News Update: What's next for George Zimmerman?

Trayvon Martin parents elated by Zimmerman arrest

By SONYA ROSS, Associated Press – 2 hours ago  

WASHINGTON (AP) — Trayvon Martin's parents expressed relief Wednesday over a special prosecutor's decision to charge the man responsible for the 17-year-old's death. Martin's mother said if she could speak directly to George Zimmerman, she would allow him a chance to say he is sorry for what happened.

"I would probably give him an opportunity to apologize," Martin's mother, Sybrina Fulton, told The Associated Press in an interview. "I would probably ask him if there were another way that he could have settled the confrontation that he had with Trayvon, other than the way it ended, with Trayvon being shot."

Her voice trailed off, and tears welled in her eyes. She remained stoic, and expressed faith that the justice system would work as it should.

Martin's father, Tracy Martin, offered several questions that he would like to ask Zimmerman about the sequence of events that led up to Trayvon's death, but in the end he would want to know, "Was it really worth it?"

"The question I would really like to ask him is, if he could look into Trayvon's eyes and see how innocent he was, would he have then pulled the trigger? Or would he have just let him go on home?" Tracy Martin said.

The parents spoke in Washington shortly before special prosecutor Angela Corey announced in Florida that Zimmerman, 28, had been arrested on a second-degree murder charge in their son's Feb. 26 death. The parents and Trayvon's brother, Jahvaris Fulton, were attending a national conference convened by Al Sharpton's National Action Network.

They watched Corey's announcement on television in a room at the Washington Convention Center. As soon as Corey uttered the words "second-degree murder," Martin and Fulton grasped hands, and their attorney, Benjamin Crump, placed his hands over theirs. Fulton smiled slightly at the news.

"We wanted an arrest and we got it," Fulton said later during a brief appearance before reporters. "Thank you, Lord, thank you, Jesus."

Before the arrest, Fulton said: "That won't bring Trayvon back but at least that would give us reassurance that the justice system is working."

Zimmerman's shooting of the black teenager brought demands from black leaders for his arrest and set off a furious nationwide debate over race and self-defense that reached all the way to the White House. Zimmerman, whose father is white and whose mother is Hispanic, said the teenager attacked him, and he shot in self-defense. Martin's family argued Zimmerman was the aggressor.

They appealed for their supporters, as well as Zimmerman's supporters, to remain calm in response to the prosecutor's decision.

"We've always said that we want peaceful resolution, no matter what side you're on," Martin said.

"We don't want them to stop the protest and the rallies, we just want to make sure that they remain peaceful," Fulton said. "We're going through the process the right way, the proper way. We just ask that everybody that supports us do the same thing. Even the ones who don't support us, we want to make sure that they protest in a peaceful manner."

Copyright © 2012 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

President Obama: “If I Had A Son, He’d Look Like Trayvon” [VIDEO]

Via MajicAtl.com

President Barack Obama has broken his silence over the Trayvon Martin killing, calling the case a “tragedy” and saying that “every aspect” of Martin’s death must be investigated.




“My main message is to the parents of Trayvon Martin: If I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon,” Obama said. “I think they are right to expect that all of us as Americans are going to take this with the seriousness it deserves, and we’re going to get to the bottom of what happened.”



The president spoke Friday in the White House’s Rose Garden where he announced his nomination of Dartmouth president Jim Yong Kim for president of the World Bank.



Martin, 17, was shot and killed by neighborhood watch volunteer George Zimmerman on Feb. 26 in Sanford, Fla. Zimmerman has yet to be arrested for Martin’s murder, which has led to outrage and protests around the world.



“Obviously, this is a tragedy,” President Obama added. “I can only imagine what these parents are going through. And when I think about this boy, I think about my own kids.”



He added, “I think every parent in America should be able to understand why it is absolutely imperative that we investigate every aspect of this and that everybody pulls together – federal, state, and local - to figure out exactly how this tragedy happened.”



Students at several South Florida high schools staged walkouts Friday morning in a protest against the lack of an arrest in the shooting. Martin was a junior at a Miami high school and was unarmed when he was killed.



SOURCE

Black Baltimore Pastors Support Gov. O'malley's Same Sex Marriage

By Tom McParland

GOV. O’MALLEY, ALLIES, WORK FOR SAME-SEX MARRIAGE SUPPORT IN BLACK COMMUNITY

Politics

— 15 February 2012

Delmon Coates and Donte’ L. Hickman Sr., both black pastors, flanked Gov. Martin O’Malley recently as they argued that allowing same-sex marriage would extend equal rights to citizens, while not impinging on the theology of churches.

“For me, this is a question of public policy, not theology, and as such, we should not ask, ‘What are my personal beliefs and biblical understandings about marriage and homosexuality, and how, then, can I impose those beliefs on society,’” Coates told two House committees.

For O’Malley, who has spent substantial political energy this year pushing same-sex marriage, Coates and Hickman personify one of the most complex storylines in the contentious debate.

While O’Malley and bill proponents have found public support from leading voices in the black community, including prominent civil rights leaders and clergy, same-sex marriage legislation faces considerable opposition from both voters and groups of legislators from predominantly black districts, where religious influence is strong.

The conflict is likely to play out this week in the full House of Delegates as lawmakers debate the same-sex marriage bill in the chamber where similar legislation died last year.

A January Gonzales Research and Marketing Strategies Inc. poll, which included 194 blacks across the state, found that only 33 percent of them favored the legalization of same-sex marriage, an 8 percentage point decrease from a similar poll last year.

Some say the numbers are reflective of attitudes toward homosexuality from some in the black community.

Bill co-sponsor Delegate Shawn Z. Tarrant, D-Baltimore, said gay blacks have traditionally not identified themselves as homosexual or part of a larger gay community.

“That, to me, is the real issue, that you have same-sex couples and people who identify themselves as gay in the black community that don’t share that, their families don’t embrace it, and that they don’t push to be embraced,” Tarrant said.

In a city lacking strong organization on either side of the issue, many of his constituents are indifferent toward same-sex marriage, he said.

Prince George’s County, on the other hand, is home to one of Maryland’s largest blocs of black voters and a very active circuit of faith communities that oppose the legislation.

“We’ve got a huge faith-based community,” said Delegate Jay Walker, D-Prince George’s, and a bill opponent.

“They haven’t asked for much during the six years I’ve been here. They haven’t asked for many things at all, and this one, they are clearly asking, ‘Protect our values in regard to same-sex marriage,’” Walker said.

Predominantly black churches, Tarrant said, have become a major political force in the same-sex marriage conversation, particularly in Prince George’s, because they offer Democratic politicians a venue to reach large numbers of black voters from varying economic backgrounds.

“It can’t be a situation where you tell the black churches when they can or cannot get involved in the issue,” Tarrant said. “You forced them into getting involved when you made it an issue for the legislature, because any time the governor’s running for office, he’s going through black churches.”

Delegate Dereck E. Davis, D-Prince George’s, while acknowledging the “overwhelming majority” of his constituents oppose the bill, was quick to deflect blame from Prince George’s delegates, saying the vote last year would have split the county’s delegation down the middle.

“It was pretty close to 50-50,” said Davis, an opponent of the bill. “So you’re probably talking, I don’t know, in the area of seven or eight, probably eight African-American delegates who were going to vote against it. There’s no way eight delegates can kill a bill.”

While some advocates have used civil rights rhetoric in promoting same-sex marriage, lawmakers and advocates on both sides are wary of that language being taken too far.

“There are different definitions of civil rights. I’m saying that. I agree with that, but thinking that these are African-Americans’ civil rights, comparing them to the civil rights that we had as a race, I don’t think that’s in the same ballpark as us,” Walker said.

A key difference, some say, is that gay people are able to hide their sexual orientation, an opportunity not afforded to blacks.

“We are concerned that people don’t confuse the difference,” Tarrant said.

“The difference is when you’re African-American, there’s nothing you can do to prevent somebody from knowing that you’re African-American,” he said.

There are, however, many similarities between the two groups that, some leaders say, unite them.

Wade Henderson, president and chief executive officer of the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, wrote an opinion piece earlier this month in an attempt to “lay the foundation” for the same-sex marriage bill, in which he said blacks and the gay and lesbian community share the goals of civil rights and equality.

“I want to challenge the assumption that somehow African-Americans are not supportive of marriage equality,” Henderson said in a phone interview.

He stressed a widespread acceptance of the gay community by blacks, who share a history of struggling to achieve their own civil rights.

“African-Americans are for equal rights for everyone, and that includes the LGBT community,” Henderson said.

Ben Jealous, president and chief executive officer of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People and an active proponent of same-sex marriage, gave the keynote speech at last month’s Lesbian and Gay Rights Task Force conference in Baltimore in which he called for unity of leaders across the lines of race, gender and sexual orientation.

The NAACP’s position has rankled some in the black community.

“I think people feel that (the organization has) lost touch with their roots, and this seems to be proof positive of that,” Walker said.

Attitudes of blacks in Maryland are consistent with statistics from other states where support for same-sex marriage bills has lagged.

For example, when California passed Proposition 8, a 2008 ballot measure that banned same-sex marriage, Associated Press exit polls showed that seven out of 10 black voters favored the ban. The California ban has been overturned in federal court.

Source: http://cnsmaryland.org/2012/02/15/gov-omalley-allies-work-for-same-sex-marriage-support-in-black-community/

 

White Neighborhood Watch Captian Kills Black Teenager

Students want watch leader who shot Trayvon Martin arrested

ORLANDO, Florida (AP) — The case of a white neighborhood watch captain who shot an unarmed black teen last month has prompted student protests in Florida on Monday, and is garnering national attention as civil rights leaders, politicians and even the White Houseweigh in.

But authorities may be hamstrung by a state law that allows people to defend themselves with deadly force.

• BLOG: Report: Shooter in racially charged death often called cops

Students held rallies on the campus of Florida A&M University in Tallahassee and outside the courthouse in nearby Sanford, where prosecutors are reviewing the case to determine if charges should be filed. The students demanded the arrest of 28-year-old George Zimmerman, who authorities say shot 17-year-old Trayvon Martin last month during a confrontation in a nearby gated community.

Gun control advocates say it is emblematic of permissive gun laws in Florida, which was among the first states to allow residents to carry concealed weapons.

Florida was the first state to pass a "Stand Your Ground" law, which has been dubbed a "Shoot First" law by gun control advocates. About half of all U.S. states have similar laws, said Brian Malte, legislative director of the Brady Campaign, which describes itself as the nation's largest organization dedicated to the prevention of gun violence.

The Florida shooting happened when Zimmerman spotted Martin as he was patrolling his neighborhood on a rainy evening last month and called police to report a suspicious person. Against the advice of the dispatcher, Zimmerman then followed Martin, who was walking home from a convenience store with a bag of Skittles in his pocket.

Zimmerman's father has said his son is Hispanic and is not racist. Zimmerman has claimed self-defense.

"I don't think a man who exited his vehicle after the 911 dispatcher told him to stay inside the car can claim self-defense," Carl McPhail, a 28-year-old Barry University law school student, said at the rally in Sanford.

The 70 protesters at the Sanford rally chanted "What if it was your son?" and held posters saying, "This is not a race issue." Many carried Skittles.

Martin's parents and other advocates have said the shooter would have been arrested had he been black.

"You would think that Sanford is still in the 1800s claiming that this man can call self-defense for shooting an unarmed boy," said restaurant owner Linda Tillman, who also was at the Sanford rally.

Florida congresswoman Corrine Brown has asked that the U.S. Department of Justice to review the case, and White House spokesman Jay Carney said Monday during a briefing that officials there were aware of what happened.

"Our thoughts and prayers go out to Trayvon Martin's family," Carney said. "But obviously we're not going to wade into a local law enforcement matter."

But prosecutors may not be able to charge Zimmerman because of changes made to state law in 2005. Under the old law, people could use deadly force in self-defense only if they had tried to run away or otherwise avoid the danger. The changes removed that duty to retreat and gave Floridians, as the law is written, the right "to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force," if they felt threatened. The changes also meant people could not be prosecuted in such instances.

Prosecutors can have a hard time making a case if there is no one else around to contradict a person who claims self-defense, said David Hill, a criminal defense attorney in Orlando. Thus far, Sanford police have said there is no evidence to contradict Zimmerman's claims.

"If there is nobody around and you pull a gun, you just say, 'Hey, I reasonably believed I was under imminent attack. Hey, sorry. Too bad. But you can't prosecute me,'" Hill said.

Is Birth Control Coverage Motivated by Religious Freedom or Religious Bullying?

Danielle Tumminio

Author, 'God and Harry Potter at Yale'

Posted: 03/13/2012 10:44 am

Even though Rush Limbaugh apologized to Sandra Fluke, the birth control controversy isn't over. While the Obama administration continues negotiations with Catholic bishops, the New Hampshire House of Representatives passed a law to exempt employers from providing contraception on religious grounds to their employees.

Supporters of this bill -- or of the Marco Rubio bill that went before the Senate recently -- argue this debate is about religious freedom. Chicago Archbishop Cardinal Francis George, for instance, wrote a letter to be read in every Chicago Catholic congregation in which he told his people that: "the Administration seemingly ignored the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, denying to Catholics our Nation's first and most fundamental freedom, that of religious liberty."

But is religious freedom really the issue?

Imagine the following parallel universe: In it, there is a country called the United States. In this country, there are Roman Catholics. These Catholics have hospitals, schools and other organizations, and there is also a thing called health insurance that provides coverage for medicine, hospital visits, and the like. But here's the difference: In this parallel universe, Catholic universities only educate Catholic students andonly employ Catholic staff. Catholic hospitals only admit Catholic patients and only hire Catholic doctors and nurses, while Catholic health insurers only cover Catholics.

If that were the case, then yes, this issue would be about religious freedom; it would be about Catholics not getting to exercise their beliefs in their community of believers.

But that's not what's going on here.

Back in our non-parallel universe, we find that Georgetown University has a Jewish Hillel and a Muslim Prayer Room on campus and enrolls a plethora of non-Catholic students. In a crisis, ambulances deliver patients to the nearest hospital, not the one that most closely aligns with their spiritual worldview, and Catholic schools routinely hire non-Catholic teachers, as demonstrated by my Jewish aunt who worked for years at a Catholic school, with the awkward side effect that she now knows the Lord's Prayer by heart.

The issue, then, is really about how Catholics treat non-Catholics. After all, presumably Catholics would not want birth control -- it's all the other folks who do. Which makes this a debate not about religious freedom but about how people of one faith care for those who do not share their beliefs.

One option is that they should maintain that their worldview is more truthful than others and therefore should not be compromised (something academics call the exclusion model). Here, the idea is that since Religion X is true, ideas that conflict with Religion X are false. So to prevent Religion X from enacting its beliefs compromises not only its integrity but also the way God wants the world to be run.

This is the kind of logic that allowed New Hampshire's Republican House Speaker William O'Brien to argue that it is not the Catholic Church's obligation to provide birth control within its various organizations because Catholics do not believe in birth control. Rather, it is employees' obligation not to take jobs with a Catholic employer or to provide for their own birth control if they do not agree with the Church's stance.

It's not rocket science to see how the exclusion model is authoritarian or hierarchical in orientation (it is called exclusion, after all): There is a faith group. That faith group's beliefs are privileged. There is no consultation of others -- in this case, non-Catholic employees, patients, or students, because they, being outside the system, are excluded from it. But imagine, for a moment, that this was not an issue facing employers and employees or universities and students. Imagine, for a second, that this was an elementary school playground where one student was telling another what to believe, how to act.

We would call that bullying.

Imagine it was a marriage where a man told his wife how to behave and penalized her if she did not comply. We would call that abuse.

This model does not work. It doesn't work in schools. It doesn't work in relationships. And as we can see from the rancor between the government and Roman Catholics, it doesn't work there either.

So how to move forward? One thing the Catholic Church could do is to exist more like they do in the parallel universe I described. Catholic institutions could more stridently assert themselves as Catholic, hiring only Catholic employees, admitting only Catholics to hospitals and universities. But in our increasingly diverse country -- and with laws preventing discrimination -- this isn't likely, nor is it healthy. Whether Archbishop Cardinal George or House Speaker O'Brien like it, we live in a country where every religious group is given -- or should be given -- equal regard and equal religious freedom under the Constitution.

So what is the alternative? I can't help but wonder what would happen if Archbishop Cardinal George or House Speaker O'Brien tried to have a non-judgmental conversation with employees and students who use birth control, with women who took emergency contraception as part of rape kit. I think I know what would happen: It wouldn't work. There would be an argument. Rush Limbaugh would make another sensational remark. Late night talk show hosts would order Chinese food and scheme about the comedy that could come from this, periodically rubbing their hands together and issuing maniacal laughs. 

Maybe that's because this is the age where internet trolls and caustic sound bytes trump all, and where talk of love and listening is seen as fruffy and too New Age. But sadly, it's love and listening -- not excluding -- that work.

I know this story's ending is unrealistic, and I will not draw it out further by defending the many avenues for finding common ground in our time (i.e. restorative justice or circle processes). Instead, I will simply say that there has to be a better way forward, and perhaps if we were able to really listen -- not to forward our own agenda but with willingness to change -- we might be able to find it.

Source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/danielle-tumminio/religious-freedom-or-reli_b_1336494.html