Normandy: Billions of Beneficiaries

Every so often I attempt an exercise: to understand what it must have been like, what fortitude it took to face Nazi forces, on the beaches of Normandy 71 years ago today.

As I've briefly mentioned before, I served two combat tours in Afghanistan, totaling 27 months. I lived a relatively cushy lifestyle, quartered in comfortable lodging and stationed on large mega bases that were, in many ways, bastions of modern western civilization. It was still a far cry from home, but I was comfortable far more often than not.

But a handful of times I was in the thick of combat. We had the upper hand in most circumstances with air, weapon, numbers and position superiority. But there were a few skirmishes within the larger battles that the playing field felt uncomfortable level. We're incredibly fortunate no good guys were hurt or lost.

Needless to say, combat in Afghanistan is nothing to scoff at. It left an unforgettable impression on me that forever altered my worldview and how I approach life, sometimes for better, sometimes for worse.

Even in the context of being one of the few Americans (percentage wise) to experience the trials of combat, I logically know that what I experienced and, quite frankly, most others who served experienced in Iraq and Afghanistan doesn't even come close to the magnitude and scale of trials WW2 vets faced in battle. That doesn't diminish or take away from what 21st American service members overcame, but its inarguable WW2, especially those on the beaches of Normandy on D-Day, went through more. Even knowing all this full well, I simply can't fathom it.

The initial invasion of D-Day was a fucking meat grinder, pure and simple. Men went in by the thousands and got came out the other side a tangled mesh of what was once a man. Brutal, yes, but it was the all-too harsh reality. How did those men move an inch forward toward the barrels of machine guns honed on them? How did they not freeze up, instead themselves into the very mouth of the monster? All that violence, death and stimuli had to be overwhelming to senses, incomprehensible to the mind.

But, in spite of all those daunting, deadly obstacles, they never thought it as insurmountable. With death reigning down on them, their brothers in arms being felled in droves, they crushed the monster of Nazi fascism. Those brave men denied Hitler his foothold in Western Europe he would never regain, and, after much more sacrifices and thousands of lives lost, domino after domino would fall as US troops marched eastward to the heart of Nazi Germany.

What a toll it surely exacted on those men can never be found or understood. So little was (and still is) known about PTSD. How many went on to fight other history-altering, brutal battles while coping with those trying symptoms? How many came back and hid their condition in the shadows from a generation who saw PTSD symptoms as a sign of weakness and lacking character and not a borderline inevitable, natural consequence of battle? So little is mentioned of that.

While I'll never accomplish the goal of my self-imposed exercise of understanding what they went through, I do comprehend -- and am eternally grateful -- to be part of a world where all seven-billion citizens are the beneficiaries of the heroism and sacrifice of thousands of brave, young men from seven decades ago. The least we can do is keep their memories and stories alive. Father Time is doing what Nazi bullets failed do on Normandy, felling our grizzled veterans in droves.

They've done their duty in both fighting evil and keeping their story and fallen comrades' memory alive. It's our generation's turn now. Let's never let them down. The world owes them that much -- and infinitely more.

Does This Offend You?

You don't have a right to not be offended. Period. That's okay. I don't either. No one does. And, in America, that's the law of the land:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." -First Amendment of US Constitution

If you had a right to not be offended, freedom of speech wouldn't be protected under the law, would immediately become nonexistent. But, thankfully, it clearly is protected. (This blog attests to this.) Black and white, plane and simple.

That's not to say someone has a right to verbally harass, intimidate or threaten you. Far from it. That wouldn't be in keeping in the "the pursuit of happiness" spirit. But you can be offended by someone else exercising their freedoms. Likewise, you have have every right to exercise your freedoms even if it offends someone who finds what you do repugnant. If we had the right to not be offended, that all ceases to exist.

Does that mean every utterance is morally covered by this constitutional guarantee? Absolutely not. Should we go out of our way to offend our fellow man for the sake of offending them? Not a chance.

I'd argue the people in Arizona hosting a "Draw Mohammed" rally are committing an immoral act. Hundreds of thousands of Muslim Americans and well over a billion other Muslims globally find any physical depiction of the Prophet Mohammed idolatrous and blasphemous. In other words, billions find it deeply offensive.

I'm sure those two Muslim men who went to a Draw Mohammed rally in Texas to gun the artists and patrons down were also deeply offended. (Thankfully, they were mortally wounded before they could kill anyone.) But -- for all that is rational and good -- how does being offended justify attempting to take someone's life? There are seven or so b-b-b-billion people out there. We're never all going to agree on everything, but we're all pretty much in lock step that killing in cold blood is reprehensible.

You think Christians are fans of shows like South Park and Family Guy parading, openly flaunting their disgust and amusement at God and Christianity? You think they leap for joy at unflattering portrayals of their Lord and Savior? Not a chance. They too are deeply offended. Just as I'm sure those shows' creators finds aspects of Christianity and other religions offensive. Far more often than not, Christians don't kill over it just because others don't see life the same way. To be fair, most Muslim aren't driving around shooting up conventions either.

There's plenty of room for all of us.

The point is we all need to practice tolerance. No one is forcing anyone to like something they object to. Society is making you accept and tolerate it though -- so long as it doesn't take away from their legal, inalienable, self-evident rights.

You want to punish people for deeply offending you? Do it by taking the moral high road. Don't stoop to their level by being equally offensive or, worse yet, harming them, even if they are bigoted, racist thugs. Taking up arms against anyone, however driven by ignorance and hate, who took up the pen makes you the villain by default. Just strengthen the bonds of this global family and let bitter cartoonists doodle in obscurity while the rest of us enjoy our lives and each others company, even if we don't always like how the other lives.

I'm offended every day -- and I wouldn't want it any other way.

From Front Lines to Behind the Scenes

I guess another late-night related TV post couldn't hurt.

A recent New York Times article revealed Jon Stewart, host of Comedy Central's Daily Show, has been quietly operating a training program aimed at teaching veterans entertainment industry skills and helping them get employment within the field. Apparently, Stewart's just now making this veterans program widely known because of his pending Daily Show exit and to encourage other Hollywood big shots to start similar ventures.

In a word, awesome. This is just simply, purely awesome. While I personally have no Hollywood aspirations, I know plenty of qualified, talented people who are, and I'm sure the America as a whole stands to benefit by having war veterans as writers, directors, producers and on-air talent.

I spent nearly five years in the active-duty Army as a print journalist in addition to being a soldier. Naturally, I've met many quality writers, from all military branches, who are hilarious, witty and superb communicators. Us print journalists worked hand-in-hand with our military broadcast journalist counterparts. Those broadcasters wrote TV spots, filmed segments from the field, edited them back at base, stood behind the camera to film the newscast or were in front of the lens when the lights came on. Many did radio work also. Both fields of military journalists have already been honing many of the same skills Stewart's program imparts. These service members, unlike many recent college graduates, have utilized this knowledge in high-stress (to say the least), real-world settings.

It's been this way for decades, yet can any of us name a war veteran that has had an impact on pop culture? Outside of Netflix, I don't digest many TV shows, movies or pop culture in general. That being said, I watch enough to know veterans are lacking a voice in our national consciousness. We've been at war or something awfully close to it for almost 14 years now. Can you name one time a veteran in the entertainment industry ushered us into an indelible moment about the trials, triumphs or historic significance of two incomprehensible, convoluted wars through pop culture?

I simply can't. I suspect the same is true for you. That's a shame-- maybe even an unacceptable one.

Stewart's and similar programs will, or already have, stumbled upon a gold mine of talent. That's not to say veteran's wishing to be in the entertainment industry are inherently more talented than their civilian counterparts. Talent can be found everywhere. But most veterans have gone through more rigorous tests and trials than a 22-year-old out of film school, many with the ability to entertain and communicate.

Even if you take veterans' already running some of the toughest gauntlets life can throw at a person out of the equation, we're still left with an important, needed voice left out of entertainment. A wise friend of mine once observed, "Media is the way the world talks to itself." When the world hears its own voice, shouldn't veterans make up an integral part of that voice? The answer is obvious. Thank goodness the Iraq War's biggest critic is doing something to fix it.

Ireland: The People of Have Spoken!

While Ireland is certainly not the first country to legalize same-sex marriage, their acknowledging of gay equality in the eyes of the law is nothing short of a monumental historic achievement.

For the first time in human history, same-sex marriage was legalized by popular vote. It wasn't decided by a few dozen representatives in a parliamentary chamber. It was made law of the land by people taking to the streets and making their voices heard at the ballot, passing the measure by a 62% to 38% margin, an overwhelming victory.

Another reason why this is so consequential is because Ireland is a country with much of its history and identity deeply rooted in Catholicism. How much this referendum passing is a reflection of an increasingly marginalized Catholic church or the evolution and reform it's undergoing can't be definitively said. My guess though, it's a lot of both.

If you would have asked me a year ago if Ireland would have legalized same-sex marriage through any means, I would have told you "definitely no." After all, Ireland recently made divorce legal by popular referendum by a narrow margin in the mid 90s. But change is, and has been, in the air for some time

And that change is far from being limited to just Europe. Since 2003, after Massachusetts became the first, 37 states have made same-sex marriage legal. If the prevailing winds continue to hold -- and all signs point to that being the case -- it seems inevitable that gay marriage will be federally legalized and recognized.

It's long overdue. I've heard about every argument under the sun for and against . The arguments against just don't hold up to logic, and, I would argue morality, itself.

Let's go with the logic side of the house first: If being gay was a choice (and why that factors into the equation anyways is beyond me), who would choose to be ostracized or completely disowned by the family they love? Worse yet, coming out in some countries and cultures equates to certain death, violent at that. Again I ask you, who would choose that?

Over a thousand species have been documented to exhibit homosexual behavior, including many of our closest ancestral cousins. The evidence is and has been overwhelming for some time. I mean, can a gay buffalo really be living in sin?

While it's certainly true that we choose our sexual behavior, we have no say in our biological sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, etc. For example, I grew up in the church and went to Protestant Christian schooling up until my junior year of high school. We were conditioned to treat abstinence like a badge of honor. Most of us, at least publicly, practiced what we were preached. Did us not having sex make us asexual? Nope. I assure you, my circle of friends and I were very much heterosexual. We just chose to behave like asexuals. See the difference?

So what government or society has any right whatsoever to tell two consenting adults how to behave sexually? It's not just their choice. It's their inherent right.

I'm very much on the far end of the heterosexual spectrum. I don't have fantasies about men. I don't have sexual dreams about them. I've never been aroused by them. There would be absolutely nothing wrong with that if I did experience those things, but the point is this: I had absolutely no say in my heterosexuality, at all, period.

I mean, did any person hit puberty go "Well, on one hand, we have penises. On the other, we have breasts. I better weigh these two on the proverbial scale and decide now, for forever and always, which one I'm attracted to"? I know I didn't. Breasts were just always fantastic. It was innate, hardwired into me. Since the heteros among us didn't choose to be straight, logic only dictates homosexuals, bisexuals, asexuals and transgendered had absolutely no say either.

Now for the morality side of the argument: Let's say you're a Protestant Christian man who has been partnered with a women for 20 years. You've built an entire life with this person, been to hell and back. She's your everything, your soul mate. Then one day on your way to work, you get broadsided by a pick-up truck. You're in the hospital, alive but in serious condition. All you want to do is see your partner.

The sad thing is, you can't. In this scenario, your partner you built a life with is Catholic and Protestant-Catholic marriages are illegal in your state/country. She is not "family" according to the law; she has no visitation rights.

How unspeakably cruel? Hey, you chose to be Protestant.

Why people try to stop same-sex couples from adopting children baffles me. For starters, a child raised by the state, in orphanages or foster homes their whole lives, tend to not fair as well as children raised by two devoted parents, regardless of the parents' sexual orientation. To cut same-sex couples off from such a noble undertaking not only deprives them of the right to pursue their happiness and life's fulfillment, it deprives those children of much, much more.

Doesn't seem to make sense, does it? Pure madness. But scenarios like this one have played out for same-sex couples countless times over the course of human history. It's time we put a stop to that.

Love is powerful and massive. Why societies continue to try to relegate it to narrow confines that don't exist in reality is nothing short of oppressive. The majority of Irish people have recognized that. Their gay population and people as a whole are now better off for it.

I just look forward to the day my friends in my home state of Ohio and across the nation I served and love with a passion can all marry the person they love. It's time for America to be become even more American. In the mean time, congratulations to the people of Ireland! You've done the world a great service.