration, which, despite Obama's earlier misgivings about marriage equality, proved to be extremely LGBTQ-friendly.
I understand that Biden isn't using a term like "sexual preference" with the intention to spread a belief that sexuality is a choice.
Barrett, on the other hand, holds more conservative views and was handpicked by a Republican president.
She is receiving an enormous amount of backlash on social media. A lot of folks are worried about what her possible presence in the Supreme Court will do to LGBTQ rights. Barrett was chosen by Trump, who caters to his loyal army of followers, many of whom are religious and homophobic.
Religion and homophobia go hand-in-hand much of the time. Conversion therapy is still being practiced across the country. It is a largely religious practice that seeks to change the sexual orientation of its subjects. It operates under this very idea that sexuality is a choice and can be changed.
The American Psychiatric Association strongly opposes conversion therapy. According to the APA, carrying out the practice will "represent a significant risk of harm" to the subject. They further state that these forms of therapy "have not been scientifically validated" and undermines self-esteem.
Due to Barrett's Catholicism and conservative views, many liberals wonder if she falls into this category. It's not known what Barrett's views on conversion therapy are. Barrett did say that she can set aside her Catholic beliefs and has done so since being confirmed as an appeals court judge in 2017.
Barrett, who is against abortion, discussed the suspicions many Democrats have regarding her views on the 1973 Roe v. Wade case, which legalized abortion nationwide, and Planned Parenthood v. Casey, upholding the right in 1992. Barrett said that she has "no agenda to try and overrule Casey."
"I have an agenda to stick to the rule of law and decide cases as they come," she said.
One can only hope her agenda is the same when it comes to marriage equality. There is the question, however, of whether a decision to overturn such a ruling would be voted on by Barrett. According to her, this isn't likely.
Barrett was asked about potential challenges to Obergefell v. Hodges, the 2015 decision legalizing gay marriage. She said those would "most likely" be abolished by district courts before it could even reach the Supreme Court. When pressed further, Barrett said she couldn't specify how she would vote.
So, when Barrett uses a word like "preference," yes, she is held to a higher standard than Biden.
There are all these concerns people have about Barrett and for good reason. The fact of the matter is, Barrett did say sexuality is a choice by using the term "preferences." That is what the word not only implies but is defined as.
The question becomes, what was her intent? In all honesty, the term "sexual preference" always bothered me. I always felt the implication of choice and I know firsthand that isn't true. Not that I would change my sexuality, though. I would mostly hear well-intended people using the term in speeches and interviews, like Madonna. I never made a big deal out of it, however, because I could always tell the intent was positive.
Unfortunately, for Barrett, we're not sure of her intent. We're suspicious and we are right to be. These are our human rights we're talking about. Barrett had to know she would be under this kind of scrutiny before accepting this nomination. It comes with the territory. The only thing she can do from this point forward is proving to us she won't strip away our rights. It would be even better if she voted in favor of them.
Barrett said what she said and apologized. Now, it's time for her actions to speak louder than her words.
Keep Reading...Show less
Subscribe to Our Newsletter
Currently
I Wasn't Registered To Vote Before RBG Died — Now I Can't Wait To Cast My Ballot
Do not let Ruth Bader Ginsburg's work die with her. Register to vote today and be the change you wish to see!
04 October 2020
1800
On September 18, 2020, we lost an amazing, resilient, and powerful woman: Ruth Bader Ginsburg. As the second woman to serve on the Supreme Court, Ginsburg made history.
All throughout Ginsburg's career, she fought in the face of adversity, even before her she had a seat on the Supreme Court, consistently fighting over gender discrimination and gender-based stereotyping in legislation and regulations.
But, Ginsburg fought many of her own battles, as well.
After the birth of her daughter, she had to bear the news that her husband was diagnosed with testicular cancer. And through this turbulent time, Ginsburg not only attended her classes, but also her husband's classes. Ginsburg still managed to make the Harvard Law Review. In June 2010, Ginsburg lost her husband of 25 years to metastatic cancer.
Ginsburg, herself, in 1999, was diagnosed with colon cancer, the first of five bouts with cancer. Through all her battles, Ginsburg never missed a day on the bench. Cancer in no way slowed Ginsburg down. In fact, she began to work with a personal trainer, Bryant Johnson, two times per week, in the justices-only gym. And before her 80th birthday, Ginsburg was able to complete 20 push-ups.
Resilience and power are the two words that come to mind when I think of Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Ginsburg was a woman who, despite the gender discrimination going on, broke those walls — and kept breaking them. With the election coming up, if not already, registering to vote, should be your priority.
As Desmond Tutu said, "If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen to side with the oppressors."
So, this election, do not let your voice go unheard. Every vote counts. Do not sit back, and wait to see change. Go out there, and make the change you want to see. Ginsburg fought for injustices and discrimination. Now, it is her time to rest and for us to step up and make sure her legacy is not forgotten.
Before the death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg, I had never registered to vote. I simply did not see the need too. But, with the news of Ginsburg's death, and in watching her funeral live on TV, and seeing so many women and citizens pay their respects, with many crying, both young and old, I began to realize that I wanted my voice to be heard, I wanted to make sure that in honor of Ginsburg, I would not sit back silently.
Keep Reading...Show less
Currently
I'm A Catholic Woman And I Do Not Support Amy Coney Barrett's Nomination To The Supreme Court
Questioning Barrett's beliefs is not anti-Catholic.
26 September 2020
2524
When Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg passed away on September 18, the country barely had time to mourn her passing before discourse around her potential replacement proliferated across the internet.
Ginsburg was a judicial icon, revered for constructing a common law framework that ensured women were equal to men in the eyes of the Constitution. Now a fierce battle is being fought in Washington over who should replace her. All eyes immediately turned to Amy Coney Barrett, a judge for the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Barrett has been the favorite to fill any vacancy on the Court after being the runner-up to fill Justice Anthony Kennedy's seat, which was ultimately given to Brett Kavanaugh. Barrett is seen as the ideological heir to Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, the extremely conservative originalist who she clerked for while attending Notre Dame Law School (where she later became a professor).
Amy Coney Barrett's religious views are not traditional to the Catholic Church and are cause for concern.
Barrett is a staunch, religious conservative. In her confirmation hearing for her current judgeship, Barrett was questioned about her involvement with a group called "People of Praise," a conservative Catholic group created as a reaction to the new, less restrictive rules created by the Church during the Second Vatican Council. According to the New York Times, "The group believes in prophecy, speaking in tongues, and divine healings." Former members have likened it to a "cult."
A former Notre Dame professor who left People of Praise characterized some of its teachings about women: "According to a teaching that has been circulating among the community heads, women are by nature manipulative." In the community, people are required to report to community heads which they are supposed to consult for almost every decision they make. For married women, their spiritual heads are their husbands. Women are not allowed to have high-level leadership positions in the community although there are some "women leaders," which were until very recently known as "handmaids." I find all these teachings inconsistent with the official Catholic doctrine as laid out in the Catechism.
Still, my major concern with Amy Coney Barrett is not that she is religious, it is that we do not know what beliefs or covenants she is bound to and how they influence her judicial decisionmaking.
At Notre Dame Law School's 2006 Commencement ceremony, Barrett said a "legal career is but a means to an end, and... that end is building the kingdom of God." There are valid questions about what bearing Barrett's faith has on her legal interpretations of access to contraception, LGBTQ rights, women's rights, and most pressingly, abortion. Since the People of Praise strays from the teachings of the Church, it is unclear what views she holds on these issues from both a personal and legal perspective. This only becomes more concerning when taken in conjunction with her disrespect for precedence.
Barrett has previously written about her originalist interpretation of the Constitution. Barrett once wrote: "There is little reason to think that reversals [of past decisions] would do much damage" to the Supreme Court's reputation. "I tend to agree with those who say that a justice's duty is to the Constitution." Her unclear commitment to the legal doctrine known as stare decisis, which asserts that Supreme Court precedents should be respected, is ripe for scrutinization. With Ginsburg gone, Roe v. Wade is closer to being overturned than it ever has before and Barrett's appointment could make it a reality. It is of supreme importance that the connection between Barrett's religious views and judicial interpretations be understood clearly as it relates to a contentious issue like abortion. Will she respect stare decisis or be guided by her pro-life position when deciding a case that challenges Roe? These are questions of paramount importance.
There is nothing wrong with a Justice being religious but they have a duty to the American people and the Senate to disclose the ways in which their judicial doctrine is affected by their religious dogma, especially when it deviates from traditional Church teachings.
Keep Reading...Show less
Currently
RBG's Passing Has Left The Affordable Care Act In Great Peril — And Trump Knows It
With California v. Texas looming, it's crucial to acknowledge the millions of constituents in danger should the ACA be ruled unconstitutional.
26 September 2020
1210
With the sudden and devastating death of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on September 18 due to complications from metastatic pancreatic cancer, a new sense of terror and urgency is added to a prevalent issue: healthcare. Specifically, the Affordable Care Act (ACA). On November 10, exactly one week after Election Day, the Supreme Court is set to again review the constitutionality of the ACA in the case of California v. Texas.
In the lower courts, a federal appeals court ruled on a case that was started by a group of Republican state officials and fervently supported by both Trump and his administration and declared that because the Republican-dominated Congress lowered the mandate tax penalty to zero in 2017, the ACA's minimum essential coverage provision — referred to as the individual mandate — was unconstitutional in nature as the individual mandate was no longer a tax.
Because of this reasoning, the Trump administration wishes to make invalid the entirety of the ACA.
Prior to Ginsburg's death, this lawsuit had little chance of succeeding. However, the Supreme Court vacancy, which Trump wishes to promptly fill with a conservative justice, has made it so that the ACA's very existence is at stake. Along with Chief Justice John Roberts, Ginsburg had voted in favor of preserving the ACA in the past, but there may not be the votes to uphold the ACA if Trump replaces her prior to the election.
As someone who at times grew up alongside unemployed parents, I know all too well the burden of not having adequate healthcare.
I found myself in and out of hospitals in my junior year of high school after discovering a tumor located in my left breast. However, the cost of the various visits and examinations proved very costly and I still haven't had it removed years later. Life without healthcare and the support it provides is difficult, sometimes impossible.
If Trump succeeds in replacing Ginsburg and the ACA is ruled unconstitutional, the effects will be astronomical. Tens of millions of Americans will be directly impacted. The Medicaid expansion will be nullified. Many individuals who have or are at risk of having pre-existing conditions will be forced to pay extortionate amounts or be outrightly denied coverage.
The threat of ACA's destruction has galvanized Democratic voters.
Democrats raised $71 million in the hours after Ginsburg's death to combat Trump and his administration in the upcoming election. In my opinion, that's not enough — we must act.
Former Vice President Joe Biden, unlike Trump, has used his platform to bring awareness to the dangers of suspending the ACA in the middle of a pandemic that has resulted in more than 200,000 deaths, emphasizing how vulnerable and susceptible our population will be should the ACA be ruled unconstitutional. Biden has established a plan that seeks to protect and expand the ACA.
Ensure you are registered to vote and vote. Lives are at stake.
Keep Reading...Show less
