Two Halves of a Rabbit

On a beautiful summer day in 2024, both of my dogs were out romping on a little over eight acres of woods that we have been blessed to steward in the Pacific Northwest.   While they romped, I was "enjoying" yard work on the property (otherwise known as the ultimate in "free" gym and fitness experiences) when I noticed our older dog racing out of the brush at breakneck speed.  I also noticed a smaller creature with a round little cottontail racing out of the same brush at a slightly faster speed.  Much to my dismay, the smaller creature soon slowed down and my dog caught up to the poor little thing which led to a scene that I won't describe in detail.   

The rabbit did not survive the experience.  To make matters worse, my other dog wanted to get in on the action and we ended up with two halves of a recently thriving rabbit in the mouths of two different dogs, running in different directions around the yard.  There was absolutely nothing I could say to them, no matter what the level of my voice, that would persuade them to stop being so "cruel" to that poor rabbit.  Their brains had turned off and instinct had kicked in at full volume.  

In that moment of horror and dismay, I couldn't recognize the sweet, mild-mannered, playful, and affectionate dogs that I knew and that got  along with my two cats (also "prey") just fine.  In that moment, all I saw was two predators doing what predators do.  

Hunting and killing.

This, despite the fact that these two canines were guaranteed two full meals a day and ample treats that would never leave them truly hungry. This despite the fact that they were "trained" to behave without aggression. This despite the fact that there were at least a hundred other, quite fun things to do in the great outdoors. 

Anthropomorphizing them, however, wasn't the way to go. This behavior was their instinct. The fact that both dogs are part hound only strengthens their impulse to hunt, tree, and kill.  

I hated watching this scene unfold, but I gave up my first impulse to scold and yell at them to drop the rabbit and retreated to the house until it was over. I couldn't watch any more of it.  The image of those two halves will be etched in my memory forever.

The scene made me think about how as human beings, we are created differently. We have been granted the immense privilege of being able to override our instinct in favor of compassion.  And with that privilege, it seems that we have a responsibility to reject cruelty and choose kindness.  We have the potential for self control. We can choose not to be cruel.  If we have enough to eat, we can refrain from hunt and kill.  As omnivores, we have the technology and capacity to kill the animals we ultimately eat -- humanely and with respect.

Yet so often and in so many ways, we choose to do otherwise.  We choose cruelty. We choose to be unkind.  And often it appears to have nothing to do with instinct.  Sometimes... too often...we come up with new and horrifying ways to act.  We come up with unkind and ugly ways of being that are far beyond the capacity of two hound dogs.

They do what they do purely out of instinct. 

And what of human beings?  If our basic needs are fulfilled, why would we and why do we choose to be cruel? 

Unity rather than Division (SB100)

 This blog is part of my ongoing effort to maintain a record of my written communication expressing concern about what is presently going in the U.S.  

Florida has a bill up for consideration this legislative session (SB100) entitled Display of Flags by Government Entities:

Display of Flags by Governmental Entities; Defining the term “governmental entity”; prohibiting governmental entities from erecting or displaying certain flags; requiring governmental entities to remain neutral in certain circumstances; authorizing a current or retired member of the United States Armed Forces or the National Guard to use reasonable force to prevent the desecration, destruction, or removal of the United States flag or to replace such flag to a position of prominence, etc.

Many people view this bill as an effort to keep Pride and Black Lives Matter flags out of government buildings.  In my view, the bill continues to shine the spotlight on divisiveness rather than on unity. I believe that unifying people is part of the responsibility of governments at all levels (local, state, national).   I oppose the bill because I think "objective" interpretation of political neutrality, in the current mood of Florida and the nation, is far more likely to lead to subjective and biased interpretation than objectivity.   The following letter was focused on promoting unity rather than further divisiveness in opposition to SB100.  

Written on March 3, 2025 to my FL state senator and FL state representative:

I am writing as one of your constituents to encourage you to vote against SB100 (Display of Flags by Governmental Entities).   I do not disagree with the premise of the bill which appears to be to preserve political neutrality in government buildings.   My concern is that what is or is not politically neutral is vulnerable to subjective interpretation and therefore, equally vulnerable to bias.  If the state of Florida continues to pass laws that are vulnerable to subjective interpretation, we risk inflaming or promoting further divisiveness. I grew up in Florida and this is not consistent with the Florida I know or the Florida I want.   

I would prefer that we consider bills that are more resistant to cultural or political bias, that focus on unifying rather than dividing. I may be naive on this, but why not simply restrict flags in Florida government buildings to the U.S. flag and the Florida flag with a clear message that reflects the mission of Florida government.  Perhaps, a statement along the lines of "Florida strives to protect, educate, and improve quality of life for all Floridians".  

I fully understand that sometimes the voices of underrepresented groups can seem too loud or too aggressive, but instead of responding in a hostile way to such messaging, I strongly support crafting a positive and neutral message.  As Floridians, we need  to do what we can to stop riding the negative wave that the current culture wars seem to be on.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Corporations are not people

This blog is part of my ongoing effort to maintain a record of my written communication expressing concern about the actions of the current presidential administration that lead to unnecessary (and in some cases cruel) harm to others, to the U.S., or to the global community. 

I wrote the following letter regarding concerns over the increasingly negative impact of the Supreme Court's 2010 decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission which ultimately gave more influence and power over our federal elections to corporations and the ultra wealthy few in the U.S.  

More about Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission

While 2010 was quite a while ago, the increasing impact of the 2010 decision is being felt in a big and ultra concerning way in recent elections.   HJR 54 is a resolution to support a constitutional amendment that limits the rights protected by and stated in the U.S. constitution to natural persons only (and not to corporations).  

Information about HJR 54

How to reach your U.S. Senators:

https://www.senate.gov/senators/senators-contact.htm

How to reach your U.S. Representative:

https://www.house.gov/representatives/find-your-representative

***************************************************

Dear Senator <Name>,

Dear Representative <Name>,

As one of your constituents, I am writing to urge you to support HJR 54, the We the People Amendment, to ensure that the vote and will of the American people are the primary force behind selecting our leaders and guiding our norms, policies, and laws in the U.S.

Corporations are not people.  Money is not speech.  The Supreme Court's 2010 ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission handed a disproportionate and growing amount of influence and power in our elections to those who have money ... both corporations and the ultra wealthy few in the United States.

Money pays for propaganda and influence that the ordinary American cannot compete with.  And the transparency presumed to prevent the Citizens United decision from increasing corruption and limiting influence in American politics to a select few has not materialized.   Now more than ever, I am deeply concerned that our leaders and legislators are pressured into serving the interests of corporations and the ultra wealthy few instead of us, the people. Corporate interests, power, and greed have become far too influential in policy priorities and decisions. 

If not HJR54, then please act and act quickly to restore the balance in our democracy, so that the voice, vote and influence of ordinary Americans on our federal government is on par with the voice and influence of other entities and the wealthy. The U.S. Constitution makes no mention of corporations or other organized entities exerting power over the will of the people.  Yet, here we are, in exactly such a situation.  Money and power must not be the determining influences in our government; by definition, this denies us democracy.   

Sincerely,

<Name of Constituent>