On This Fourth of July by Natalie Weaver


I woke up this morning with a terrible itch in my mind.  I want to sue the government.  I’m not a lawyer, at least not yet, and I know that governments have sovereign immunity that typically prevents them from being sued.  But, it didn’t and doesn’t seem right that I feel so lied to and unprotected during this pandemic.  What is more, I know I am not deluded.  Either it is bad or it isn’t. Either it is spreading and lethal, or it isn’t.  Either precautions help, or they don’t.  It can’t be that ambiguous from a viral-behavioral perspective.  Government leadership refuses to speak or model a consistent, truthful, and accountable model for the social welfare, leading to such absurd reductions (in Ohio, for example) as that each individual school child can decide whether s/he wants to wear a face-covering this fall.  So, what gives?  Why all the half-, mixed, mis-, and disinformation?

Freedom of speech in the United States of America is not unequivocal.  In 249 U.S. 47 (1919), the Supreme Court decided that it was illegal to circulate anti-draft literature during World War I in Schenck v. United States.  According to Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., words that cause a “clear and present danger” are not protected speech.  For, he went on to say famously that even: “The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting ‘Fire’ in a theatre…”   In another statute, 18 U.S. Code  §1038 says that anyone who engages in false information and hoaxes, with any conduct to convey false or misleading information that may be reasonably believed is subject to criminal punishment of fines or imprisonment, of anywhere between five years to life, if harm or death results.  Furthermore, under this code, defendants may be liable for civil penalties.  Our highest court has maintained that speech which is obscene, fraudulent, defaming, inciting, threatening, and/or integral to already criminal conduct is not protected under the First Amendment.  In short, one can’t just lie legally in dangerous, public ways that cause harm to persons, property, social welfare, and/or result in death.  You and I can’t do it, so why can thought leaders, television personalities, legislators, and executives in government get away with it?

Here following is an example of what I consider to be a trend in dangerous, public speech.  On January 14, the World Health Organization tweeted that “Preliminary investigations conducted by the Chinese authorities have found no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission of the novel #coronavirus (2019-nCoV) identified in #Wuhan#China,” even though, according to its own website, WHO noted on that same day that it was certainly possible that the virus could be spread by human-to-human transmission.  They knew theoretically; they may have known actually; it was their responsibility to know absolutely before they tweeted deadly misinformation.  (I understand that WHO is not under the auspices of US governance, but we have historically funded WHO and deferred initially to their guidance for public policy.)

On April 3, 2020, the CDC began recommending that Americans wear face coverings in public to slow the spread of the disease.  Yet, on April 6, 2020, WHO said mask wearing by healthy people could result in unnecessary face touching and take away masks from the medical professionals who needed them, and thus they discouraged widespread use of masks by healthy people.  They were also concerned, apparently, that people would rely on masks and desist from washing hands.  In short, they assumed average people would be irresponsible if we wore face coverings.

 Now, in a remarkably cryptic doublespeak, WHO says:  “Non-medical, fabric masks are being used by many people in public areas, but there has been limited evidence on their effectiveness and WHO does not recommend their widespread use among the public for control of COVID-19. However, for areas of widespread transmission, with limited capacity for implementing control measures and especially in settings where physical distancing of at least 1 metre is not possible – such as on public transport, in shops or in other confined or crowded environments – WHO advises governments to encourage the general public to use non-medical fabric masks.”

Of course, these three or so points on this particular map are but a miniscule sampling of (shall we give it a name?) The COVID Messaging War.  Who could blame people everywhere for not getting it right?  Today, because of disinformation, misinformation, and misleading rationales about the efficacy of face coverings and the seriousness of this disease, we are fighting each other at the local ice cream shops over whether to cover up and coughing on cabbage in the produce aisle.  “Mask” has become some divisive contronym for freedom and oppression, while media and news personalities capitalize on opinion to jockey for viewers and funds as politicians use our collective vulnerability and individual fears to jockey for office.  This situation poses to us a “clear and present danger” of misleading information that heralds from the world’s in fact most empowered and thereby theoretically credible sources (including news outlets, the until-recently-predominantly U.S. funded World Health Organization of the United Nations, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the U.S. federal and state governments).   It seems to me that they, all of them, are at once variously shouting “fire” and “nothing to see here” in the theaters of our lives (that is, the schools, groceries, parks, and restaurants).  And, what is more? We pay for it, whether through our support of media outlets or through compulsory taxation.

On this Fourth of July, I find myself considering my frustration.  I like my home, and I love the people who comprise this varied and dynamic and still-forging country.  But, I am horrified by the incontrovertible data about how disease is ravaging us and how poorly our country is handling it, from the President, to the befuddled governors that don’t want to issue any guidance any longer, to the celebrity opiners, to the unmasked masses at beaches and protests, to the spitters in aisle seven, we should be better.  Moreover, I think people of the United States have a legitimate case under the Federal Tort Claims Act to sue the government for damages to life and property for the abject failure of leadership to keep us safe in these times, especially in consideration of the statues that do not protect false and dangerously misleading information.  And, every purportedly reputable news outlet or personality that has misinformed the public about this disease should likewise face criminal and civil charges.

I am frustrated, specifically as a single mother, because I feel afraid and overwhelmed and as if the capitol has fallen and I am darting across enemy lines with my kids under my skirt.  There’s no one to help, no guidance I trust, and I’m lysoling the bag of celery so intensely that I’m sure we’ll die of carcinogens if the other thing doesn’t get us.  But, underneath that sense of being hunted in the woods, I find another feeling.  That feeling is Resistance.  Rage.  No.  Stop.  That I’m Not Playing Any Longer.

I started off asking myself what does wanting to sue the government have to do with women or feminism, specifically?  I decided Everything.  The ineptitude of these structures of leadership to which we have been subjected has at last shown itself to be killing us.  We need to change the whole script, beginning with the inverted metric that minimalist success of our society is to be gauged by the welfare of the least-voiced, most vulnerable women among us.  Only women can assume the reigns of responsibility for a new, non-hunted, non-running, smart and sober paradigm shift, because no one will do it for us.

In the late 5th century BCE, Aristophanes’ comedy Lysistrata toyed with idea of women’s power to end the Peloponnesian War between Greek city states through women’s banding together and denying sex to their bellicose men.  It’s a comedy, of course, and sex as currency isn’t really the direction we want to pursue here.  But, there is a kind of eerie power in the idea that women could simply change everything by not playing along, by changing the script, by using our voices and our minds to stop it all and start it afresh.  Women need truly, deeply, powerfully, and irrevocably to come together.  We need to step out of participation in every binary script that keeps us divided.  We need to discover and employ every tool of empowerment to reframe and redefine the commonweal, starting perhaps with a lawful action of Women vs. the United States of America over the handling of the Covid-19 crisis.

I used to laugh at the grandiosity of Pope Paul VI’s address to women at the close of the Second Vatican Council on December 8, 1965, being myself heartily unconvinced that the Council gave women any true support needed to carry out the charge therein issued.  He said: “Women of the entire universe, whether Christian or non-believing, you to whom life is entrusted at this grave moment in history, it is for you to save the peace of the world.”  It is about time, I think, to take him up on it.

 

Natalie Kertes Weaver, Ph.D.is Chair and Professor of Religious Studies at Ursuline College in Pepper Pike, Ohio. Natalie’s academic books includeMarriage and Family: A Christian Theological Foundation (Anselm, 2009); Christian Thought and Practice: A Primer (Anselm, 2012); and The Theology of Suffering and Death: An Introduction for Caregivers (Routledge, 2013)Natalie’s most recent book is Made in the Image of God: Intersex and the Revisioning of Theological Anthropology (Wipf & Stock, 2014).  Natalie has also authored two art books: Interior Design: Rooms of a Half-Life and Baby’s First Latin.  Natalie’s areas of interest and expertise include: feminist theology; theology of suffering; theology of the family; religion and violence; and (inter)sex and theology.  Natalie is a married mother of two sons, Valentine and Nathan.  For pleasure, Natalie studies classical Hebrew, poetry, piano, and voice.


Categories: Activism, American History, General, Women's Voices

Tags: , , ,

7 replies

  1. The masks we wear or don’t have a limited capacity to protect others…. I wear one routinely because should I be carrying the disease i don’t want to be responsible for spreading it…but I note how often I am adjusting the damn thing…

    The mask has become some kind of symbol for freedom or oppression – meanwhile, the disease is spreading…

    The Fourth of July is a joke.

    Like

  2. I agree – absolutely!!

    Like

  3. Excellent post. Brava! I think we’re living in Orwell’s novel, 1984. Yes, it’s time for women to take action.

    Like

  4. I don’t have to worry about masks as I am doing, for myself, what is necessary to stay safe. I stay home. And it is true – none of us know who to believe and so we need to do what our inner voice – our conscience – says to do and if we are at risk and people don’t wear masks – we stay away.

    We do have laws that, in all honesty, prohibit government control and that makes it very difficult. My whole family is in conflict about what is safe and what is not. My son’s business has been destroyed – his wife works when she can as a hair stylist. My daughter and her daughter and kids are not isolating and not wearing masks but they would never come near me, so on some level they know they are risking!

    It is a tough call!

    Liked by 1 person

  5. Thanks to the Pope and the Dalai Lama for seeing the writing on the wall.

    Like

  6. This is brilliant.
    “ But, there is a kind of eerie power in the idea that women could simply change everything by not playing along, by changing the script, by using our voices and our minds to stop it all and start it afresh. Women need truly, deeply, powerfully, and irrevocably to come together. We need to step out of participation in every binary script that keeps us divided. We need to discover and employ every tool of empowerment to reframe and redefine the commonweal, starting perhaps with a lawful action of Women vs. the United States of America over the handling of the Covid-19 crisis.”
    Thank you.

    Like

  7. “Who could blame people everywhere for not getting it right? Today, because of disinformation, misinformation, and misleading rationales about the efficacy of face coverings and the seriousness of this disease, we are fighting each other at the local ice cream shops over whether to cover up and coughing on cabbage in the produce aisle.” I love this very compassionate and reasonable point. As a person with contamination OCD, I worry about others as well as myself wearing fabric over our noses and mouths, possibly coughing and breathing and creating an environment that breeds and traps contaminants.

    Also, not to take over this very important issue, but also a concern of mine on the 4th is the disregard for the health of the earth and all living beings with the mindless use of fireworks. From Forbes.com:

    A 3 week study in London, spanning two major festivals that are celebrated with fireworks, found increased gas phase pollutant levels of nitric oxide (NOx) and sulfur dioxide (SO2), which are primary contributors to acid rain as well as important climate change gases that also serve to irritate the lungs and throat. This study also found elevated mass concentrations of fine particulates, and trace concentrations of heavy metals, specifically strontium (Sr), magnesium (Mg), potassium (K), barium (Ba), and lead (Pb) (ref).

    But how much more of these heavy metals can just one fireworks show add to the atmosphere? Surely, not much? No, not so. A case study found that within 1 hour of fireworks displays, strontium levels in the air increased 120 times, magnesium 22 times, barium 12 times, potassium 11 times, and copper (Cu) 6 times more than the amount already present in the air before the event (ref).

    Hospital admissions for asthma and other breathing problems peak the day following a fireworks display.

    You would think that with a respiratory pandemic happening globally, the American government would have suggested states decline firework use to keep our air clean to give all living beings the best possible chance at good lungs. But no, we don’t think about the consequences to what we are used to.

    Like

Please familiarize yourself with our Comment Policy before posting.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: