My First New Thanksgiving...

It's my first Thanksgiving that I'm not hosting...

Because my family is 1,200 miles away...

I'm used to two large banquet tables and a circular dining table added to one end. I'm used to two large turkeys cooking overnight, both easily over 25 pounds, started on Wednesday evening. I'm used to having 20+ guests--sometimes over 30!--coming to my home, eating, drinking, laughing...

To go from that, to just now unthawing a 10 pound turkey and cooking it for two...

With 80 degree weather outside....

It's odd, to say the least. I'm unsure if I'll have that experience again, honestly. How many stars would have to align to get the 16 people of my immediate family to come to Florida for me to ever do that again? How many heavens would I have to move, how many gods would I have to sacrifice to, to ever host in that way again?

I find myself missing the most poignantly, albeit of my own doing, starting a new life so far away.

***

But for a moment I shall digress and hop on my soapbox because someone just pissed me off with this photo:

1. It is *not* something to feel guilty about to want to spend time with your family on a holiday that has been around for 200+ years
2. It is *not* the same thing to be a soldier fighting for U.S. interests overseas (or even on home soil) and selling crap made in china at a national retailer
3. It is DEFINITELY okay to be PISSED that GREED on behalf of U.S. businesses are making you work--and probably threatening you with your job if you question it--on a day that SHOULD be spent relaxing, enjoying food and family, when there are 363 OTHER days of the year that people can enter your 24 hour a day establishment and buy cheap goods that are not supporting U.S. factories, let alone paying a wage above the poverty rate...

I can only assume that a Republican who thinks his right's are violated if he can't make slaves out of other Americans made such an asinine, stupid, insensitive poster...

Assholes.

I would wish you a hellish holiday, but that's not very nice, as the B.E.D. would say, so I'll simply say to the creator of this image?
FUCK YOU.
Fuck your greed for making your employees work just so you can make an extra buck when you barely pay them shit. Fuck your inhumanity for taking away one of the few days of the year when FAMILY should take priority over all else. Fuck you for trying to equate wanting to spend time with family with "unAmercanism" and "unpatriotism", especially because the wages you pay and the fact that you ARE making people work simply for your bottom line is the MOST unpatriotic, MOST unAmerican thing I can think of.
FUCK YOU.
***
Anyway, missing my family while staring at my paltry frozen turkey...

Luckily, I have an employer who pays a decent wage, allows me time off to spend how I wish, and has no urge to try to make me feel guilty about it. 

Zombies and Wind and Jesus, Oh! My!

It still boggles my mind to this day that there is a persistent belief in a god(s), especially in a society where education should be a priority. (Should be because not enough people value asking “why?”, and politicians always seem to think budget cuts start in our schools…)

You see, a recent game of “Which would you rather” in the morning somehow got turned into a “Have you seen this crap!” and thus, a coworker recently pointed me to another coworker’s blog, where the heavy-handed “I’m more moral than the world” coupled with the “I’m so humble in Jesus” monologues made me want to gag, vomit, commit suicide, and drop nuke’s on every major religious center in the world—

Scratch that—it made me want to drop nukes on even the minor religious centers.

I do try my best to withhold judgment when people make off-handed comments in my general direction, like “Jesus helped me do this,” or “I know God’s watching over me because of blah blah blah”; seriously, I say nothing most times, just smile and nod like I’m one of the sheep who checked his brain at the door to life and thinks angels are dancing all around me with swords flying to keep Satan and his minions at bay from causing me to commit one type of sin or another…

Sigh…

I try to be a live-and-let-live dude, what with the mass of brain-dead zombies that inhabit even the most liberal locations of where I live. Add to the fact that most of my family, and my partner, have religious and spiritual inclinations, I’m pretty well versed in the mumbo-jumbo, the beliefs, the practices, the voodoo. So, in the name of tolerance, I will sometimes make an observation, delicately-put depending on the audience, or sometimes outright laugh, also depending on the audience…

But overall, I’m highly disappointed in you, human race…

One of the more common arguments I hear from the windbag types is, “Well, you can’t see the wind—how do you know it’s there? All you can see is the effects! So Ha!” (As if such a mind-numbingly silly argument came from the lips of God hisself into their ears… Which is funny, because I’m feeling the effects of all the hot air they’re spewing when making this claim, but there it is…) If you can’t figure out why this is such a weak, silly, and all-around stupid argument, I’ll not bother to educate you. Suffice it to say, if you’ve ever considered this argument to be a firm tenant in your belief system, you have bigger problems than just believing in sky daddies and angel fairies… Suffice it to say that it hints to the notion (okay, okay, outright screams to the notion) that you somehow think wind is magical and supernatural… And I can only hope you realize how silly a position that is…

I can only hope you also realize that, when the apocalypse does come and the zombies do take over, you’ll only have to look at the closest standing religious center to find out where the infection started. (There’s a reason they hafta eat brains—their god(s) took theirs away…)

Fact of the matter is, anytime you are going to believe in something that cannot be seen, measured, tested, or even just plain logical, you may as well just do us all a favor and remove yourself from both the mating pool and the voting masses…

Knowing you exist out there really makes me think the Constitution should be amended to read “We the intelligent people…,” with a special clause regulating the rest of you to speed bump duty… Which, of course, will be unnecessary once my hover-stang is perfected. And when such a time arrives, you’ll be reassigned to coat-rack duty, assuming that global warming has been corrected by that time (and it will be, because the idiots will have been spayed and neutered and busy being coat racks…), and that sometime, somewhere, we the intelligent people will sometimes need to wear a coat due to the chilly “magical” wind…

Something Stormy This Way Spins...

How Ballerenic, yes?

Ballerenic... Yes, I suppose it's not a word. Although it does seem as if the clouds themselves pirrouette upon the sky, positioning thus to form the eye as the clouds and waters spin into a great wall of wind and rain, lightning dancing, thunder keeping time, trees bowing at the great performance of nature as it edges closer to the land which will ultimately end it's performance!

As Isaac approaches the state of Florida, I'm excited in the same way I used to get excited for snowstorms--perhaps more so as it doesn't involve cold temperatures or snow. Wind, rain, probably some hail, a multitude of lightning and thunder, but snow shovels need not apply!

This shit's already melted when it falls! Oh happy day!

Of course, I'm on a learning curve here, and I'm tickled pink that I'll be getting my feet wet on a category 1 huricaine. (Pun, indeed, intended...) I've been told by the natives running around the it's not even worth getting excited about, let alone worried, for anything less than a category 3 storm, but I'm a newbie, and I plan on taking some pictures of the beach beofre hunkering down in my concrete bunker of an apartment as the waves crash upon the beach with the wrath and anger only swirling winds and evil-eyed storms can do!

Still, I did what I used to do when I heard a big ol' snow storm was a'comin'! Ran to the store for bread, bottled water, canned vegetables, a few bottles of wine, and--of course--ring bologna, cheese, and Ritz crackers... Nothing says comfortable-storm food like ring bologna, cheese, and crackers! With some white wine in the appropriate wine glass, that is.

Of course, the natives also tell me that I'm probably going a bit overboard. But I'm a firm believer in "better safe than sorry" while also being a firm believer in "enjoy everything," "find the bright side," and, last but not least, "fuck weather!"

Knowing my luck, this storm will simply vanish, or at the very least, go severely off-course by all the hot air being blown around by the sudden influx of windbag Republicans that are strolling into the state for their convention--but it seems to me, that if they truly were "God's party," what with their "pro-family," "pro-life," "pro-God," "pro-country" propaganda shit talk, God wouldn't've sent a tropical storm toward the very place they were having their convention, now would he?

Unless, of course, we consider that maybe--just maybe--God might like the Democras better? Jesus was, after all, a socialist...

Chew on that while watching the clouds roll in, boys... I have some ring bologna to slice up...

In Jesus' Name...

I usually ignore things like this. "Forward this" and "forward that" type emails usually aren't even privy to being opened, let alone perused! And at first, that's what I did. Ignored it. It was one of those religious forwards meant to appeal to your sense of decency, your patriotism, and to your devout faith in god. I know a lot of my friends are very strong god believers, hence I expect to get these every now and again. Such is life, right?

The email in question is in it's entirety below, and ended with the usual:

---

If you agree with this, please pass it on.
If not delete it.

---

Of course, most people who know me know that the way to get me to share an opinion is to tell me not to share an opinion... I know, I know... This time I played right into the right-wing's evil plans by doing exactly that--I deleted it. Sigh. But then one of my other friends just had to hit "Reply All" with the following statement:

---

IN JESUS NAME.... AMEN! Thank you for sending this along. I usually ignore forwards, but I am glad this one washed upon my inbox. I pity the poor SOB that dictates to me to deny CHRIST :-D

---

Ugh. Okay, that's the part that not only got my goat, but sold it into slavery, beat it with a whip, forced it to eat brambles, and then sent it home with a belly ache on death's door. (My poor goat!) Never mind that the email had nothing to do with denying Christ, but was about praying before football games... Which, while I suppose one could read into no state-sponsored prayer before a game as a "denial" of Christ, the stretch is... Well, beyond reasonable.

First off: Andy Rooney, right-wing blabber mouth that he is, never said the words in this email even though they are ascribed to him. Or, if he did, he completely plagiarized them. (Note that this email makes the rounds also crediting these words to Paul Harvey--which is just as untrue...) Actually, most of these words were written by Nick Gholson... But that's another story...

Onto the meat of the matter, the email itself. You know how these things work: it's filled with pictures of our soldiers, a cross or three, a bible--you know, just in case words are not enough, pics are included to portray another thousand words or so.

---

Pray if you want to!

---

Oh, thank you for your permission! Never mind that everyone in this country can pray if they want to...

---

CBS and Katie Couric et al must be in a panic and rushing to reassure the White House that this is not network policy.

---

Yes, yes, that's what happens when Andy Rooney says something in his op-ed block on television--people "scramble" to make sure Obama and company "know" that this isn't "network policy". Except that Andy Rooney never said it. And neither did Paul Harvey. So even though there wouldn't have been any scrambling, and no reason to to begin with... Well... Yeah...

---

Folks, this is the year that we RE-TAKE AMERICA & CANADA.

---

Who took them? Anybody? Anybody? You mean... No one took them anywhere?! I would think even the U.S. and Canada would like a field trip every now and then... But there they are, still... Well, there... Right where they were, spinning around the sun just like always... Go figure...

---

********* Get Ready *********
Keep this going around the globe.

---

So it's not just the U.S. and Canada!? Oh, dear!

---

Read it and forward every time you receive it... We can't give up on this issue.

---

Just so we're clear--the issue seems to be relocating the entire Western half of the Northern Hemisphere...

---

Andy Rooney and Prayer. Andy Rooney says:

---

As stated above, no, he doesn't.

---

I don't believe in Santa Claus, but I'm not going to sue somebody for singing a Ho-Ho-Ho song in December.

---

I couldn't even begin to imagine how one would go about suing for that reason. And thank goodness that we, as adults, are now allowed to stop believing in imaginary beings! Whew!

---

I don't agree with Darwin , but I didn't go out and hire a lawyer when my high school teacher taught his theory of evolution.

---

Well, that's good because you would have lost. You see, the teacher was busy teaching you about facts, which, among other things, didn't include Santa Claus. The fact that you think Santa and scientific law are somehow related to one another is not helping your cause in any way.

---

Life, liberty or your pursuit of happiness will not be endangered in any way because someone says a 30-second prayer before a football game.

---

Actually, it's very possible you did infringe upon some one's liberty. Were the football students coerced into joining in because of fear of retribution from not participating? (Yes, this has happened... Probably more often than we would like to admit...) Having a moment so that people can pray to their deity of choice is not the issue--having the coach lead the students and players as if suddenly everyone there were in fact Christian and praying to the same god, IS an issue, especially if that coach is a state employee. Especially if that "voluntary" prayer is being broadcast tot he entire stadium over the stadium's state-paid-for PA system. Especially if the school policy allowed only for "appropriate" messages and imposed other guidelines that give the student's message "the imprint of the state." Separation of church and state isn't a matter of opinion or belief--it's the law. That being said, I, as most other atheists I know, don't get upset at these little Pray-Alongs. We just hum quietly, count the ceiling tiles, or make faces at you while your heads are bowed... Generally, we find a way of amusing ourselves, sometimes at your expense, while you all pray to some invisible deity who, in all honesty, if he did exist, could probably give two shits about who does or doesn't win your game of choice.

---

So what's the big deal?
It's not like somebody is up there reading the entire Book of Acts.

---

They have in the past. And they would if no one ever said anything. And that's a fact.

---

They're just talking to a God they believe in and asking him to grant safety to the players on the field and the fans going home from the game.

---

Asking for no injuries and safe play while strapping on padding and a helmet only makes me question your faith more. If you're asking your god to protect you while playing, why the need for the shoulder pads and helmet? Not that I mind if you wear them to bed--Ooh, lala! But something tells me you have less faith than you claim...

---

But it's a Christian prayer, some will argue. Yes, and this is the United States of America, and Canada, countries founded on Christian principles. According to our very own phone book, Christian churches outnumber all others better than 200-to-1. So what would you expect -- somebody chanting Hare Krishna?

---

So because there are more of you, screw everyone else's beliefs? Why should the Muslim player on the team have to sit there and listen to the coach's prayer to the Christian god? Why not let the players pray to themselves? Is the coach going to lead as prayer to Allah, then? In fact (and please pay attention to this part, it's vitally important...), we are not Christian nations. We may have been founded on some of the principles in life that Christianity happens to share in common with multiple other religions around the globe, but the Founding Fathers expressly prevented mentioning any type of god in our Constitution (despite many a pastor and preacher's protestations to do just that) simply because they knew it was divisive and did *not* want to go down the path of our mother country, England. They saw what state-sponsored religion could do to a nation, and thus, not only erected a wall in the first amendment, but also included a clause in the Constitution which forbade "any religious test" as a prerequisite to holding public office. I can't speak for the history of the Canadian government's freedom of religion, but I can assure you that the United States is not a Christian nation, just a nation that happens to have a disproportionately high number of Christians...

---

If I went to a football game in Jerusalem, I would expect to hear a Jewish prayer.

---

As football isn't nearly so popular in the Middle East, and considering half of Jerusalem is under Israeli control while the other half is under Palestinian control (aka mostly Muslims...)--well, odds are about 50/50 depending on what type of prayer you would hear...

---

If I went to a soccer game in Baghdad, I would expect to hear a Muslim prayer.

---

So do they say a prayer to Allah in Baghdad? I'm just curious...

---

If I went to a ping pong match in China, I would expect to hear someone pray to Buddha.

---

Only if the Communist authorities allowed it. I expect, given that they have to approve any and all religious practices, the Communist Chinese government would have specific words pre-approved--if approved at all--to pray before a sporting event.

---

And I wouldn't be offended. It wouldn't bother me one bit.

---

But you are offended that not everyone here in the U.S. and Canada may *not* be a Christian? Or--wait--are you offended because people may be offended by your practices holding up a sporting event with no religious affiliation whatsoever? I mean, I could understand a bit better perhaps if, say, Jesus had said, "And whosoever toucheth the pigskin, or the orange bouncer, or taketh upon themselves any sporting event not involving lions, should say a prayer, and thank the father for the blessings of sports"--well, then, I might understand your compulsion to pray for safety as you strap on 50 pounds worth of safety equipment. But since he didn't... Well... You see my issue, right?

---

But what about the atheists? Is another argument. What about them?

---

Um... We live here, too. And we play sports. And if you want to give people time to pray before a game--fine. We'll be counting the blades of grass, eying up the competition, and running through our last minute game plays while the rest of you pray to sky fairy.

---

Nobody is asking them to be baptized.

---

Um, you do live here, right? Happens to me at my house at least once every three months!

---

We're not going to pass the collection plate.

---

Oh, but you would if you could. And you know it. Just like that "it's only ten percent" line you try in your actual churches, with your stupid felt-board thermometers keeping track of just how close you are to the new roof, the summer camp trip, the missions project to Appalachia... You would.

---

Just humour us for 30 seconds.

---

Because you don't exercise your privileges enough? You need that extra 30 seconds (which is a lie, you pompous windbags! You go on for hours sometimes!) to pray--why? I thought your god was omniscient? That he knew your needs and whims? You need to pray before the game--why, exactly?

---

If that's asking too much, bring a Walkman or a pair of ear plugs. Go to the bathroom. Visit the concession stand. Call your lawyer!

---

What do you think we've been doing all these years? You thought we enjoyed staring at you down on your knees, delaying the start of every major event in our lives?

---

Or, just exercise their right to leave this country!

---

Ah, the old stand-by. "You don't like it, you can leave!" You'd like that, wouldn't you? Fortunately, I love this country just as much as you, I simply don't have the need to tell others how to live, what to do, and to be quiet while you sacrifice a chicken, or whatever the hell it is you guys do on Wednesday evenings these days. Pray all you want, I'll keep making faces, but I'll be damned if I'll leave simply because you somehow think it's a "persecution" that some people just no longer have the patience to listen to you twaddle off at invisible sky daddies.

---

Unfortunately, one or two will call their lawyer.

---

And Christian fundies never sue anyone, right?

---

One or two will tell thousands what they can and cannot do. I don't think a short prayer at a football game is going to shake the world's foundations.

---

Maybe not the world, but you Christians love to play the victim when in fact, you were making victims of others. You see, dear reader,this entire email stems from a ruling by the United States Supreme Court in 2000, when it was found that Texan school officials were allowing "student-led" prayer before games, when in reality it was just a ploy to get around the law forbidding coach-led prayers before a game. (Source.) In the Supreme Courts own ruling, it stated: "Nothing in the Constitution as interpreted by this Court prohibits any public school student from voluntarily praying at any time before, during, or after the school day. But the religious liberty protected by the Constitution is abridged when the State affirmatively sponsors the particular religious practice of prayer." Hmm, just as I said above. Imagine that.

---

Christians are just sick and tired of turning the other cheek while our courts strip us of all our rights.

---

None of your rights have been stripped! Not to mention Jesus COMMANDS you to turn the other cheek! What has happened, however, is that Christian Privilege is no longer tolerated. We are still in process, but our country is leveling the playing field, so to speak, when it comes to religion in this country. How would you feel if Jews were suddenly demanding that a Jewish prayer be led by teachers every morning? After all, we are just as much a Jewish nation as a Christian one--yet I hear of no Jewish peoples complaining about their god not being present in school as the source of all that is wrong with the United States--why is that?

---

Our parents and grandparents taught us to pray before eating, to pray before we go to sleep.

---

Not every one's parents taught their children these things. Hence, religious freedom.

---

Our Bible tells us to pray without ceasing.

---

Your bible. Not "our" bible. Again, that pesky religious freedom thing.

---

Now a handful of people and their lawyers are telling us to cease praying.

---

No--they are telling you to stop elevating Christianity above all other religions in this country. Again, you still have your right to pray--just not to expect the state to lead you in that prayer, promote that prayer, or in any other way make your prayer more special than anyone else's prayer.

---

God, help us.

---

Guess that praying isn't doing you too much good after all, then, eh?

---

And if that last sentence offends you, well, just sue me.

---

We would, but that would only feed your victim complex, you non-Andy Rooney-esque idiot.

---

The silent majority has been silent too long.

---

Could have fooled me. Seems I can't do anything without seeing your churches, hearing you on television, trying to keep you from making your religious beliefs into the law of the land. You are everywhere, yet still carry a persecution complex. Amazing the amount of self-deception that goes into these emails...

---

It's time we tell that one or two who scream loud enough to be heard that the vast majority doesn't care what they want! It is time that the majority rules!

---

You may not care, but that's the beauty of this country--majority rule with minority rights. This country wasn't founded by the mob for the mob. Mob rule has no place here for very good reason--reasons like the rhetoric in this email. And claiming that "you don't care what they want" isn't exactly a "love thy neighbor" type of position, is it? I'd like to hear you defend that before your supposed Creator. "Well, you see, God, I didn't mean that I didn't care, so much as I wished they would let me rule the country in your name. So you see, it was all for you, God!" Uh-huh.

---

It's time we tell them, "You don't have to pray; you don't have to say the Pledge of Allegiance; you don't have to believe in God or attend services that honor Him.

---

We already knew that, and certainly didn't need to listen to all that rabble-rousing to get there. We don't pray. We do pledge our allegiance to this country (omitting that silly phrase entered by the Christian wing-nuts in the 1900s fearful of the Communists, "under god."); and we don't believe in god or attend your silly worships, but only because we made laws over the years redacting old state laws that made such worship compulsive. (A fact, see here.)

---

That is your right, and we will honor your rights, but by golly, you are no longer going to take our rights away. We are fighting back, and we WILL WIN!"

---

Again, your rights have not, nor will they ever be, taken away. Freedom of Religion, dippy! (Jeebus, do these wing nuts have ear muffs on??) Saying you are going to "win" makes it seem as if you've lost something, and you haven't (unless it's your faith in your sky fairy, in which case I applaud you...)

---

God bless us one and all...Especially those who denounce Him, God bless America and Canada,

---

Yadda, yadda. Ugh. It's exhausting dealing with such stupidity...

Claims about discrimination and persecution would be justified by the Christian right if we were dealing strictly with Constitutional rights (such as the right to free speech, or the right to bear arms), but we're not talking about these things are we? As much as the Christian right would like to make this about a "violation of rights," it's really just a leveling of the playing field, and a loss of their "specialness." The truth is that Christians are losing privileges, actions, and entitlements they feel strongly about--not rights. They are losing the power to get treated better than everyone else. They are not actually being discriminated against--its just that they can no longer discriminate in their traditional ways and means, and are starting to be treated the same as everyone else. It’s certainly not unlike how the end of “white privilege” was perceived by whites during the Civil Rights era of the fifties and sixties (you know, the good old days when all these right-wingers claimed that "life" was somehow better?)

Christian privilege is one of the few traditional privileges that continues to be openly defended in today's United States. Other forms of privilege (like "white male privilege") may continue to exist, but it’s wrong actually argue in defense of them anymore (to many a discriminatory person's chagrin). Perhaps one day religious privilege will go the way that white male privilege are going, but conservative Christians are already bemoaning their loss and fighting tooth and nail (in the humility and love of Christ, of course).

One wonders what they'll resort to when all privilege is gone?

How Tony Perkins Has it Wrong...The Story of Harold and Clay...

Have you heard the story? Russ has a great post on this story as well which you should check out, but for what it's worth, here's my two cents... It's a simple, tragic tale, one that puts to rest the tired arguments of the right-wing Americans who claim that all we need to do ("we" being same-sex partners) is fill out the legal paperwork, spend the hundreds of dollars to ensure our wills and our estates are made out to one another, jump through the hoops and be good little gays and stay away from that word of "marriage" because that's "sacred" and only for straight couples...

So that's what Harold and Clay did:

---

Clay and his partner of 20 years, Harold, lived in California. Clay and Harold made diligent efforts to protect their legal rights, and had their legal paperwork in place--wills, powers of attorney, and medical directives, all naming each other. Harold was 88 years old and in frail medical condition, but still living at home with Clay, 77, who was in good health.

---

You see, they lived together in California--you remember the fiasco that happened in California, do you not, dear reader? Prop 8? Ring a bell? Prop 8 repealed the right of same-sex couples to get married in the state of California under the guise of "majority rule" (i.e. Mob rule). The Mormon church, Tony Perkins of the "Family Research Council," and a whole host of other right-wing lobbyists spent billions of dollars to make sure their right to marriage remained special and separate, and repeated, quite often, that the gays just needed to do their paperwork and leave that word alone, and we'd all be just hunky-dory. In fact, just a few days ago, Tony sent out an email which said the following:

---

Let me be clear--I agree that patients should be free to authorize anyone they want to visit them in the hospital and make decisions for them if they are unable to. In fact, they can already do so--through advance directives, such as a health care proxy or power of attorney. These are private contractual arrangements that do not require redefining "family" or "marriage." And they don't require the President of the United States to make himself "hospital-administrator-in-chief."

---

(Well, Tony, you're full of SHIT.) You see, Harold and Clay had done all of those things, but in the state of California, which just rescinded the rights of gay couples to have a marriage license... Well, this is what occurred next:

---

One evening, Harold fell down the front steps of their home and was taken to the hospital. Based on their medical directives alone, Clay should have been consulted in Harold's care from the first moment. Tragically, county and health care workers instead refused to allow Clay to see Harold in the hospital. The county then ultimately went one step further by isolating the couple from each other, placing the men in separate nursing homes.

Ignoring Clay's significant role in Harold's life, the county continued to treat Harold like he had no family and went to court seeking the power to make financial decisions on his behalf. Outrageously, the county represented to the judge that Clay was merely Harold's "roommate." The court denied their efforts, but did grant the county limited access to one of Harold's bank accounts to pay for his care.

---

Oh, it doesn't stop there, dear reader. Oh no, what happened next was beyond the pale. The fact that this can happen in America today, that this very well could have been Rich and I just a few short weeks ago--it terrifies me. The legal paperwork is only as good as the government issuing it, and if the government stance is "Gay relationships are nowhere near as special and important as straight marriage", well, this is what happens:

---

Without authority, without determining the value of Clay and Harold's possessions accumulated over the course of their 20 years together or making any effort to determine which items belonged to whom, the county took everything Harold and Clay owned and auctioned off all of their belongings. Adding further insult to grave injury, the county removed Clay from his home and confined him to a nursing home against his will. The county workers then terminated Clay and Harold's lease and surrendered the home they had shared for many years to the landlord.

Three months after he was hospitalized, Harold died in the nursing home. Because of the county's actions, Clay missed the final months he should have had with his partner of 20 years. Compounding this tragedy, Clay has literally nothing left of the home he had shared with Harold or the life he was living up until the day that Harold fell, because he has been unable to recover any of his property. The only memento Clay has is a photo album that Harold painstakingly put together for Clay during the last three months of his life.

---

Their possessions--sold. They were separated against their will, both physical and legal paperwork notwithstanding. Harold died alone. All Clay has left to remember his partner, his lover, his HUSBAND, is a book of pictures. Pictures. A 20-year life together auctioned off like junk, two men torn apart because, according to the "law," they were just "roommates." ROOMMATES?!

I lay this at your feet, Tony. You and the Mormon church and the rest of your ilk. Harold died alone because their relationship wasn't "worthy" of a marriage license, because all they had to do was "fill out the paperwork." All Clay has left from the last 20 years of his life, of their lives, is a photo album. Of course, maybe you don't care, and that is your right. But imagine if it were you, and your loved one, your partner, the last twenty years of your life. Knowing you were barred from seeing them? That they died alone? You weren't there to say that last good-bye, for that last kiss, that last whispered "I love you" gently into the ear that lay by your side for the last twenty years. And all you had left to show for those twenty years--is a photo album. Not the house you both shared, or the yard you both tended, or that special something you both fell in love with at that yard sale... Nothing.

I hope Clay makes them pay through the nose. Even though money can't bring back his husband, I hope he makes them pay until it hurts, until those people responsible feel just a little bit of the pain they inflicted on these two, the pain they inflicted on Harold in the last moments of his life, and the pain and suffering Clay still goes through having been robbed of what should have been their final moments together...

This terrifies me, that this can and apparently does happen. And, dear reader? If it doesn't scare the shit out of you? Then you haven't actually thought about it...

Thanks to the Bilerico Project for bringing this story to light, when even the local papers weren't covering this tragic piece of news.

How Gay Would That Be?

Tony Perkins of the "Family Research Council" claimed in a mass email on Thursday, 1/28, that "[Obama] is turning the military into a homosexual playground," among other things. Something tells me he's watched Saving Ryan's Privates too many times (only, of course, so he can let others know how bad gay porn is for American families...). Never minding that we always have been and always will be proud members of the military (as we are, in Tony's words, "militant homosexuals"...), serving with honor and distinction to the highest ranks of the military all the while keeping our personal lives separate and secret, Tony also wants everyone to "sign our new petition and remind Capitol Hill that the military isn't a laboratory for political correctness." As if the military were a democracy... Ha! What's truly hilarious is all the arguments Tony and his ilk are whipping out to "support" their position are the exact same arguments that were used to try to prevent blacks from serving alongside whites in the military. My friend Russ has an excellent post about this here. I've said it before and I'll say it again: Discrimination against homosexuals isn't the same as what African Americans went through (and in many instances still experience), but there are too many similarities to not draw a comparison.

---

---

In a semi-related incident, the "American Family Association" has come up with an even more brilliant idea to handle "the homosexuality problem." As they are apparently unaware that this isn't a theocracy (a mistake a lot of fundamentalists make), on the radio the other day one of their people advocated imprisoning us all and putting us through "reparative therapy"! (EVEN THOUGH IT DOESN'T WORK!) As Russ once again posted about, American Family Association radio host Bryan Fischer stated on the air:

---

If you believe that what drug abusers need is to go into an effective detox program, then we should likewise put active homosexuals through an effective reparative therapy program. Secondly, I'm afraid you're simply wrong about the Bible's perspective on the law and homosexuality. Paul lists quite explicitly in 1 Timothy 1:8-11 the actions and behaviors that are the proper concern of the law:

Now we know that the law is good, if one uses it lawfully, understanding this, that the law is not laid down for the just but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who strike their fathers and mothers, for murderers, the sexually immoral, men who practice homosexuality, enslavers, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound doctrine...

The bottom line here is that, biblically, those "who practice homosexuality" should come under the purview of the law just as much as those who take people captive in order to sell them into slavery. You express a belief in the Scriptures, and I trust your confidence in Scripture is not selective. If you believe all Scripture is inspired, then you are compelled to accept that legal sanctions may appropriately be applied to those who engage in homosexual behavior.

---

So not only do you want to round up all the men who have sex with men and lock them up together (rope no longer needed for soap!), but even more unbelievable is this man actually thinks secular laws should be based on the bible! Now, let me think, let me think... Who was it that also advocated rounding people up, jailing them, and, when possible, brain washing them? Oh, that's right: The Nazi's! Again, not exactly the same, but enough similarities to draw a pretty accurate comparison... After all, both the AFA and the FRC support Israel and all Jews, just as long as they aren't gay Jews, secular Jews, or unwilling to fight for the Holy Land Jews...

And, in regards to "Paul's list" in which "homosexuality" is included? As Russ pointed out, and as I've mentioned various times here on this blog and in other forums, the word homosexual didn't even exist back when Paul was writing his letters, and most of today's English translations are very crude paraphrases of the original Greek and Hebrew... See here for my own wonderful expose on Paul's letter to the Romans... (Sorry, Bryan Fischer, but bad paraphrasing of an ancient language can by no means be construed as "quite explicit"...)

---

---

As a former soldier in the United States Army (and current homosexual), and knowing many homosexuals who are still in the military, as well as many former military members, I find it shocking that a former Marine (of all people!) DOESN'T realize he had served among many fine and upstanding gay and lesbian soldiers! (Of course, given the climate created under DADT [that's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" for you acronym-challenged folks] and how out-spoken Tony is about his intolerance and fear of all things gay, one can only assume they were smart enough not to let him on the fact...)

Perhaps Tony's biggest fear (other than the fact that a homosexual might have seen his pee-pee in the communal showers during basic training) is the fact that if gay marriage does become recognized throughout the country, Jesus will pop down from heaven and ask for Tony's hand in marriage... Just to prove that he does, indeed, love Jesus that much. How gay would that be?

My Fellow Americans...

I don't even know where to begin... My dander is up for two completely unrelated topics:

1. Corporate Free Speech???, and
2. Hak-Shing William Tam of San Francisco

Between the Supreme Court and an "expert witness" on gay marriage...

One does wonder where one finds the time...

---

---

1. Corporate Free Speech?: When was the last time you hugged a corporation? When was the last time you saw a corporation burn a flag? When was the last time you were standing next to a corporation in line waiting to cast a vote? Never.

Ever since Theodore Roosevelt was president, there was a reason campaign finance laws restricting corporations donations and activities have been curtailed in American politics: because corporations were running the government instead of the other way around. From big oil (even back then) to the railroads, from the factory floors to the boardrooms, corporations were waving checks in front of politicians and saying, "Vote our way, or else..." Or else could have meant "We'll fund your opponent"; "We'll withhold our endorsement"; "We'll pay for radio ads and television ads that say you did this or that"; or, even worse yet, "We'll hand you a check for such and such an amount if you simply sign here..."

Here's the thing about businesses in America (you know, those entities which are so frail and poor and restricted by the free market, taxes, anti-trust laws and the like): They are in the business of making money. NOT, it should be noted, such a bad thing, until you consider that Money is the only thing corporations are about! The only reason they sell things is because we want the things they are selling--but is a society built simply on the exchange of goods? Do you think women gained the right to vote by buying only Wonder Brand Wonder Bread? In fact, if a corporation were to engage in anything "non-profitable," that part (or the whole!) of the corporation dies! If it can't be made into a good, packaged, or sold as a service--it doesn't serve the interests of the company, ergo it doesn't matter. Corporations exist at and by our discretion, by our willingness to purchase their goods or to work for them producing their goods. Corporations do not exist for the worker, the individual, the American citizen; they exist for money. WE the PEOPLE are the ones who fight for rights, enforce laws, vote for our leaders and not because we are trying to "maximize our profits" or "secure our bottom line," but because we want a better life, to pursue happiness, to feed our children, play in the park, hang out on the boardwalk, garden at our leisure, or, in the case of some individuals, work all the time.

And the Supreme Court, by a 5 to 4 vote, just sold your vote. "Oh, the ads will be more honest now," I heard one commentator say on the radio. "No need to hide behind half-truths and such." Baloney! If you believe that, I have an electro-magnetic force field holding a microwave in orbit around Jupiter I'd like to sell you. (It's teal!--the microwave, not the force field...) Chief Justice John Roberts is quoted as saying, "The text and purpose of the First Amendment point in the same direction: Congress may not prohibit political speech, even if the speaker is a corporation or union." Excuse me? The First Amendment, your high and revered douche bag, is in the BILL OF RIGHTS, which is expressly for INDIVIDUALS! Another bright bulb in this mess is Gregory Casey, president and CEO of the Business and Industry Political Action Committee, who is quoted as saying, "The Supreme Court's ruling frees American business from the yoke of second-class citizenship. ... The reason American business is active in politics in the first place is to influence public policies that impact the prosperity of its employees and shareholders." Excuse me? "Second class citizenship" for a CORPORATION? When was the last time Reebok or McDonald's applied for a green card? When did Pfizer pledge allegiance to the flag? Who ever saw Greco or General Electric or WalMart apply for a drivers license? CORPORATIONS ARE NOT CITIZENS, they are ENTITIES led by SPOKESPERSONS in the BUSINESS OF MAKING MONEY. End of discussion! But then the dude said "influence public policies that impact the prosperity of its employees and shareholders." He should have left out "employees" but kept "shareholders," because that's really what it's about: When a company is in financial trouble, what happens? Employees get laid off, wages go down, pensions are scrapped, perks scrubbed, and why? So profits stay up and shareholders continue to make money! That's it! Nothing more, nothing less! There's a REASON there are laws protecting individual and workers' rights, and it's not because it's profitable! Child labor laws are due to society, non-discrimination laws are in effect because of society, corporations are only allowed to run and exist if they follow the rules of the society, NOT the other way around! But that's exactly where we're back to. As political analyst Michael Sandel says of corporations, they cannot "sacrifice individual interests for the sake of the common good, and the ability to deliberate well about common purposes and ends." And why? Because they exist only to make Money. Nothing more, nothing less.

I've never been so upset by a decision from the Supreme Court before, but they have really dropped the ball on this one, much like when they became involved in Bush V. Gore--FLATLY unconstitutional, despite the spin job of the 5 majority justices.

---

---

2. Hak-Shing William Tam of San Francisco. In case some of you may not have noticed, there is a federal court battle playing out about Proposition 8, the voter initiative in California that rescinded the rights of same-sex couples to wed. Whatever your opinion on that might be (as it is rather moot, whether you like it or not), a friend sent me an email in regards to one of the persons who was behind the entire voter proposition to begin with: Mr. Hak-Shing William Tam. My brain was boggled by not only the fact that his trial appearance was put up with, but that his kind of ignorance still exists. From the article:

---

Tam testified that he spent a lot of time working on the campaign and communicated with its leaders but modestly added he did not consider himself a major player. He said became an official proponent because of his concern that legalizing same-sex marriage would encourage young people to pursue gay partners.

"I think it is very important that children won't grow up to fantasize or think about should I marry Jane or John when I grow up, because this is very important for Asian families."

Under questioning by Boies, Tam also said he agreed with a statement on the Web site for the Chinese-American Christian group that said if same-sex marriage was treated as a civil right, "so would pedophilia, polygamy and incest."

"And that is what you were telling people in encouraging them to vote for Proposition 8?" Boies asked.

"Yes," Tam answered.

Tam said he drew that conclusion after reading an Internet article that claimed incest and polygamy were legal in the Netherlands, a country where same-sex marriages became legal in 2001.

Boies: "You are saying here that after same-sex marriage was legalized, the Netherlands legalized incest and polygamy?"

Tam: "Yeah, look at the date, Polygamy happened afterward."

"Who told you that? Where did you get that idea," Boies asked incredulously.

"It's the Internet," he said. "Another person in the organization found it and he showed me it ... I looked at the document and I thought it was true."

---

Well, if he found it on the Internet, it must be true, no? No matter where you stand on the issue of same-sex marriage, is such a blatant "I can't think for myself" type ignoramus really someone you want on your side? Saying "I read it on the Internet so it must be true" is almost as bad as saying "I read it in the Bible so it must be true!" Have you people no critical thinking skills?? Does it cross no one's mind that they should stop and think, "Hmm, what web site is this? Are they a credible source? What facts do they have to back them up, and where did they obtain, and how did they obtain, these so-called facts?" (By the way, that teal microwave is still for sale, Mr. Tam. If you've read it here, it's on the Internet, and that's what I claim is important for Asian families! Teal microwaves in outer space!)

So, what have we learned? Oh, yes, corporations are endowed with inalienable rights according to the Supreme Court, and Mr. Tam can't think beyond his Internet connection, which, if you ask me, never fully connected...

Welcome to your country, my fellow American. You'll be pleased to know your leaders have been bought by General Mills, and you can't get married because some yahoo in California thinks it isn't good for Asians.

Heterosexuals Don't Expect to be Tolerated....

As I've said earlier:

---

...tolerance is only ever meant to be the smallest part of patience. And when the patience has been tried, tolerance goes out the window. Tolerate is what you do when your two-year-old tried again to drink from a cup instead of his sippy-cup, or you tolerate the sales person who called during dinner only as long as it takes to get them off the phone. You tolerate a visit from some member of the family you dislike for the sake of a holiday, or some-such other type scenario.

---

While our capitol city council recently voted (and approved) a bill to allow same-sex marriage (much to the Catholic church's chagrin...), it seems that the church is also trying to influence politics in Uganda. (For those of you who are geographically challenged, that's in Africa...)

You see, they're trying to put a law on the books (PDF here) that, among other things, will:

---

Section 2 of the Bill is titled, "The offence of homosexuality". It reads as follows: Clause "(1) A person commits the offence of homosexuality if --- (a) he penetrates the anus or mouth of another person of the same sex with his penis or any other sexual contraption; (b) he or she uses any object or sexual contraption to penetrate or stimulate the sexual organ of a person of the same sex; (c) he or she touches another person with the intention of committing the act of homosexuality."

Clause "(2) A person who commits an offence under this section shall be liable on conviction to imprisonment for life".

Where does the death penalty enter this twisted world of sexual paranoia? Let me quote the applicable section and sub-section. Section 3 of the Bill is titled, "Aggravated homosexuality". It reads in part: "A person commits the offence of aggravated homosexuality where the offender is a person living with HIV". "A person who commits the offence of aggravated homosexuality shall be liable on conviction to suffer death". And just in case there's any conjecture, we have this finale: "Where a person is charged with the offence under this section, that person shall undergo a medical examination to ascertain his or her HIV status".

---

I'm wondering how many "straight" politicians it takes to sit around the table to envision every conceivable type of "same sex" activity to make a law against it? I wonder if it was an "awkward" conversation as they drafted this "law" against their fellow human beings?

Even above and beyond the realm of 1984 is the fact that:



So now, not only are you guilty just by being gay; not only can you be put to death for having "gay" sex; you will be fined and go to jail if you don't report gay activity! (Strangely, on this last point, I'm reminded of the DADT policy... Wonder why, wonder why...)

A split is coming, fellow humans, and we watch it grow wider and wider every year, not only here in the United States, but the world over. We wonder why there can't be "bipartisanship"? The church is no longer content to be sidelined. As it did back in medieval times, it wants to rule again. It meddles in politics (while screaming about an individual right to worship freely and say any damn bloody thing that comes to mind no matter how idiotic...), lobbies to pass laws based on badly translated, sadly misinterpreted ancient texts, and it pits human against human to serve the "greater good" of "godly living." "Let's not simply punish them for the acts, let's also punish the other ones who don't tell!"

Let's face it--attempts at tolerance are out the door unless they think their freedoms are being somehow "infringed" because they can't have a mandatory recital of the Lord's prayer each morning in school. In fact, in North Carolina, a "Christian" would like an Asheville City Councilman removed simply because he's an atheist (because, in the fundamentalist mindset, you are free to believe whatever you want as long as it involves a bible, a god, a son crucified, and a steeple within a half-mile radius...)

---

"My father was a Baptist minister. I'm a Christian man. I have problems with people who don't believe in God," said Edgerton, a former local NAACP president and founder of Southern Heritage 411, an organization that promotes the interests of black southerners.

The head of a conservative weekly newspaper says city officials shirked their duty to uphold the state's laws by swearing in Bothwell. David Morgan, editor of the Asheville Tribune, said he's tired of seeing his state Constitution "trashed."

---

The grand tradition of making Jesus proud by ignoring laws and reason and common sense. Never mind that the U.S. Constitution states that "no religious test" shall be used for any office holder anywhere within our boundaries (which, of course, nullifies the religious test called for in North Carolina's state constitution): Edgerton has a problem all right, not the least of which is his ignorance and idiocy. He's probably cheering on Uganda's "fight" to protect "normal" people.

Is this what "conservative" Christianity has come to? Fascism? Making people "tattle" on one another, basing civic laws on beliefs that, most often, can't even be agreed on by the plethora of denominations within the church itself?!

Let's see: what other "offenses" can be traced back as an "attack" on Christianity and the "traditional family"? Eating out? Teenagers working part-time jobs? Women in the workplace? Television? Skipping church on Sunday? I know! Let's make it all illegal, and punish anyone who knows of people "engaging" in these activities, as well as the criminals themselves!

Dictating dogma through the government... What will the church think of next? Something else, I'm sure, that I don't expect to tolerate...

The Capitol and the Catholics...

The Catholic church of Washington, D.C., has issued the city an ultimatum:

---

The Catholic Archdiocese of Washington said Wednesday that it will be unable to continue the social service programs it runs for the District if the city doesn't change a proposed same-sex marriage law...

---

Because feeding and sheltering the homeless isn't nearly as important as gay couples getting married, right? Making sure orphaned children are adopted by loving parents isn't nearly as important as making sure lesbians don't tie the knot! It says it right there in the Bible!:

---

Deu 15:11 For the poor shall never cease out of the land: therefore I command thee, saying, Thou shalt open thine hand wide unto thy brother, to thy poor, and to thy needy, in thy land.

---

Er... wait... Wrong verse... But you know it as well as I do, dear Christian! The gays can not, MUST NOT be allowed to get married! Jesus commanded it! Remember when he said:

---

Luke 18:22 Now when Jesus heard these things, he said unto him, Yet lackest thou one thing: sell all that thou hast, and distribute unto the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, follow me.

---

Um... not there, but I'm sure he said something about it! He must have! I mean, homosexuality was rampant back in his day--the Romans and the Greeks! He was surrounded by those perverted homos!

And then Paul--you know, the guy most Christians worship?--HE was very adamant that the poor weren't nearly as important as the gays! He went into great detail saying about how the law of the land was the utmost of importance when it came to Christian/Government relations, like when we wrote:

---

1 Cor 13:3 And though I bestow all my goods to feed [the poor], and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing.

---

Oh... Well, I'm sure he said something about it...

And Jesus' brother, James? If one man was to know what Jesus and god thought of all this gay wedding nonsense, it was he! He wrote:

---

James 1:27 Pure and undefiled religion before God and the Father is this: to visit orphans and widows in their trouble, [and] to keep oneself unspotted from the world.

---

Well, regardless of what the bible actually says, you as Christians MUST remember that your religious freedoms which are not affected by the gay marriage bills in the United States are MORE IMPORTANT than helping out your fellow man. Your religious freedoms are MORE IMPORTANT than being a stand-up guy for your Jesus. What you believe, what your opinion is on civil matters is MORE IMPORTANT than anything else! Even though the D.C. bill explicitly states that "religious organizations would not be required to perform or make space available for same-sex weddings," what the Catholics really fear from this bill (and if you were to ask Jesus, rightly so!) is that "they could be forced, among other things, to extend employee benefits to same-sex married couples."

God. Forbid. If Jesus were in a grave (and because the Bible says he rose, he isn't!), he'd roll over! Twice!

What is this world coming to, when the equal treatment of human beings trumps religious belief and opinion? I'm sure when the Pilgrims landed at Plymouth Rock to escape the religious persecution in England only to start religiously persecuting everyone else that also came here, they never envisioned this! Why, the nerve of our nation's capitol! The unmitigated gall!

Well, not to worry--just like when god threw Massachusetts into the ocean, Vermont was swallowed by a gaping sink hole, and in Iowa everyone was turned into a pillar of salt, Washington, D.C., will have its day of judgment to... I'm sure of it!

Just as soon as god becomes real and takes an interest in the overwhelming persecution of the United States Christian... (even if Christian beliefs and actions stemming from those aren't affected by the law, and even if homeless persons will go hungry and die...)

Amen.

A Fellow American...

Where to begin? As it has been said, it is best, I suppose, to start at the beginning...

---

There is a reason we won't go back in the closet. As with any other human being on this planet, we are human beings, first and foremost. We have hopes and dreams, fears and failings, desires, ambitions, happy thoughts and sad, and we have lives.

We are brothers and sisters; we are mothers and fathers; we are sons and daughters; we are grandsons and granddaughters; we love and are loved. We eat, drink, laugh, cry, love and hate; we sing in the shower, yell at people who cut us off on the freeway, scream at the television when something pisses us off...

And we do get pissed off. Much like anyone would be when their lives are up for "popular vote."

We are not a nameless mass huddled in a dark corner ashamed to exist, although there are some who would like to make us feel that way. We do not have horns and forked tales and carry pitchforks trying to "recruit" people into the homosexual "lifestyle." As Harvey Milk once said, "I was born of heterosexual parents, taught by heterosexual teachers... If it were true that children mimicked their teachers, there'd be a hell of a lot more nuns running around." Much like red hair, left-handedness, even a white child born to African American parents, we just happen. We are not of the devil, we are not because we were molested as children, we are not some degenerate throw-backs--we are PEOPLE. We come in all colors, exist in all nations, adhere to a plurality of religious backgrounds and traditions, as well as a plurality of orientations. We are born of you, raised by you, loved and hated by you, work with you, shop with you, employ and are employed by you--but we are not a virus, a plague, nor are we lesser than you, my fellow American.

We are gay, lesbian, bisexual, and yes, we are transgendered and transsexual. We are male and female and somewhere between, and we are all human beings with the same inalienable rights. You know us, whether you like to admit it or not. We exist, whether or not you'd prefer to acknowledge it. You are entitled to your opinion, and on most days, any American would be happy to respect it...

But not today.

Today I am angry. If you would have put women's suffrage up for a "popular vote"? It would have lost, and you would have heard that women should just be grateful that God provided them with husbands and children that needed cared for. It was their "proper place," being in the home, without right to land, money, or even a vote to voice an opinion. Civil rights for African Americans? Wouldn't have had a prayer. Children's labor laws? Perish the thought! The Civil War? You know, the one where we fought tooth and nail just for the right to exist as a new nation, to not suffer under horrible taxation laws, no right to trial, presumed guilty unless by some miracle proven innocent? Two thirds of the people living in America at the time of the American Civil War were AGAINST the war!

Because people, ultimately first and foremost, fear what they do not know, cringe from change, find comfort in the status quo. When Kennedy was running for president, the largest fear was that the Pope would run American politics. It took years and years of Catholics running for office before Kennedy even had a prayer of winning! Change comes slowly when people fear the unknown, and I suppose I find small comfort in the fact.

Very small comfort.

But when you know someone who is gay? It's much harder for you to put up their lives for a "popular vote." That's also just another simple fact, do with it what you will. For the longest time, it was thought that homosexuals were the principle perpetrators of child molestation when in fact it is 95% of men who identify as straight and are usually related to the child who commit these vile acts. It was thought that gays were "demon infested"--sadly, something still thought of as true not only in small pockets of the United States, but in countries the world over as well. It was thought to have been "caused" by having been molested, or having a "distant" father or "overbearing mother," none of which is even remotely true. Ask us, we'll tell you. We'll set the record straight, if you'll pardon the pun.

There's a reason we won't just be "happy" to live quiet lives so you can remain ignorant, so you can raise more gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgendered and transsexual children, ignorantly telling them their entire lives that they are wrong, that they are sick, that they are perverts! YOUR CHILDREN! Ignorance is not an excuse. Naivete is no longer an option. That's who were are! That's who we will always be. Your children. And when you pulled that lever to say "We don't want gays marrying!" guess whose happiness and dreams you've just put up for a vote? It wasn't some nameless mass of "gays" four states away and a world apart. It was people you see every day. It was your fellow American. It was your children.

When I woke up this morning and saw the news that Maine voters had overturned same-sex marriage in their state, I was not shocked. "Saddened," perhaps. "Angry" most certainly! But shocked? I hadn't even dared to hope.

But there's a reason I do now. There's a reason I hope once more.

You see, back in the 1970s there was a state-by-state banning of gay civil rights, started by Anita Bryant. State by state she helped states repeal or ban ordinances that protected homosexuals from being fired or denied housing just for being gay. Not based on job performance, mind you, or credit scores, or anything else even remotely objective--back in the 1970s, you could be fired or evicted just for being a gay human being. But, of course, it was the "morally correct" action to make sure these homosexuals didn't have basic human rights (as if denying someone the right to earn a living and live in a decent home could even be remotely spun as a moral thing to do!) And state by state, the moral majority was mostly successful! Just shy of forty years ago, California was the first state to take a stand and say, "We will protect all of our citizens!" and did not bow to the immorality of the moral majority. It became illegal, in 1978, when I was two years old, to discriminate against an individual because of their sexual orientation in the state of California...

Now 30 states protect persons from such discrimination, and by years' end, it should be federally illegal to do so (thus mandatory in all 50 states...) And while I am sad to say, my state covers sexual orientation and gender identity only if you actually happen to work for the state (i.e., it is not one of the thirty states), thirty states is more than the one state almost forty years ago...

Indeed, change comes slowly, but it does come. And as angry as I am right now, I do have that hope that, perhaps in forty more years, it won't just be five states that allow people to share their love and joy through marriage (Massachusetts, Connecticut, Iowa, Vermont, and New Hampshire), but all fifty states. In forty more years, I hope that you, America, will recognize what a dumb bachagaloop you've been--putting human rights up for a vote?!

Once you have said it is okay to do to one minority group, others aren't far behind. Hitler, too, had a shopping list. And considered himself quite a good Christian.

Offended by that analogy? Offended enough to rethink your approach to human rights?

After all, I, too, am an American. It's just that I happen to be gay as well. Is that really a reason to tell me I cannot marry the man I love? Is it?

In forty years, look back on this moment, dear voters in Maine. Look back at what you voted on.

You voted to deny a fellow American the right to marriage.

A fellow American.

I hope you feel proud.

"I'm Not a Racist... I Just Don't Believe in Mixing the Races..."

One wonders what the qualifier is for being a racist then?

But apparently, Keith Bardwell, justice of the peace in Tangipahoa Parish in Louisianna, has "piles and piles of black friends."

Perhaps he uses them for kindling?

He goes on to say, "There is a problem with both groups accepting a child from such a marriage," Bardwell said. "I think those children suffer and I won't help put them through it."

Has this man heard of President Obama? Mariah Carey?

This may be a case of "prjection" on Bardwell's part...

Bardwell also says in his own defense "I try to treat everyone equally," he said. He claims that if he married one interracial couple, he'd have to marry other interracial couples. So I suppose it's in the spirit of "equality" that he refuses to marry any of them, thus "treating them all equally."

Only in the south...

A Counter Argument... (or, At the Very Least, a Response...)

This blog post is mainly a response to a discussion going on here at War of the Waves.

---

---

The problem with saying "Darwinism" is at fault, or at least "the scientific rationale for Communism-an ideology" is it's not only a mis-directed blame-ology, it is a false argument at it's core. It would be much like trying to say it's the bible's fault that people have used scripture as the basis for some of the bloodiest and deadliest wars in all of recorded history. Just because Marx was able to twist Darwin's writings on natural selection as a way of building a government system with which to subjugate and control most of a continent isn't Darwin's fault, and it certainly isn't evolutions fault--it's Marx's fault! And you, Richard Ramsey, are making the same misplaced logic that Marx was at fault for using! You just have a different goal for misreading evolutionary theory! (not to say that the misreading is entirely "on purpose," but it is nonetheless twisted and misread on your part...)

And while it may be nice, even a worthy goal, to read up and study Communism's faults, foibles, and history upon earth as it relates to human history and such, it is still a very bad casual connection to say Darwin and evolutionary theory are somehow to blame for Communism's brutal and bloody reign. The bible, and the wars fought on it's behalf (or, if you will, the beliefs held by those who have read and misread it for eons) have caused just as much misery, pain, torture as Marx--more, if truth be entirely told. And while it is easy to see how Marx could misread and use evolutionary theory to build a governmental system meant for subjugating a people, the fault lies in that, instead of seeing how Marx misread the writings of Darwin, but that you think Marx read them correctly and thus it must be Darwin's fault (or at the very least evolution's fault!) means that you think Marx's misreading and misapplication must have been the only true and accurate way of reading Darwin's material in the first place!

I am hoping you see the distinction here, but if you think I'm not being entirely clear here on the distinction, let me know and I can try to figure out another way to phrase or illustrate my point...

Now, onto your second point, "how can one go about observing one species changing into another?"

First, I suggest you read up on how micro- and macroevoltion are the exact same thing. (You can see my 29 posts about the topic of evolution and it's impact on all our lives, or if you do a simple Google search on macroevolution and find many reputable, scientific articles, sources, and facts about macroevolution and its many proofs). Of course, none of this will mean a pile of dingo's kidneys if you refuse to look at any of it with any type of critical thinking (so many refuse to engage in critical thinking when it comes to these topics of "creationism V evolution") but I like to think most people keep an open mind when considering any point of view or reading any new material... :)

WWJS?: Or Who Would Jesus Shoot?

You know, I just don't get it.

Now, don't get me wrong: I am not one of those anti-gun, anti-2nd-amendment, more-gun-control types who think everyone just needs more laws to keep people from murdering one another: Far from it! What I don't understand, though, is how these people who are fervent, verging-on-psychotic, right-wing nut-job Jesus followers are also the same types who would brandish sixteen pistols, seventeen shot guns, seven rifles and a war chest of ammo...

Or is it just me? Does anyone else see... well, something not quite right about this image?

Let's look at the facts: There is not a command that says "Never go to war," although the OT god was so much about war, you would of thought his commission on giving the so-called "holy land" to Israel was close to 90% (God, Jesus, and Ghost Realty, Inc.)! But when it comes to the new testament? You read things like "turn the other cheek"; "love your enemies"; "whatever you do to the least of these, you do to me." When Jesus was getting arrested to be put on trial (and eventually nailed up like an oil painting) and Peter cuts off the ear of the high priest, did Jesus cheer him on? Grab his sword and say, "I can take it from here, Petey"? He admonished his disciples and (supposedly) healed the priest: In Matthew he is reported to have said "Put your sword back into its place; for all who take the sword will perish by the sword..."; in Mark he is recorded to have said "No more of this!"

When the Pharisees got everyone in an uproar and they tried stoning him, did he start throwing rocks back? Grab a sword and go all jihad on their asses? No, he "passed through them" (became Casper, if you will) and walked away... When I read "Vengeance is mine sayeth the Lord," one wonders how many of these southern baptists and what-not think, as the bible is to be taken quite literally, that guns don't count--it's the sword they need to be concerned with... (Perhaps that might explain a lack of enthusiasm for the art of fencing here in the states?)

Of course, many a Christian likes to pull the old 10 Commandments out at this point: "The Bible says 'Thou shalt not MURDER,', not 'Thou shalt not kill!' so there!" (I have to be amazed that this is still the only bit of actual Hebrew most of these right-wingers have learned...) And it's true: it is "Thou shalt not murder" if one translates it correctly. But what is murder?

There are no disclaimers about self-defense not being murder. There are no asterisks (*) nearby calling attention to a footnote that reads "Except when protecting your land, crops, wife, child(ren), goats, sheep, cows, and American-made pick-up truck." If every person--let me repeat, every person--is made in god's image, and every human has an eternal soul, and you kill that human despite the NT examples set forth by your man-god...

What makes your life more important than the robber or murderer? Sure, you can justify it til the cows come home (or at least reasonably close to home), but can you find me the disclaimer? The one that reads "if your life is in imminent danger, you are no longer committing murder, you are simply killing"?

If one looks at the entirety of the new testament, the portion of the bible we are supposedly living under, show me where violence on the part of a follower of Jesus is condoned or otherwise not frowned upon...?

And remember context: The "sword" in the new testament? Always is a metaphor--it is never once referred to as an actual physical weapon to be used by a follower of Jesus...

But that's probably only because shot guns hadn't been invented yet... And Rome must have had sword-control laws in place... So now we have to ask, who would Jesus have shot? Anyone? Anyone?

A Turning of the Tide? orThe Calm Before the Storm?

In just the last two weeks, the number of states with legal same-sex marriage has doubled. (I'm still not sure if that's sad or amazing.) The first was Iowa which, just last week, ruled that denying marriage to same-sex couples was unconstitutional. I think I speak for most East Coasters when I say I almost fell off my chair... Iowa? Seriously? A mid-west state has just legalized same-sex marriage? Let's face it, the mid-west bread-basket portion of our country gets the short end of the stick when it comes to social policy. Not only has the so-called "Family Research Council" been in over-drive, slamming my in-box full of emails exhorting me to "speak up" for marriage since it's "in the cross hairs" (because everyone knows you ruin more marriages with gays than guns...). But even after I got up off the floor and back into my office chair, it seemed just moments later when the legislators of Vermont voted to override their governor's veto and pass a bill for same-sex marriage (I'm sure we all feel bad for Tony Perkin's not being able to use the "activist judges" phrase in this case...)

When I pried my head out from the ceiling tiles and dropped back down to the floor, it hit me fully: Two states in less than seven days! Then another email came in: Washington D.C. had voted to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states...

The nation's capitol city... Will recognize same-sex marriages...

I do believe I passed out...

There are now four states in which same sex marriage is currently legal (five states in which same-sex marriages have been performed--I think at this point California can suck it!): Connecticut, Vermont, Massachusetts, and Iowa. There are now four more states considering bills to legalize same-sex marriage: New Hampshire, Maine, New York and New Jersey. There are even more states (and districts [D.C.]) that will recognize those relationships even if they won't perform those marriages: Rhode Island, New York, and New Mexico!

I'm still flabbergasted that the East Coast is demolishing the West Coast in terms of equality--not to mention Iowa representing for the bread basket! (What is UP with THAT?!) And when you look at the world view? Sweden just became the fifth European nation to allow same-sex marriage, following the Netherlands, Norway, Belgium and Spain! And who could forget our neighbor to the north Canada! Add South Africa and Nepal--the tide does seem to be turning indeed!

But then I read Ryan's Blog where he talked about gays in Iraq. After some research I found the following map (clicking on map will open it in a larger window...):


Homosexuality legal

██ Same-sex marriage recognized

██ Other type of partnership (or unregistered cohabitation) recognized

██ No recognition of same-sex couples

██ Foreign same-sex marriages recognized

Homosexuality illegal

██ Minimal penalty

██ Large penalty

██ Life in prison

██ Death penalty

Does anyone notice anything disturbing? Places where religion have a stronghold on a nation's laws and policies have a very disturbing record when it comes to equal rights for same-sex couples... Conservative Christians in the United States, Fundamentalist Muslims in the Middle East, the combination of both in various parts of Africa, not to mention the socialist and communist areas of the map--more and more the "defenders" of "traditional marriage" are seen side-by-side with very strange bed fellows! Russia, China, Islamic countries, and the conservative Christians of the United States united together in preventing same-sex couples from entering into life-long, committed relationships so that they can care for one another in the same way heterosexual couples take for granted--truly a "godly plan" if I ever saw one... It's quite scary that the only difference between the fundies over here and the fundies over there is that I can no longer be put to death simply for existing... Sparse comfort, but comfort nonetheless I suppose...

But I remain hopeful (if only because the "depths of despair" isn't nearly as cozy as the highs of anticipation...). I can't help but to believe in my fellow human beings, for I truly believe that everyone, even when they make the greatest mistakes and commit the most awful atrocities, are almost always sincerely trying to do the right thing, no matter how misguided or mistaken.I can't help but think that the ignorant fear and misguided "defenders" will realize the error futility mistakes they are making with their current decision-making processes. As if what two consenting adults do with one another is more important than the millions starving around the world. As if two penis's in one bedroom were more important than thousands dying from inadequate health care.

I can't help but to believe that, in the end, before I breathe my last breath, before I leave this Earth for eternity, I will be able to declare my love in front of my friends and loved ones, to be able to care for him as he grows older, to not have to worry that our dying days will be filled with angst and worry over money instead of spending our last days sharing in one another's company, cherishing our time, sharing our love...

Dear America--dear world!--I have faith that eventually, you will all realize what a mistake you have made in fighting against equality. That you will come to terms with your irrational fears and conquer them with the reason you possess. That you will finally recognize your fellow man and woman for the individuals they are--just like you, with the same hopes and dreams you have, with the same expectations from life, family, and friends you have. To be loved, accepted, deserving of respect, and treated equally in the eyes of the law and in the depths of the heart.

I have faith in you, my fellow human being--can't you have the same in me?

---

---

Sources for this post:

• Chicago Tribune
• National Public Radio
• Wikipedia