New Yorker "millenials" unite against the NYPD's policies

                    The tragic death of Eric Garner was unfortunately viewed as horrific, yet typical by many who have grown up in poor neighborhoods in New York City. Minorities have long been the subject of unfair racial targeting and excessive aggression brought about by the hands of the NYPD. These communities have marched in the past and yet change has not come. We marched when Sean Bell was shot, yet change has not come. We are now marching for Eric Garner and still serious changes are not being considered or even vocalized. Mayor de Blasio and police chief Bratton have given conciliatory words, but neither of them have acknowledged that sweeping change needs to occur in the force. And for a second I will forsake everything I believe in to keep an open mind. Crime in New York City is at an all time low. Whether that is a result of the harsh policies brought in the 90s or demographic shifts or other unanticipated externalities (e.g. Freakonimcs famous abortion chapter) is the question nobody wants to answer. But it is the question that needs to be answered. There can no longer be a justification of the needless murder of minorities in the city. We cannot allow racial profiling to become the crux of our police force's tactics. Yet many whites in the city are content with just allowing the status quo to stay the same. Well it's time for meaningful change.
                   This meaningful change needs to come through evaluation of hard facts. For example, look at the NYCLU report on stop and frisk to see the ineffectiveness of an exorbitant amount of stops. Also, why is it that whites are suspected of engaging in crimes such as misdemeanors and drugs at a far lower rate than Latinos and Blacks. To assume that whites in the city are using less or are far more mature than their Black and Latino counterparts seems like a large oversight. The racial bias is clear and many a racist person in the city is ok with this. Most of the voices I hear shouting vehemently in support of the NYPD are white. It doesn't surprise me that this is the case. White people have no reason to fear the NYPD because the tactics being used don't racially target them. But to hastily frame this as a "racist white phenomena" would be premature. I have heard from many Latinos and Blacks themselves that they believe Blacks and Latinos deserve this extra scrutiny. Racism and self hatred is something that is embedded in the city. As I grew up I was taught to hate people like me. I was also taught to differentiate myself from them. There were "ghetto" Puerto Ricans and then there were those like me. What I didn't realize was that when others looked at me, they wouldn't see the difference. And then I realized further that was because there was no difference. We were both Puerto Rican; others thought of us as ghetto. One of us rejected the term, the other didn't bother to comment. Rooted in the city is a sense of knowing. We all think we are culturally competent to the point that we can make sweeping generalizations. And when a minority awkwardly laughs with you as you make a joke that clearly isn't funny, you are deluded into believing that you have gained access to a secret cultural capital that allows you to be racist. But to you it isn't racism. You think it's truth. You're wrong.
                  Racial progress is being made in New York. The new generation of New Yorkers aren't afraid to have serious conversations about race. We aren't afraid to proclaim our ignorance. We don't allow the racial poison that has been given to us by our parents and environment to affect our decisions. Instead we believe in a better New York City. One that doesn't include a police force that is trained to racially profile. This isn't a condemnation of the NYPD. It's an earnest call for reform. Teach cops that minorities are people. Tell them to check themselves when they feel their own racial biases kicking in. And make it clear that when your racial biases lead you to mistreat the people you are supposed to protect, then you will face significant penalties. This is the kind of language we need to see. Bill de Blasio and Bratton's doctrine of mutual understanding is not enough. 

Things they don't tell you about being an RA that you should know going in

I was an RA for two years, my second year serving as a leader for my staff and I can tell you that there's a lot of things they don't tell new RAs or people considering staff. Here are just a few things I think people should know about before joining.

1. You will most likely be put into situations that you have not been prepared for. Furthermore, you can potentially be reprimanded or fired for not following a protocol you weren't explicitly taught. -
       I've seen plenty of situations play out where residents did things that were ridiculous and the protocol for how to deal with it simply wasn't clear. The mantra in most buildings tends to be "when in doubt page up", but if it's a particularly busy night and the supervisor above you isn't responding, then it becomes your responsibility to deal with the situation as you see best. Veteran RAs know better than to let these situations fall on them, so typically they'll play everything on the side of caution. But a new RA, who is eager to make a positive impact on their residents and is committed to keeping their residents safe can easily get themselves involved in an incident that they can't handle. But Raymond what kind of incident would you be describing? There can be medical emergencies where the student refuses to take your advice ( which is always to call the ambulance). Any veteran RA would know to page up and if they did not receive any guidance because leadership is currently not around, then they would just call the ambulance themselves. Remember safety is paramount and choosing not to call could put that resident's life in danger.

2. You may be given unclear or mixed messages about how to enforce rules -
     Let's face it, different boss, different standards. I was fortunate to be in a building that played it by the books, but other buildings certainly were not like that. Also, your training in the beginning concerning rules and regulations could be completely ignored or even discouraged when the regular year came up. Typically this will have no negative bearing on you. If every RA looks the other way over a slightly giddy underage resident coming back at 1:30 am on your round, then you certainly won't be reported (unless your staff hates you). But let's say that giddy resident hurts themselves or has a medical emergency. If you were found to have engaged with that resident without enforcing a zero tolerance policy about drinking that could have possibly prevented injury, then you should expect serious repercussions. Strict rules are frustrating, but they can save you from putting residents' lives in danger and save you from risking your job. People may not like you on your staff, but oh well.

3. You may deal with incredibly difficult experiences (e.g. suicide ideation and sexual assault)
     This point is in no way meant to discourage new RAs. My training covered quite thoroughly how to deal with these scenarios, but no amount of training prepares you for the real thing. If you are committed to the job and truly care for your residents, then this should be something you are willing to take on. Your residents need to know that when you took this job, you are ready if any of them need you in this capacity. This does not mean you need to play the role of psychologist, best friend, and advocate (in fact for your own health and for theirs you shouldn't attempt to be any of those things). It means if your resident ever needs support you offer it and you connect them to the resources they need. Again this isn't meant to be discouraging, but realistic.

4. You may be on a staff that has a history of negative or bad RAs
      I've met horrible RAs. The one hallmark of a horrible RA is they tend to not realize how horrible they are at their job. When a staff has multiple horrible RAs, then you will find yourself fighting to do your job because often they will advocate for the bare minimum to be done at all times. The bare minimum extends to everything. No effort for residents and no effort for staff relations. As a new RA you may not feel comfortable calling out a veteran RA, but if they are honestly not doing their job, then feel free to do so. You can attempt to discuss it with your supervisor. If that doesn't work, then sometimes bringing up issues (don't target specific members, target specific behavior) in staff meetings may also be helpful. Often you'll feel that everyone is complicit with the poor behavior. I found that was not the case. Many RAs want to do a decent job and when they're prevented from accomplishing anything because everyone isn't willing to carry their own weight, then they are more than willing to apply some good old fashion pressure on their less than willing co-workers.

5. You may be on a staff that has bad leadership
   Bad leadership is just as bad as having a negative staff (possibly even worse). I don't have good ways of handling this situation. Often there are avenues to report leadership, but naturally housing protects their leadership positions, especially if your housing department has had difficulty filling out those positions in the past. You can try discussing it with your leadership in  a positive and respectful way, but often you'll find that bad leadership is also stubborn leadership. One way I dealt with bad leadership from other staffs is by simply ignoring their authority. At the point I was well versed in how procedures worked in housing and so I felt comfortable just ignoring the advice and suggestions coming from leadership that I found to be detrimental to my development as an RA. I was fortunate to have awesome leadership as an RA, but I have heard quite the opposite.

6. You may have no leadership whatsoever
People quit. Shit happens and expecting your lead RA to fill that gap is wrong. Lead RAs can only do so much. So when leadership quits, you'll need to make do. If you're new, feel free to go to your lead RA or another veteran RA for help. If you are a veteran RA, you honestly should step up.

7. You may have staff members who are not socially just
     It is typically taboo to call others out for not being socially just (you look like a pretentious asshole), but when a staff member clearly uses a racial slur or makes sexist get back to the kitchen jokes, you are often taken aback with pure disbelief because staff is the last place you would expect to hear that. Report them to leadership.

8. Staff doesn't write up Staff
    The most well known unspoken rule ever to exist is that staff members tend to not write each other up. There are plenty of reasons why. 1. Getting someone fired isn't cool. 2. If they don't get fired now you have someone on staff who hates you. 3. Everyone else on staff is now worried that you will write them up, sowing distrust in the staff. I always felt weird about this rule. As a lead RA it was never an issue because I tried hard to lead by example and most RAs were smart about what ever extra curricular activities they decided to partake in. But when I was a new RA, there were plenty of times when I wondered should residents even be seeing RAs like that. It feels weird. You're gonna feel uncomfortable. It's your choice on how to handle it. If you write up staff, I honestly wouldn't think any different of you. I believe every RA needs to make that choice for themselves.

9. There are moochers on every staff. Telling them to stop early typically saves headaches. If you don't then expect to be frustrated forever
 Self explanatory, if someone has you cover their shifts and don't repay the favor, then stop covering their shifts. Once everyone on staff has decided to ignore them, then they'll get the hint.

10. You residents actually do care and want to get to know you-
       You will hear that most residents don't care. That's absolute bullshit. Most people love talking about themselves. For those who aren't self absorbed, they tend to ask legitimate questions. Make yourself available, commit to getting to know them and maintain friendships.

I loved being an RA. It shaped my view on things and pushed me into the service commitment I am currently doing with Teach For America. Anyone who wants to be an RA, I suggest you do it. I just want you to be prepared for a level of dysfunction that may not seem apparent at first. Some tips

1. Stay positive- Once you give up (on your staff or your residents) they will give on you as well
2. Feel free to cry- staff can be stressful. Sometimes you want to be strong like the rest of them. That's bullshit. We all breakdown. The worst of them (me included) just do it in our rooms, alone, locked up, wishing you could tell someone.
3. Residents-RA is a two way street.
4. Staff can be staff or family, your choice
5. Use your unlimited meal plan while it last.

Rethinking the hot dog stand: Why what you think is NYC isn't

                                "I want a NYC bagel," my friend said when they first got off the plane. I threw them a strange look. A city with delicious cuisine from all around the world and the first thing you want is a bagel, come on. But NYC is apparently "famous" for their bagels. I wish I was given the memo. To me a bagel is a bagel, regardless if you get it from NYC or Bruegger's in Ann Arbor. If someone asked me to to tell them something that is quintessential NYC, the last thing I'd tell them is a bagel. So after we indulged in some high carb goodness at a local deli, the next culinary demand came. I want a Reuben from a Jewish Deli. I was so confused. I know Jewish Delis used to be famous in NYC, but now they are essentially a symbol of what NYC once was. So we went over to Kew Gardens and got him a Reuben. I ordered some Matzo Ball soup, which was delicious. After that we did some touristy crap: Time Square/Rockefeller Center/ South Street Seaport, take your pick. And finally it was time for some din-din (as he put it, while I rolled my eyes). He cleared his voice and then said with a serious demeanor, "I want alcohol." I shrugged and said let's go to the Lower East Side. He agreed and was giddy over the prospect of Boozing it up in the city, but before we could do that we needed some sort of sustenance because we were responsible adults after all. And that's when the final straw came. "Great, I can finally try an iconic NYC hot dog," he said thinking his culinary passport of the city finally had a foundation. "No," I said abruptly. "We will not waste money at a hotdog stand for what typically amounts to an underwhelming experience," I said with a stern look on my face. My friend, bewildered by my distaste for his "iconic" craving proceeded to buy three hot dogs anyways, at the tune of 3 dollars a dog. I walked a block down to a Halal cart and got a platter of Chicken, rice and salad  with a drink for 6 dollars. The rich hue of red over the tzatzki made the platter look more like the beginning of an artist's palette. His hot dog looked like a hotdog with mustard on it.
                         People come to NYC romanticizing a NYC that once was. They want to relive the authentic mom and pop Jewish delis that existed during the first big rush of immigrants. They want to enter a mob owned Pizza shop in Brooklyn, while forgetting to fold their slices and order garlic knots on the side. They want to enter an Irish pub and make believe that the owner is just a regular joe like them and not a rich landlord who has made a fortune serving martinis to wall street workers, while consistently raising the rent on their tenants' properties. NYC lore propagates an unspoken hierarchy of culture. I mean sure if you want you it, you can find it, but I don't see movies glorifying the NYC I know to be home. I don't see the Puerto Rican Day Parade (the largest parade in the city) as a center piece for movies. I don't see the Zagat rating some of the best Jamaican or West Indies food in the city. High class in NYC instead glorifies a city that doesn't exist anymore The remnants are there. I can still get a slice. I can still pass a Synagogue on my way to work. And you best believe soda bread was served to me as a young kid, but these "other" cultures, the ones that aren't glorified and mythologized as quintessential NY are what populated my life. It's time to we stop romanticizing NYC and start treating it for what it is. 

Please go to College

  The new trend nowadays is to frame people who get college degrees as worthless freeloaders who are taking on unnecessary debt and gaining a useless education that could be obtained in a library. People quote that obnoxious Good Will Hunting scene, where Matt Damon goes up to a pretentious Harvard student and reminds him that Matt Damon had a similar education for a much smaller price ( 150 dollars in Library fees). This is supposed to be a hyperbolic statement of course, yet people take it to heart. What people fail to acknowledge is the continuation of the scene where Matt Damon admits his kids will be serving McDonald's to the pretentious gentlemen. So let me make this clear. You are not Matt Damon. You are not a genius. The kind of intelligence exhibited in Good Will Hunting is not typical, it's not even above average, it's incredibly rare. So please stop citing my favorite movie for your own insecurities.
  Now I want you all to stop telling kids to not go to college. It's obnoxious. Are there people who are successful without a college degree? Yes. This isn't a post claiming college is necessary for success. But the overwhelming majority of people need college to be successful. Why? College opens doors. Your college degree makes you more qualified than a random person on the street who decides to apply for your job. In terms of starting your career, college is the boost you need to get the experience you want so you can remain marketable. People often bring up entrepreneurs who easily outclass college graduates. Bill Gates, Steve Jobs and the gang are all examples of bright young minds who decided to forgo college for experience. Now I want you to give me the list of people who didn't get jobs because they didn't have college degrees. That's a much harder list to construct because no employer would outright admit they rejected someone because they have no college degree, but I'm sure there are plenty of employers who either reject people without degrees or prefer people with degrees.
  Poor students who hear this mantra of "don't go to college" are the ones who are hurt the most by it. Poor students who are academically successful can easily be persuaded to forgo the costs of college. Rich and upper middle class students may whine and groan, but as long as their moms and dads are picking up the tab, they let out a long sigh and say "might as well". Poor students will hear about entrepreneurial work ethic and the overbearing costs of college. They also don't want to put their parents in the awkward position of saying no to their education. So it's easier to just not go.  But that's a mistake. Even for those technically gifted, it can be a challenge landing an interview with Google or Microsoft, when they typically give their internships to college students. There will always be success stories that defy the odds. But everyone cannot be an outlier. Eventually the institutions set in place for proficiency in this country will bring down those who have decided to reject the system. The day companies stop using college degrees as a prerequisite for their careers is the day I will recant everything I said here. But until then, stop telling kids to not go to college. Stop labeling every student who leaves college without a job as a freeloader. The economy is hard, jobs are difficult to find. Finally, please stop it with the "college isn't for everyone" nonsense. I hate it when people say that. It's typically targeted towards poorer students who are "low achievers" in high school. I do agree college isn't for everyone, but with the variety of colleges and classes in this country, college is surely for most people.

List of random job offers where Bachelors is expected
http://jobs.bloomberg.com/job/London-2014-Financial-Product-Sales-and-Analytics-Polish-speaker-Job/43259900/
https://www.google.com/about/careers/search/#!t=jo&jid=21435001&
https://www.google.com/about/careers/search/#!t=jo&jid=33635001&
http://www.goldmansachs.com/careers/students-and-graduates/our-programs/americas-programs/new-analyst-copy.html


And I'm pretty sure the list can go on and on.

Now I don't want this to be post be taken as a Carte blanche for taking on an insurmountable amount of debt for your degree in Classical civilizations. That's a whole different ballgame that requires an expert in personal finances.

Bias:  I am a graduate of the University of Michigan. 

Elliot Rodger's wasn't psychotic, he was acting like a guy and that's the real problem. TW: Rape

      Most articles have called Mr. Rodger's racist beliefs to be irrelevant (they're not, but I won't be discussing them here). Most people have called out his banter as sexist beliefs gone too far ( once something is sexist, it's already gone too far). And finally, mental illness has been used as a criticism shield for what honestly does not seem as irrational as people make it out to be. Many have portrayed his actions as the musings of a psychotic, but if one examines nerd culture and how it has become embedded in mainstream culture, then the sick inspiration for his massacre becomes quite clear.
      Now don't take that as an advocacy for what he did. On the contrary, this is my attempt at being as frank as possible about what many men refuse to admit about Rodger's actions. I have been around plenty of men who would have joked about doing what he said he was going to do in his manifesto. Everyone in the male community seems to be saving face with this dumbfounded game of "who would honestly do this", but at least in many nerd and geek circles, the murdering of women, especially "popular" women is something joked about in closed doors among mostly male audiences. Now the nerd culture aspect of this case has been covered in this article by the daily beast, but one key aspect the author failed to address is how nerd culture has become embedded in main stream culture. You see many people who consider themselves a part of "nerd/geek culture" like to delude themselves into believing people still openly make fun of people over playing video games, being intelligent, and liking comic books. I mean come on nerd iconography is everywhere. Nowadays to be cool, you need to be a bit of a nerd and the qualifying statements people used to give about liking video games and knowing a lot about Star Wars is no longer necessary. Does this mean mainstream culture has adopted all of Nerd Culture? No, there is plenty of Nerd culture that is too anti conformist to be adopted into mainstream culture.
     However, misogyny has always existed and those aspects of nerd culture fit right into this 21st century world, where oppression occurs through forced smiles and institutional barriers. Nerd misogyny is especially adaptive to 21st century misogynists because as it currently exists it is usually done anonymously and can be easily discounted through the "timid nerd"rouse (e.g. the nerd blames his social awkwardness for his social faux pas). We can see it in the tremendous amount of hostility male gamers show towards female gamers. We can see it in many an angry nerd rant one could find on youtube. If people think Elliot Rodger's videos are unique, then I am sad to say that I've seen plenty of videos where men lament over women not liking them and eventually come to the same conclusion Rodger's had (i.e. women must be wrong, since I am entitled to them). This leads to a regular proliferation of rape/violent fantasies. These fantasies are told in the form of a joke or a hypothetical. There is always some sort of misdirection that absolves the men discussing the fantasy of their shame. The fantasy always picks on an illusion of a "popular girl" caste that has been denied to the men and stereotypes these women as "sluts". What is disturbing is how much has changed since when an actual popularity caste system existed, the 1950s (think of the movie Grease). Today a diversity of cliques are given prestige and acknowledgement, especially in college. In short, nerds want to pretend that they have been spited by an immutable caste system that prevents them from dating "popular pretty girls", when such a caste system doesn't exist and even if it did the culture milieu of mainstream culture is in their favor anyways. To make matters worse, many nerds aren't even what we'd consider to be the traditional "nerd". Drop the pocket protector and glasses, many "nerds" are suave, good looking, and socially competent individuals. Yet they'll still cry the victim and use that fake victimization as an excuse to joke about violent acts towards women.
     This post is meant to cut through the bullshit. Many people have called it misogyny, but efforts such as #notallmen like to plant a seed of doubt, which insinuates that most men don't do things like this. Sorry to break it to ya, but as far as I know, many men do think about things like this. And they laugh and constantly joke to their buddies about it. It's not some mystery as to where this stereotypical generalization of sorority houses come from and it's not mystery as to why he believes he's entitled to women. Most men do believe they are entitled to women. That's the problem.  

The Friendzone doesn't exist. You're just both idiots.

 Note: I'm a Cisgender straight male so for the examples which require an individual speaking I'll be writing in my own point of view. For generalizations I'm going to try to write without any mention of gender. If I fuck up, feel free to call me out on it and I'll gladly edit it. Also if you think there's a better way to go about writing this (i.e. the gender scheme I'm using is still oppressive), then please give me suggestions because as a writer this is something I've struggled with for awhile.

         Awhile ago I wrote this post about the friendzone and now a few months later I'm realizing how much of an idiot I was. While some good points about maintaining a healthy friendship and relationship were brought up in my previous piece, the final conclusion that men and women were justified in their furor due to being "wrongly" strung along was patently false. I have a few tips that will keep you from ever being friendzoned or at least from ever being upset over a failed romantic encounter. Most of this stuff is common sense, so there's really no point in reading it. In fact, I'm really just writing it for myself. If you want the only important piece of information scroll down to the bottom of this post.

1. Just fucking tell them how you feel:
 Honestly once you think there's something there, just go out and say it. Now I'm not saying profess your love the first time you meet someone (unless you honestly do feel that way, in which case probably best you do, that way rejection can teach you a real world lesson on how love works). But if you're kind of interested, then flirt a bit. Make your intentions known! A simple "I could see myself dating you" or "you're just the kind of girl for me" or something along those lines will send out the signal that you are probing for some romantic possibilities. If the person is completely opposed  then at least no stringing along occurred. You can move on.

2. Move on if someone says no or doesn't reciprocate in the time frame you want:
If someone says no, unless they gave you some ridiculous condition (like a forbidden love type deal and even then you should probably walk away), then you should just take it as a no and let it go. If you followed tip one this should have occurred relatively early so you shouldn't be too torn. If they're taking their time informing you on how they feel (i.e. playing games) it's time shut that down too. Just leave them, forcing the imperative of choice on them. If they really care and feel for you, then they'll make an effort. If not, then just let it be. Now I'm not telling you to rush the familiarization process. Some people take extended periods of time to get to know someone. You need to give that person the amount of time you feel comfortable giving.

3.  The impetus isn't only on the suitor (technically both people should be coming together, the whole suitor thing is kinda outdated, still there will always be someone who takes the initiative) people being pursued need to make up their minds:

People string people along all the time. People play games all the time. If you follow rule 1 and 2 you won't fall susceptible to this. Take a hint from my man Serani, he knows what I'm talking about. But if you're the one playing games, just stop that shit. If it's a no, then outright say no. And you're not allowed to have your cake and eat it too. I mean if you're going to reject someone, you don't get to tell them you have feelings for them. You either make a clean cut or give it more time. But watch out if you take too much time, they might follow tip two and drop you.

4. Keep an open mind:
Sometimes you meet someone and you're not attracted to them. This is usually enough  for most people to just assume that person has no romantic potential. I disagree. There have been plenty of people I eventually became attracted to overtime. True love at first sight isn't a thing and you finding someone not attractive is just you being shallow. Sorry not everyone can be gorgeous and when you hold people up to standards regardless of how low they are, you're already creating this rigid template for future relationships. Just give it a few days. If their personality and money can't make up for their lack of looks then feel free to tell them a no. Now if they're a jerk, of course feel free to outright say no. Jerks are known to play games and we're not about that here.

So yea that's it. You didn't get friendzoned, she just didn't like you. And the only thing you really need to remember to avoid all of this:

NO GAMES

God doesn't care about the Pledge of Allegiance (or your kid's in-class prayer)

                         People like to complain about how we can't have prayer in school or say God in the pledge of allegiance. When people do this I think they're pretty foolish. These people have decided to pick surface details and elevate them to primary reasons their religious values and the country's values are slowly deteriorating right before their eyes. And I'm sorry that this post reeks of Christian privilege, but the major offenders of this kind of ridiculous whining typically come from a Christian background (most likely because Christians have a hegemony on the media in America). These Christians will stomp their feet on the ground until the world around them somehow conforms to their occult rituals. I'm Catholic so it isn't like I'm guilt free. For a long time the Catholic faith was the biggest offender. A group that expected deference, while being entrenched in scandal and also picking petty fights such as whether the use of condoms should be allowed or if Harry Potter should be seen. It isn't until recently that Pope Francis made me realize how deluded many in the Catholic (and at large the Christian) faith have become. Pope Francis addressed the elephant in the room: income inequality. He called for wealth distribution and combat against poverty. His words didn't sit well with many conservatives, but honestly who cares it's not like he's forcing any of them to give up their money anyways. Oh wait, I can here it now. "But Raymond my parents are ultra rich and they donate all the time!" Really? Do they now? Wasn't it Jesus who told his disciples to leave everything behind and follow him. When he said everything, I think he meant everything. So unless your parents are constantly giving most of their paycheck to the red cross, I don't want to hear it.  We all know they're taking some liberties with the scripture aren't they in regards to the whole living in poverty part? Which is ok because faith is something you work at and strive for. But it means if you're going to let shit like being a selfish, self serving jerk fly, then you also need to be willing to let minor inconveniences like not forcing your religious beliefs on the general public and not making public schools take a religious tone (Catholic, Muslim, Christian, etc. schools exist) work as well.
            So if you want to complain to me about how it's ridiculous your kid doesn't have time to pray in class, then I better not see you walking back to a new Benz because guess what your kid not saying a Hail Mary isn't what's causing the moral degradation of this nation, it's possibly your complicit behavior in a capitalist system which favors the rich and disadvantages the poor. I feel like Jesus would have found the latter far more troubling. Or not. Maybe he's a stickler for prayer.