Mississippians voted in the midterms in record numbers, something we should all be proud of. However, spoiler alert, a Mississippian embarrassed the entire state.
A voter in Olive Branch, Mississippi, Clayton John Hickey, wore this shirt to vote on Tuesday. He has since lost his job and is a pariah on social media.
Surprisingly, or perhaps ashamedly not, persons are defending him for wearing this. There really is no defense. Does he have Constitutional protections to wear this shirt? Yes. Are their consequences for our actions? Yes.
The “confederate” flag has become a symbol of hate and division. Perhaps it had proud beginnings, but that has been overpowered by hate groups. The above shirt, in addition to the flag, has a noose and “Mississippi Justice” emblazoned on it. Inexcusable.
Our state leaders would do well to take a stand not only against Hickey, but against this symbol.
Literally a campaign sign for Chris McDaniel.
There is absolutely no connection between Hickey and McDaniel…other than the “rebel” canton. However, you are mistaken if you believe explaining your policy differences will somehow distinguish your position on the State flag and the voters referendum in 2001, arguing it gives you the moral high-ground to continue to support an indisputable symbol of hate and intolerance.
There is a push afoot to adopt this Flag, the Stennis flag, as the State’s new symbol. It began grass-roots, but has taken hold and can be seen throughout the state. The flag was designed by Senator John C. Stennis’s granddaughter, Laurin Stennis, a Mississippi artist.
The significance of the flag is explained;
Nineteen stars form a circle around a larger center star, which represents Mississippi as the 20th state to join the Union in 1817.
The centering of the blue star on the field of white is an inverted “Bonnie Blue,” a reference to the state’s secession (1861 – 1865).
The circular shape symbolizes wholeness and continuity and is also drawn from artifacts of indigenous peoples to our region, particularly, the Choctaw Nation.
The red bars stand in opposition, recognizing the passionate differences we sometimes harbor, as well as in honor of those who have given their lives in pursuit of liberty and justice for all.
Matthew Thompson is a Family Law attorney and is tired of the hate, rhetoric and, in the immortal (paraphrased) words of Fannie Lou Hamer, is sick and tired of being sick and tired for our State.
The Mississippi legislature has been called “backwards” and compared to hissing possums.
Unfortunately, Mississippi will again bear the brunt of ridicule. House Bill 1523, if signed into law, allows state employees, and other entities, to discriminate against other citizens based upon a “sincerely held religious belief” or “moral conviction.” This means that a State employee whose job is to issue marriage licenses, for instance, can refuse because they do not approve of your spouse.
The intent is to prevent persons from entering into a same-sex marriage in the Hospitality State. Incidentally, the United States Supreme Court found that marriage is a fundamental right under the Constitution. This bill, which seeks to infringe on that RIGHT also goes much further.
If the State Employee does not want to issue you a license they can refuse for a same-sex marriage, can refuse if you were previously divorced, can refuse if you had sex out of wedlock, and I am sure there are other Leviticus-based refusals.
This bill is simply pandering. It affords no real protections to any class in need of protection. It allows discrimination under the guise of faith. A faith which requires that we love our neighbor as ourselves, and teaches us that the one without sin may cast the first stone. It is an affront to the law.
This bill, if passes, guarantees the State will be sued and Mississippi will spend tens of thousands of dollars defending an indefensible position, to protect a class not in need of protection, to solve a problem that does not exist.
This is another example of Mississippi striving to fulfill her stereotypical destiny.
Now here’s your chance to vote on the one you like or submit your own. The prior poll had readers opting for a flag change 55% for – 45% opposed. The majority of poll takers wanted a change.(Granted it was about 1,500 responders.) The disagreement came on what the change should be.
Matthew Thompson is a Family Law Attorney in Mississippi, does not consider himself to be a “whiny, liberal” and still supports changing the flag in Mississippi.
As a state, we have had some negative press of late. Our flag is behind the times and not representative of over half of our population (I’m including all races in this calculation, btw). We are considered one of the least educated, poorest and most corrupt states. We are good at being bad and bad at being good in the categories that matter, it seems.
However, we are also one of the most generous state’s per capita. We have a history of phenomenal athletes, authors, artists and musicians. We have amazing chefs, foodies and cuisine. We have a lot to be proud of. We also have the potential to be better. We know our problems. We know they cannot be solved overnight, but we also know there is a solution.
Time, hard work, commitment to change, to educate, to build infrastructure and to drive forward exists in the generations that are and will be the leaders of Mississippi.
Mississippi,
Here’s a pat on the back. You do somethings really well!
Also, to anyone not in Mississippi, as Public Service Announcement; Mississippi has electricity, running water, indoor plumbing, books, shoes and air conditioning and we have had these luxuries/necessities of life for decades!
Matthew Thompson is a Family law attorney in Mississippi and is proud #Hail from the Hospitality State.
Follow the blog: #BowTieLawyer Visit the website: #Thompson Law Firm You may also contact Matthew with your family law matter or question at (601) 850-8000 or Matthew@bowtielawyer.ms
Private Investigation is not as glamorous, or as easy, as you think it is…
Why should I get a P.I.?
They know what they are doing. (usually)
They are good at what they do. (usually)
They are professional, will document their efforts and testify in Court.
They can be objective and unemotional about your circumstances.
They aim to satisfy as they care about their reputation.
Why doing it myself is a bad idea?
You do NOT know what you are doing. (Watching old reruns of Magnum PI does not qualify you for the job)
You are NOT good at it. You will get caught following too closely, spotted watching them, seen taking an obvious picture, or will lose them in the crowd.
You’re efforts will be viewed as biased. (of course you will say you saw him cheating, you’re trying to get a divorce!)
You CANNOT be objective nor unemotional. (the desire to confront her will be almost unbearable)
You do not care what anybody thinks!! (He’s a perv!!)
Think about this question posed by Federal Court Judge, Carlton Reeves, yesterday:
“What is the state’s rational basis that same-sex couples can’t marry … and its prohibition of same-sex couples from adopting children when all a child wants is to be loved, and they don’t care by whom?”
At least two instances of persons challenging Mississippi’s ban on same-sex marriage and adoption are now pending before the Federal District Court. A number of Federal Circuit Courts have struck down similar state bans and the trend is growing.
The response to the Judge’s inquiry was “responsible procreation.” However the days of “having” to be married to procreate have gone out the window. Additionally, it has no bearing on infertile couples, elderly couples or even prisoners, all of whom still have the legal right to marry so long as it is a person of the opposite gender.
Mississippi’s ban, I predict, is the next to be struck down. There’s not a rational basis for gender discrimination when it comes to marriage. There are arguments on a religious basis and tradition, but neither of these arguments will carry the day, nor will responsible procreation. These cases and the Mississippi law really turn on same-gender arguments and whether there is a rational basis, the legal standard required, to place limitations on the rights of same-gender couples as opposed to purely sexual orientation arguments. Stay tuned.
Matthew Thompson is a Mississippi Family Law attorney, Adjunct Professor of Domestic relations, admitted to practice before the U.S. Supreme Court (pictured above) and predicting a change in Mississippi law very soon.
Follow the blog:#BowTieLawyer Visit the website: #Thompson Law Firm You may also contact Matthew with your family law matter or question at (601) 850-8000 or Matthew@bowtielawyer.ms