+
“A balm for the soul”
  review on Goodreads
GOOD PEOPLE Book
upworthy
Democracy

Synagogue sues Florida over abortion ban, saying it violates freedom of religion for Jews

Advocating for abortion access is not the religious argument we usually hear, but it is no less valid than religious arguments against it.

abortion, jewish, florida

Jewish leaders are explaining that abortion is a religious right.

Debate over legal access to abortion has long been a part of social and political discourse, but increasing state-level restrictions and a leaked Supreme Court draft opinion that threatens to overturn five decades of legal precedent have propelled abortion directly into the spotlight once again.

While we're accustomed to seeing religious arguments against abortion from Christian organizations, a synagogue in Florida is flipping the script, making the argument that banning abortion actually violates Jewish religious liberty.

In a lawsuit against the Florida government, Congregation L’Dor Va-Dor of Boynton Beach says that the state's pending abortion law, which prohibits abortion after 15 weeks with few exceptions, violates the Jewish teaching that abortion "is required if necessary to protect the health, mental or physical well-being of the woman.” Citing the constitutional right to freedom of religion, the lawsuit states that the act "prohibits Jewish women from practicing their faith free of government intrusion and this violates their privacy rights and religious freedom."

Wow.



The Florida 15-week abortion ban only grants exceptions if the mother's life is at risk, if she is at risk of "irreversible physical impairment" or if the fetus is found to have a fatal abnormality. There are no exceptions for rape, incest or human trafficking.

If Jewish law stipulates that access to abortion is required not only for a woman's physical well-being but also her mental well-being, then laws that criminalize such access are violating religious freedom, Congregation L’Dor Va-Dor contends.

Advocating for abortion access is not the religious argument we usually hear, but it is on equal footing with religious arguments against it. (It's worth pointing out that Governor Ron DeSantis signed the Florida abortion act into law not at his office, but rather at a church.)

The synagogue's lawsuit raises the question of which religion takes precedence when it comes to legislation. It also highlights the difference between "This is against my religion, therefore no one can do it" and "This is part of my religious tradition, therefore I legally have a right to access it." The former really has no place in U.S. law, as it violates the traditional separation of church and state, and the latter is a prime example of the purpose of the First Amendment right to freedom of religion.

Part of what makes legislating abortion so messy is that the questions at the heart of the debate are actually largely religious in nature. What is the true nature of human life and when does life begin? At what point is a zygote, an embryo, a fetus considered a full human being with the same rights as the rest of us? What is the relationship between a human (or potential human) in the womb and the person whose body is building it? What responsibilities does the person who is building it have toward that life, and what responsibility does society and/or the government have in holding the human accountable for those responsibilities?

These are all legitimate questions that don't have easy, straightforward answers, no matter how simplistic and undernuanced people try to make them. They may be simple questions for some people to answer individually, but collectively? No. We all make those determinations based on different criteria, different beliefs, different values and different understandings of the nature of life. There is no way for "we the people" as a whole to answer those questions definitively.

And the implications of those questions extend far beyond the abortion debate. The Cleveland Clinic states that one-third to a half of pregnancies end in miscarriage before a person even knows they're pregnant. For those who believe that life begins at conception or fertilization, should every death in the womb be considered a tragedy? Should we mourn the loss of lives we carried that we never even knew existed?

There are the slippery slopes that stem from those questions as well. Some religious people may see a miscarriage as God's will, but what if it was caused by something a woman did? What if a miscarriage occurred because of an action taken of her own free will? Is she culpable for that loss using the same logic we use to criminalize abortion? At what point do we start policing women's behaviors—what she eats or drinks, what medications she takes, whether she's around smokers, and so on—at all times in order to protect a life she may potentially be carrying? We're already seeing women being jailed for miscarriages. How far will we go with it?

What about things like child support payments and government benefits? Why we do not expect child support to be paid from the moment a pregnancy is detected? Why do we not give Social Security numbers to Americans in the womb? Why can we not claim a child on our taxes until they are born? If there is genuinely no difference between a life being grown inside a uterus at 12 or 15 or 20 weeks and a life outside a uterus, why does the law treat them differently?

How do we begin to answer these questions when the heart of them always circles back to individual beliefs?

The synagogue's religious freedom argument is compelling for sure, but the bottom line is we shouldn't be legislating on something based on religious beliefs in the first place. "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…" That's literally the opening line of the First Amendment of the Constitution. Banning abortion is, in effect, establishing a particular religious belief as law and prohibiting the free exercise of religion for an entire group of people.

At a basic level, abortion is 1) a medical event that entails far too many individual factors that are not the business of the government to judge, and 2) a choice that is determined to be valid or invalid, right or wrong, based largely on individual religious beliefs. Both of those realities are reason enough for legislators, who are neither medical professionals nor religious leaders, to stay out of people's uteruses and leave these incredibly personal medical and religious decisions to the individual.

A guy having a collaborative conversation.

The quickest way to stop having a constructive dialog with someone is when they become defensive. This usually results in them digging in their heels and making you defensive. This can result in a vicious cycle of back-and-forth defensive behavior that can feel impossible to break. Once that happens, the walls go up, the gloves come off and resolving the situation becomes tough.

Amanda Ripley, author of “High Conflict: Why We Get Trapped and How We Get Out,” says in her book that you can prevent someone you disagree with from becoming defensive by being curious about their opinion.

Ripley is a bestselling author and the co-founder of Good Conflict, a media and training company that helps people reimagine conflict.


How to have a constructive conversation

Let’s say you believe the room should be painted red and your spouse says it should be blue. Instead of saying, “I think blue is ugly,” you can say, “It’s interesting that you say that…” and ask them to explain why they chose blue.

The key phrase is: “It’s interesting that you say that…”


conversation, arguments, communication tipsPeople coming to an agreement. via Canva/Photos

When you show the other person that you genuinely care about their thoughts and appreciate their reasoning, they let down their guard. This makes them feel heard and encourages them to hear your side as well. This approach also encourages the person you disagree with to consider coming up with a collaborative solution instead of arguing to defend their position.

It’s important to assume the other person has the best intentions while listening to them make their case. “To be genuinely curious, we need to refrain from judgment and making negative assumptions about others. Assume the other person didn’t intend to annoy you. Assume they are doing the best they can. Assume the very best about them. You’ll appreciate it when others do it for you,” Kaitlyn Skelly at The Ripple Effect Education writes.

Phrases you can use to avoid an argument

The curiosity approach can also involve affirming the other person’s perspective while adding your own, using a phrase like, “On the one hand, I see what you’re saying. On the other hand…”

Here are some other phrases you can use:

“I wonder if…”

“It’s interesting that you say that because I see it differently…”

“I might be wrong, but…”

“How funny! I had a different reaction…”

“I hadn’t thought of it like that! For me, though, it seems…”

“I think I understand your point, though I look at it a little differently…”


conversation, arguments, communication tipsTwo men high-fiving one another.via Canva/Photos

What's the best way to disagree with people?

A 2016 study from Yale University supports Ripley’s ideas. The study found that when people argue to “win,” they take a hard line and only see one correct answer in the conflict. Whereas those who want to “learn” are more likely to see that there is more than one solution to the problem. At that point, competition magically turns into collaboration.

“Being willing to hear out other perspectives and engage in dialogue that isn’t simply meant to convince the other person you’re right can lead to all sorts of unexpected insights,” psychologist and marketing Professor at Southern Methodist University tells CNBC.

In a world of strong opinions and differing perspectives, curiosity can be a superpower that helps you have more constructive conversations with those with whom you disagree. All it takes is a little humility and an open mind, and you can turn conflict into collaboration, building bridges instead of walls.

The Rye Riptide washed up on the shores of Norway.

This story brings a whole new meaning to the word friendship.

In October 2020, the middle schoolers of Rye Junior High, in Rye, New Hampshire, bid a bon voyage to their handmade mini-boat, which set sail off the coast of New Hampshire to who-knows-where.

Measuring only 5.5 feet, the “Rye Riptides” was indeed a small ship. It ran crewless, but carried a bountiful cargo of colorful artwork made by students, along with a GPS tracking device that reported the boat’s location … sometimes.

Cut to 462 days and 8,300 miles later, and what started out as a simple science project became a surprise discovery for some Norwegian sixth graders, and a fun new connection across the Atlantic.


Rye Junior High had partnered with Educational Passages, a nonprofit organization that aims to connect students around the world to the ocean and each other. Once the kit arrived, the kids started building while learning about ocean currents, science and math. However, science teacher Sheila Adams shares that the more artistic, right-brained activities equally found their way into the curriculum. “The students needed to use their writing skills to inform others about their mini-boat project, describe our school and town to people of other languages, just in case, and write requests to get the boat deployed,” she said in a release.

…not me feeling jealous of some middle schoolers right now…

COVID-19 nearly threatened to knock the Rye Riptides off its course. The boat had been constructed, but not yet decorated, when students were moved to taking class online. Then, there was the matter of launching the boat. Which Cassie Stymiest, director of Educational Passages, noted was “challenging with all the restrictions in place.” Luckily, creativity, resourcefulness and a little technology saved the day. Working remotely, each piece of art was done at home, then scanned, printed and made into a collage. Then, Ms. Stymiest connected with the Sea Education Association (SEA), which set the Rye Riptides on its journey.

Seriously, my inner child is geeking out with this stuff.

Would the boat make it to Europe? Rye student Solstice Reed wasn’t so sure. “Honestly, I thought it would sink,” she admitted to the Portsmouth Herald. Considering the boat was cruising the ocean waters during hurricane season, the skepticism was well-founded. During the more tumultuous periods, the GPS signal only came in intermittently. And for a long while, there was nothing but radio silence.

But then, at long last, on the small Norwegian island of Smøla, the Rye Riptides successfully made it to dry land. Sure, it was a bit dismantled and covered in barnacles, but inside, all the adorable trinkets remained intact. The Smøla students peered with wonder into their bounty of photos, signed facemasks, fall leaves, acorns and state quarters, gifts sent out almost two years ago.

The voyage of the small boat has gone viral in a big way, sailing across social media, and making headlines. And now, Educational Passages plans on facilitating video meet-ups between Rye Junior High and the school in Norway, “to continue building this new relationship to learn from each other and about the shared Atlantic Ocean between them.” Plus, NPR reports, the students of Smøla would be writing a letter to their new American friends.

Human connection found its way across the sea in the most wholesome and magical way. It’s really cool to see that educational programs like this exist, impacting both the hearts and minds of young students. Mission, successful.


This article originally appeared on 2.22.22

Popular

A seemingly simple Final Jeopardy question stumped all three contestants in 1984

It was only Alex Trebek's second day on the job when all three contestants gave the same wrong answer and all ended up with $0 .

Representative photo by Rosemaryetoufee

"Jeopardy!" is one of the most popular trivia shows in the world.

The popular game show "Jeopardy!" originated in 1964, and for six decades it has stumped contestants and viewers with tough trivia questions and answers (or answers and questions, to be more accurate). Competing on "Jeopardy!" is practically synonymous with being a smartypants, and champions win lifelong bragging rights along with whatever monetary winnings they end up taking home.

To win "Jeopardy!," you place a wager in the Final Jeopardy round with whatever money you've collected through the first two rounds. All three contestants write down their wagers based solely on the category given, then they have 30 seconds to write down the question for the same answer after it's revealed. Very rarely do all three contestants get the Final Jeopardy wrong.

But in 1984, on Alex Trebek's second day hosting the show, a deceptively simple Final Jeopardy answer answer resulted in all three contestants making the same wrong guess and ending the round with $0 each.


The category was "The Calendar," and after the contestants placed their bets, the answer was revealed: "Calendar date with which the 20th century began."

- YouTubewww.youtube.com

The 20th century was the 1900s, as most of us are aware, and all three contestants wrote down identical responses: "What is January 1, 1900?" But they were all incorrect. And unfortunately, all three had wagered their entire amount, leaving them with nothing across the board.

"Oh, I don't believe it!" exclaimed one of the contestants as they all laughed at the absurdity. "I'm at a loss for words," said Trebek.

A member of the audience asked what the correct answer–or question— was, and Trebek shared that the correct response would have been "What is January 1, 1901?"

If that seems confusing, it's probably because we all made a huge deal about the year 2000, marking it as the end of the 21st century as well as the turn of the millennium. But basically, we were wrong. Some people did point it out at the time, but the excitement and momentum of celebrating Y2K had us all in a frenzy and no one was going to wait until January 1, 2001 to celebrate the new millennium.

Why should we have? It all comes down to the fact that in the Gregorian calendar the first year wasn't 0 A.D., it was 1 A.D. The first century spanned from 1 to 100 A.D., the second century from 101 to 200 A.D. and so on, leading up to the 20th century officially being from 1901 to 2000. So January 1, 1901 is actually the date that the 20th century began, despite how unituitive it feels.

To be fair, you'd think a "Jeopardy!" contestant might recognize that the question seemed awfully simple for a Final Jeopardy round, but only having 30 seconds to think under pressure is tough. And it's not like these people lived in the internet era where random trivia questions like this regularly go viral, making us more aware of them. And this episode aired over a decade before the "Seinfeld" episode where Jerry explains the "no year zero" thing to Newman, who had planned a millennium party.

- YouTubeyoutu.be

As one person pointed out, the calendar answer is technically correct, but it's not the way the average person thinks of centuries, just as a tomato is technically fruit but the average person thinks of it (and uses it) as a vegetable. Even though there were some sticklers about the year 2000, most of us just went along with seeing it as the turn of the millennium because it felt like that's how it should be. It's kind of wild how most of us can think of something incorrectly but we just sort of collectively accept our wrongness about it.

The 1984 episode has been making the viral rounds, prompting people to share how much they miss Alex Trebek. The beloved, long-time "Jeopardy!" host died in 2020 at age 80 after a 20-month battle with pancreatic cancer. He worked up until the point where he couldn't anymore, even while undergoing chemotherapy. His final episode included a touching tribute honoring his 37 seasons with the game show, the end of an illustrious and iconic era.

- YouTubewww.youtube.com

via Pexels

First day of school can be exhausting … but for who?

It’s back-to-school time and that means new school supplies, a trip to Target for clothes and social media channels flooded with photos of kids holding chalkboards. Over the past decade, back-to-school photos with kids standing on their doorsteps with signs with their name, grade, year and teacher have been ubiquitous on social media.

There’s nothing wrong with the photos, they’re a cute way for parents and kids to mark the passage of time. For most parents, it’s a way to remember that it all goes by way too fast.

However, for the “perfect” parents out there who like to flaunt their Instagrammable lifestyle, they’re another way to show off their “flawless” first days on social media.

In an attempt to show parents they don't have to fall for the myth of perfection on social media, Jeni Bukolt—a mother of two boys age 8 and 12 from Waxhaw, North Carolina—posted a first-day photo of herself looking burnt out and wearing sunglasses. School hadn’t even begun yet.

"Mom's first day of school,” the handmade sign read. "I am 42 years tired. I'll probably miss a school 'theme' day. I really like sleep. Please don't ask me to volunteer. But I will buy you supplies."


"I make signs for my kids each year but lately I've thought about how I always feel behind, as though I'm failing (in some way)," Bukolt told Today. Clearly, other parents feel the same because it was a hit with a lot of them on Instagram.

A lot of comments were from parents who thought the photo was a breath of fresh air during a stressful time of year. "Brilliant, you speak for millions!" cathycole wrote. "May we all survive the drop off/pick up lane," merakifitnessandpole added.

"I thought maybe if I can create a lighthearted moment, some other moms will laugh and understand we're all in this kind of struggle together. Like, let's have empathy for each other," Bukolt told Good Morning America.

Bukolt hopes her post builds an “empathy bridge” between parents. She’d also like to shine a little reality on the parents who feel judged on social media.

"I also feel like when you look at social media, there's all these, [picture perfect] worlds,” she added. “It's not the true story. And some people think like, 'Oh, they have it better or they're perfect,' and this is an opportunity to say no, we're all real human beings ... we're all in the struggle together."

But of course, there were some humorless parents who thought her post wasn’t supportive of teachers or her two sons. So Bukolt made a follow-up where she explained that she was just having fun.

“For the keyboard warriors… yes I do have a job, yes I love my kids and no, I don’t hate teachers. Back to work. Have a great day!” she wrote.

Parenting is hard and we all fall short of glory at times. Kudos to Bukolt for making us feel a little less alone and letting us know that some folks have already accepted their imperfections on the first day.

"If other moms can get a good laugh about it, then that makes my heart happy," she said.


This article originally appeared on 9.2.22

Bounder playing fetch with his neighbor.

Every dog is different when it comes to playing fetch. Some have zero interest in playing, while others are obsessed with the game and won’t stop playing until their human friends force them to stop.

There are a lot of reasons why dogs love to play fetch. First, most dogs are genetically predisposed to chasing after objects that move, whether it’s a car or a squirrel. They also instinctually bring back prey to their dens.

“After a hunt, sometimes the wolf will carry the prey back to the den to be consumed safely with the pack, essentially ‘retrieving’ dinner for the family,” Katelyn Schutz, Certified Professional Dog Trainer of Wisconsin Pet Care, said according to BarkPost. “The game of fetch in our pet dogs is suggested to be a simple variation of this ‘prey-carrying’ behavior.”

Fetch also stimulates the reward centers in a dog’s brain, so once they get started playing they don’t want to stop. Bounder, Brittney Reynolds’ black Labrador, can’t get enough of catching and retrieving a tennis ball.

“He’s obsessed,” Reynolds told The Dodo. “He will play fetch until I make him stop.”



@brittneygoes

He brings it back to the edge of the fence. #blacklab #doglover #SeeHerGreatness

Bounders' obsession with the game led him to ask Reynolds’ neighbor to play fetch with him when she wouldn’t. She discovered the game had been going on in secret one day when she went outside to see why Bounder was barking and discovered he was asking the neighbor to play with him.

“The neighbor was sitting on his back patio with the ball gun on the table, and Bounder was staring him down and barking at him wanting to play,” Reynolds said. “I tried to tell him to stop barking, but the neighbor got up and started shooting the ball gun for him. It was just so cute. I went and thanked him for playing with my boy and found out that they had been doing this for a while.”

The neighbors had a ball gun to play fetch with their dog, Layla.

Reynolds shared a wholesome video of Bounder and the neighbor playing together and it went viral receiving over 6.8 million views. “Just found out my neighbor and my dog have been playing fetch together over the fence,” she captioned the video.

Some commenters thought the game was great for the dog and the neighbor, too. "I just watched all your videos on this and I'm in love with this story! Your dogs have new grandparents and they have a reason to stay active," Monica wrote.

"I hope that you know that allowing this is making that man’s day. You are a great neighbor and humanitarian. Thank you," another user wrote.

@brittneygoes

Caught the neighbor playing with a Bounder again. He looks forward to this. #goodneighbors #doglovers #Totinos425

“I am a huge dog lover, and it always makes me happy to see others treating dogs so well,” Reynolds said about her neighbor.

“Our dogs are our family, and I think you can tell a lot about a person by the way they treat animals.” Reynolds shared a follow-up video that showed the over-the-fence fetch game is still happening.


This article originally appeared on 5.2.22