Thursday, June 29, 2006

Coultergeist Goes To Pottersville



The other day, I received a rather unpleasant e-mail from someone purporting to 'educate' me and all the other America-Hating Traitors (i.e. Democrats) who, for some unknown reason, take offense at the fascisistic, hate-filled ramblings of Ann "The Man" Coulter.

I have been slack on posting recently because family matters are taking precedence at the moment and I have neither the time or the emotional wherewithal to address this, so I passed it along to some of my blog friends to see if anyone was up to the challenge.

Thanks to Blue Gal passing it along, the redoubtable JurassicPork at Welcome To Pottersville picked up the gauntlet and did a bang-up job of exposing this execrable screed for what it is - mean-spirited wingnuttery attempting to masquerade as 'intellectualism'. Of course, when I replied to his e-mail by asking to be removed from his spam list, his reply was (and I quote:)
hey spam is commercial I am just trying to help you learn to think??
My reply was:
If you would like to help me 'learn to think', learn how to write. A statement is not followed by double question marks.
And, of course, spam is not only commercial - it is any unwanted and unsolicited e-mail. Commas, capitalization and periods would not also be amiss if one wishes to be taken seriously.

So, please stop on by at Pottersville (love that name - and it's right close by Hooterville!) and check out JurassicPork's take on it.

And thanks to those who unselfishly sullied their eyes for the cause...

Wednesday, June 14, 2006

Income Distribution in the US

The L-Curve is a fascinating site. We know that there is a disparity between the very rich and the rest of us, but it's difficult to visualize just how vast the difference is. The L-Curve lays it out visually in a way that makes it understandable.

Check this out:
We are on the 50 yard line of a football field, representing the median U.S. family income. The income of the "Median Family" is about $40,000. The frame is 1 meter square.(A meter is a little over a yard...a meter is about 40 inches whereas a yard is 36 inches.)
We have zoomed in by a factor of 10. Meet the "Median Family," the family at the 50th percentile, the 50-yard line on our football field.
The US population is represented along the length of the football field, arranged in order of income.

Median US family income (the family at the 50 yard line) is ~$40,000 (a stack of $100 bills 1.6 inches high.)
--The family on the 95 yard line earns about $100,000 per year, a stack of $100 bills about 4 inches high.
--At the 99 yard line the income is about $300,000, a stack of $100 bills about a foot high.
--The curve reaches $1 million (a 40 inch high stack of $100 bills) one foot from the goal line.
--From there it keeps going up...it goes up 50 km (~30 miles) on this scale!


We have zoomed out by a factor of 10, so this frame is 1 kilometer square. A square representing the previous frame is visible. The tree is a Giant Sequoia. A stack of $100 bills 1 kilometer high would be a billion dollars. This country has about 400 billionaires.
We have zoomed out another factor of 10. Squares representing the previous two frames are visible. The mountain in the background is Mt. Everest. Our pile of $100 bills is approaching the $10 billion mark.
Our frame is now 100 kilometers square. The exact height of the top of the curve varies from year to year, but the total amount of money in the vertical spike continues to grow steadily. Bill Gates "wealth" was at one point estimated to be over $100 billion. The red line represents his greatest "increase" in net worth in a year. At 50 kilometers, the pile of $100 bills extends beyond the stratosphere, more than 5 times the height of Mt. Everest. $1 million is the same proportion of this income as $1 to a person earning $50,000 per year.


And these are the people who need more tax cuts...

Check out the L-Curve for yourself.

Tuesday, June 13, 2006

I Am Afraid

I am afraid. Do you know what I'm afraid of?

I'm not afraid of Iraq.

I'm not afraid of Islamic terrorists.

I'm not afraid of Iran.

I'm not afraid of Osama Bin Laden.

I am afraid that all the information is going to come out, that the truth will be laid bare for all America to see…and it won't matter.

That the ugly reality of what George Bush and his band of verminous cohorts has perpetrated upon us, upon our dead soldiers, upon a country who never attacked us, upon our Constitution, upon our former 'freedoms', upon our very definition of what it means to be an American, will be shown up in broad daylight for what it is…and no one will care.

That the work of people like Greg Palast, who relentlessly and tirelessly exposes the secrets of this grotesque administration both at home and abroad, will be for nothing…because it will be met with indifference.

That's really what I'm scared of.

Because that's what's happened so far.

Every day, fresh hells are revealed. Every day, more horrific abuses are uncovered, and no one seems particularly bothered, except the usual suspects - us shrill, screechy left-wing moonbats.

All along, I've been wondering just how bad it has to get before Americans will get off their asses and register some kind of discomfort with these crimes. I can only conclude that, incredibly, it hasn't gotten bad enough yet.

There was a time when I thought that it was only because we didn't know that we didn't care. I thought that, once the American people had access to the truth, that they would demand a change. That they would stand up and put a stop to the corrupt regime who is decimating our way of life to fatten their bottom line.

But, like alcoholics who stubbornly refuse to see that their drinking is destroying not only their lives but the lives of everyone who loves them, the American people are simply cruising down that river in Egypt, Denial, sipping the Kool-Aid as they float along, comfortably numb.

That is what frightens me to the marrow of my bones.

Friday, June 09, 2006

My Evening With Greg

Since I couldn't attend Yearly Kos, just down the street in Vegas, I consoled myself by going to see Greg Palast speak at a church in Los Angeles tonight. Helen Wheels and I had plans to go together - we wanted to go to the pre-speech dinner, which was cheaper for two, so she was going to be my gay date. We ran into a couple of snags, though - the dinner was sold out, and then her new puppy got sick, and she had to cancel.

I figured I could still go to the lecture, so I headed out there solo. When I got there, a guy at the door told me that I could go to the dinner anyway, that there was some room left. When I got to the ticket table, there was a lady in front of me who was also going to the dinner, but she didn't have enough cash for a meal ticket, and they didn't have a credit card machine. So she and I ended up being each other's date because she had just enough cash for her half of the couple's price, and we both saved money and had some company. Of course, the Greg Palast policy was that no one would be turned away for lack of funds. There's just something nice about progressive people. Somehow I can't imagine that kind of thing happening at an Ann Coulter lecture.

Greg Palast is a wonderful speaker, and very inspirational, as well as damn funny. Most (but not all) of what he talked about was in the book, but what I took away from it was a renewed sense of purpose as a liberal. The facts are depressing; no doubt about it. The vote stealing, the gross indifference to America and Americans, except for the 'base' - the haves and the have-mores; the power of the corporatocracy, the throwing away of countless human lives for nothing more than greed - it's all true. But at the end, he said, "If we march, we win. If we vote, we win. If they steal 5 million votes in 2008, let's register 7 million new voters. It may not be original or exciting, but it does work. And if we don't march, and we don't vote, we don't win."

That's the way I see it, too. Whatever I do as an individual may not be much, but it beats the alternative, which is inaction, and thereby aiding and abetting the thieves. The alternative is not acceptable to me.

After the lecture, Greg stayed to autograph books. He stayed until each and every person who wanted an autograph got one. His energy is amazing. I've been hearing him on every radio show I've listened to in the past couple of days, he's been traveling all over like a madman for this book tour, and yet he was so exuberant and inspirational. I brought my book that I bought the day it came out, and also the book that I got with my dinner ticket. I got him to sign one to me and the other one to Hooterville. I'm going to be giving it away here on the blog, so stay tuned for contest details!

If he's in your city
, don't miss him! If not, buy the book! I wish I could have gone with all of you all - we would have had a blast.

Inspiration!

I have the solution!

I've finally figured out what to do about the Coultergeist.

Hook her up with Bill O'Reilly!

Isn't it obvious?

Ann. bless her heart, is desperately lonely and no doubt sexually - uh, under-served, shall we say? She's screaming out for love and attention with her skankulous attire (sorry, Ann, but 45-year-old women, no matter how emaciated, should leave tight little sleeveless minidresses or black vinyl to the younger gals) and her waterfall of peroxided glory which she wears like a thirteen-year-old. Her shrill, screechy, nasally whine will no doubt be a mating call to the ears of a red-blooded he-man like Bill, who is also obviously over-sexed and under-served, if his unwelcome kinky phone-calls to his underling and his pornographic novel are any indication.

Yes, Ann & Bill...a political pornographer and a plain ol' pornographer. What a cute couple they'd make. Bill would make a woman out of Ann for sure. "Oh, Bill, tell me to 'shut up' again!" Perhaps they'd be so happy with each other that they'd leave the rest of us alone!

How 'bout it, y'all?

Thursday, June 08, 2006

An Observation

You know what? I just never, ever want to hear the words 'activist judges' come out of the mouth of someone who stole the highest office in the land with the help of 'activist judges'.

I just don't.

Wednesday, June 07, 2006

The Walk of Shame

I know - I said I was done, but I just had to add this. Our friend kissfan (whose 2-year blog-i-versary I'd like to toast) made the observation that the Coultergeist claims to be from the party of higher morals yet she dresses like she's trolling for action.

No kidding - in she sashays to the Today Show at - what - 6 in the morning? - all skanked out in a skin-tight black minidress. Girlfriend, if you're dressed like that at 6 AM, you're doing the Walk of Shame.

And, come to think of it, she was.

Since she has this idea about liberals being 'loose and immoral', she feels compelled to 'out-slut' them all. And brag about how Christian she is while she does it.

Have you noticed that there is this pathetic sense of 'one-upmanship' that Republicans seem to revel in? "Our women are better-looking than Democratic women" (which is not true!) - as if the only way they can win is for somebody else to lose; as if the life of our country is a game where there are winners and losers - "We won, so shut up and get over it" (even though that isn't true!). As though winning an election (which they didn't actually do) means that the other half of America doesn't exist!

Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't remember the Democrats being like that when they were in power. I really don't.

Update: I just e-mailed the Today Show to express my disapproval of their having her on their show; if you'd like to do the same, here's the address - today@nbc.com...

Last Mention

I don't want to give Ann "The Man" Coulter any more cyber-ink, but I'll finish with this:

Yesterday, I went to Borders to get the new Greg Palast book, Armed Madhouse. I was hoping that it would be prominently displayed among the new releases, but, sadly, no. I had to have an employee look it up on the computer and get it for me. But what assailed my poor eyes as I entered the store? You guessed it. Bam! Row upon row of the Coultergeist, glaring belligerently at me, double-dog daring me to walk by her.

What a very sad state we're in.

Ugh.

Tuesday, June 06, 2006

Autobiography

Well, well…it seems as if Ann Coulter (no, I'm not giving her a link) has published a new autobiography, entitled (aptly enough) "Godless".

This is the latest installment of her self-revelatory tomes:

"Treason"
"Slander"
and, of course,
"High Crimes and Misdemeanors"

Her candor is refreshing.

Thursday, June 01, 2006

Mark Fiore - Ethics Liquidators' Congressional Sale-A-Bration!

The unfailingly fabulous Mark Fiore has a new dead-on-hilarious Flash animation out. Run, don't walk, to his site!

Animation here.

Wednesday, May 31, 2006

Marcy Winograd



I hate phones.

I hate selling.

I hate phone solicitation the most.

So what was I doing last night in a law office with a headset on, calling strangers till I got a migraine?

Volunteering for Marcy Winograd.

Marcy is challenging Rep. Jane Harman for California's 36th Congressional District seat in next weeks primary. Jane Harman is essentially a "Bush Democrat", voted for the war in Iraq, voted for the Patriot Act 3 times. Marcy Winograd is a true progressive Democrat, from the 'Democratic wing of the Democratic Party'. I'm glad to have a local candidate that I feel good about volunteering for. Here's what Marcy's about:
Domestic Policy Position Summary:

Winograd supports universal single-payer health care; substantial corporate incentives for alternative energy development (New Apollo Energy Act); media reform that favors local autonomy over corporate consolidation; a national voter-verified paper trail with standardized ballot audit protocols; and campaign finance reform such as the CA Clean Money campaign; as well as a new education initiative focused on bolstering early childhood education to close the achievement gap, improving teacher training and on-going professional development, and recreating schools as cross-community hubs rather than isolated silos.

Winograd also supports a woman's right to choose; legalization of gay marriage; workers' right to organize (bipartisan Employee Free Choice Act ); decriminalization of immigration; abolishment of the death penalty and censure and impeachment of Bush and Cheney for high crimes relating to the war in Iraq and for attacks on civil liberties, including illegal wiretapping (see http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/reasons.)

Foreign Policy Position Summary:

Marcy supports immediate withdrawal of our troops from Iraq, cessation of air strikes over Iraq, an end to no-bid reconstruction contracts for war profiteers,no permanent US military bases in Iraq, war reparations so that Iraqis can reconstruct their own country, and diplomatic efforts to involve regional Arab stakeholders in fostering peace and unity in Iraq. Marcy calls for an end to Bush's first-strike pre-emptive nuclear war policy, secret detentions, suspension of due process and torture, and illegal wiretaps of Americans.

Winograd vigorously supports renewed Israeli/Arab peace talks aimed at establishing a Geneva Accord two-state solution for Israel and Palestine. In the face of the Bush administration's pre-emptive war policy, Winograd stresses the importance of opposing a military attack on Iran. For more on Iran, read: A Nuclear Iran Would Be Bad - A Forcibly Defanged Iran Would Be Worse.

Winograd believes the United States should join the International Criminal Court to underscore the importance of the rule of law to prosecute international terrorists before a world community -- and believes Congress should, as Congressman John Conyers suggests, pass a unified security budget that integrates and balances the importance of preventing the spread of nuclear, biological and chemical weapons with beefing up homeland security (ports, other transportation centers) and creating international goodwill through a renewed commitment to fight poverty, AIDS, and illiteracy both at home and abroad. Winograd also supports efforts by Congressman Dennis Kucinich to establish a Department of Peace. (See www.dopcampaign.org.)
As much as I hate phone solicitation, last night I spoke to one woman who had never heard of Marcy. After we talked, and I told her about Marcy's positions, she said, "I'm so glad you called! If I hadn't talked to you, I would have just voted for Jane Harman."

That one woman made the migraine worthwhile.

Here's Marcy's website.

And thanks to DivaJood for bringing her to my attention!

Monday, May 29, 2006

Hooterville Hellcats: Mission Accomplished!

The Hooterville Hellcats launched an assault upon Sherman Oaks today. Unfortunately, due to the danger and secrecy of their mission, and the fact that I can't find my digital camera, they could only be seen by camera-phone.

First, they secured their communications base.



Then, they captured the enemy's fueling station.



The Hooterville Hellcats proceeded to deploy all across Sherman Oaks, capturing bus stops, coffee shops, and even into the belly of the beast - the Galleria!

Major combat operations in Sherman Oaks have ended, but the War Against War continues for as long as necessary - six days, six weeks - I doubt six months...

Monday, May 22, 2006

Monkey Business

from Kurt Vonnegut's "Breakfast of Champions", published in 1973:

"[Kilgore Trout, the science fiction writer] wrote a story one time about an optimistic chimpanzee who became President of the United States. He called it 'Hail to the Chief.'

The chimpanzee wore a little blue blazer with brass buttons, and with the seal of the President of the United States sewed to the breast pocket....Everywhere he went, bands would play 'Hail to the Chief.' The chimpanzee loved it. He would bounce up and down."


Another golden nugget from The Smirking Chimp

Saturday, May 20, 2006

Kommandos Project


Kvatch over at Blognonymous has started a new blog to promote a protest that I just love. It's called the Kommandos Project. Target date is May 26th and 27th - Memorial Day weekend. As Kvatch says, "The notion is to place little green army men--you know the ones that you played with as a kid--with banners protesting the war anywhere...everywhere we can think of."

I think it's a fabulous idea - non-confrontive, thought-provoking, fun. Also, deadly serious. Wouldn't it be great to see these little guys popping up everywhere?

I'm going to e-mail my non-blogging friends, blogwhore where I can. I'm going to buy my supplies tomorrow - army guys are available at the 99¢ store or any toy store.

Check out the Kommandos Project - everyone is welcome to participate! Let's remember and respect our fallen soldiers by helping to bring some back home alive.

Fast-Track Flyboy: Kommander Kodpiece, the Kowboy Koward of Krawford

I found this nugget at The Smirking Chimp - one of my go-to-daily sites.
Editor's note: This is an e-mail message Michael Graham sent two days ago to a highly reputed investigative "blog" run by a progressive think tank. Mr. Graham was responding to blog entries concerning Bush's overuse of the National Guard.
Dear troublemakers,

I used to be a prize-winning reporter, so hear me out. Before that, I served in the real Air Force, as a commissioned officer in counterintelligence, at the same time George W. Bush was hiding out in the Texas Guard. At that time, the Guard did relatively little unless there was a hurricane or something. They certainly didn't have to worry about combat.

My theory is that Commander Codpiece -- insanely addicted to power -- is so hung up on the fact that he was a coward back then that he is compensating for it now by forcing today's Guard to be heroes. That way he can be one retroactively -- heroism by association. That may sound nutty, but the man is batshit nuts. And it is just a theory.

But here is something that is provable. No one in journalism has picked up one aspect of Bush's past: He never was properly trained to be a second lieutenant in the first place! I'm talking about before flight school, entrance to which requires an officer's commission.Those of us in the real Air Force got commissioned in one of three ways: The Air Force Academy, ROTC, or -- if already college graduates -- the Officer Training School at Lackland Air Force Base, Texas. If you saw the film An Officer and a Gentleman, depicting the Navy's version, you have a rough idea of what that training was like. It was goddamned hard. But young Georgie didn't have to go through it. If you examine his records, you will find that he was given a direct commission as a second lieutenant after completing enlisted basic training and nothing more! Bang: He went directly from Airman Third Class, which is the rank of someone just out of basic, to a second lieutenant with a few typewriter keystrokes. Then he went to flight school. Read more…

Pride

I came home last night from a gig in Long Beach, where I played at a gay bar. This week is Pride Week in Long Beach. I've played many, many Pride festivals, and when I see so many wonderful people and beautiful families deprived of their basic civil rights by someone else's arbitrary 'religious' beliefs, I am always just outraged. I use 'religious' in quotes because this is not about religion at all, but the product of fear and prejudice. And straight people need to stand up and support their gay brothers and sisters. So many of the people I love in my life are gay, and to not stand with them seems a betrayal to me. It takes all of us to change the system. The courage and determination that my gay friends have in just living their lives openly is an inspiration to me.

Sexual orientation is not about sex - plenty of people can 'swing either way', but about love. Who you fall in love with. Who you want to spend your life with. Who you want to build a family with. And that's what 'family values' means to me. Imagine the twisted thinking that believes a child is better off shuttled through the nightmare that is foster care than given a permanent, loving home with a gay couple hungry for a child to share their love and build a family with. Children brought up loved are loving. That is what society needs more than anything else.

Gay pride, at the end of the day, is not so much about being proud of one's sexual orientation - after all, it's just how one was born - but about pride in being yourself; a pride that we as straight people take for granted. This most basic pride in oneself, the core, the cornerstone of your personality, is denied to 10% of God's children, for no other reason than someone else's fears and insecurities.

The 'Defense' Rests

I received my first marriage proposal at the age of eighteen. My fiancé, a year older than I, was a real catch. A Tom Hanks look-alike, he was tall and lanky, with curly brown hair and a sweet, slightly loopy smile. Kenny was smart, funny, athletic, a gifted actor and a talented saxophone player who helped me get a full-tuition music scholarship at the community college he attended a year ahead of me. His mom had been my first piano teacher, and we had been friends ever since I was in the eighth grade. We bonded in high school, both of us being theater geeks, band nerds - not terribly popular but cool with being 'on the fringe'. Music and drama helped us both to find our own place in the spinning vortex that is high school.

Kenny was a college sophomore and I was a freshman when he proposed. We were both music majors, and both had jobs as well - I was playing keyboards in local bands at night, and he was the night manager of a convenience store. Unlike most of my other male friends, Kenny was already planning for a home and family. Hard-working and thrifty, he was putting away money for a down payment on a house. I adored him. We had so much in common - including the fact that we both liked guys.

Yep, Kenny was gay. It was not a 'lifestyle choice'; it was not a 'sexual preference', like 'preferring' tea to coffee. Believe me, Kenny did not just wake up one fine morning and say, "I think I'll alienate my family, exclude myself from the social mainstream, jeopardize my ability to choose where I live and what I do, and lay myself open to rejection, discrimination, violence, hate, and fear." Folks, I'm afraid he was born that way. Take it from someone who grew up with him.

As close as we were in high school, we never talked about it. He had a 'girlfriend', a sax player at another high school, and we both pretended that he was in love with her long enough for him to have a prom date. It wasn't until after I graduated in the late '70s and disco was king that Kenny opened up to me about being gay. He introduced me to the gay subculture in our town, and I went with him to the gay bars and the all-night discos. He would have crushes on guy after guy, always so sure that this one was 'the one', but somehow it never seemed to work out. Although finally free to 'be himself' with other people who felt the way he did, the long-term relationship and stability that he wanted so much was at odds with the hedonistic excesses of the era, and there was no social framework in place to support him.

This was where I came in. As we saw it, our getting married could solve a lot of difficulties (Your Honor, I plead the ignorance of eighteen). Kenny's mom knew me and liked me; she would be happy that I would give Kenny social validity; Kenny could have the home and family he wanted - well, at least the home and the appearance of a family. I could have my cake and eat it, too - a partner who would be there for me financially and emotionally without asking for sexual fidelity, who would give me a home and not care what time I came back to it!

Well, as it turned out, we didn't get married after all; there was that pesky detail of 'being in love' that we knew, as young and nutty as we were, was the real reason for getting married. As much as we loved each other as friends, there would never be a marriage in our hearts. We went our separate ways; I went on the road and he stayed in our home town, still working, still saving, still waiting and hoping for the dream to come true. We still kept in touch, and when I came home to visit my family, we'd get together and catch up on each others' lives. Kenny eventually got the home, but the life partner to share it with never came along.

After a few years, I moved to California and my visits were spaced farther and farther apart. Sometimes I saw him, sometimes I didn't, but there was always 'next time'. I got married (for real) and after the birth of my first child, I flew back home with my husband and new son, eager to introduce them to my family and friends. I couldn't catch up with Kenny; I left messages on his machine, but in the whirlwind of activity surrounding the new baby, I put Kenny on my 'next time' list.

Two weeks after I went back to California, my sister called me to tell me that Kenny had died of AIDS.

When I hear people talking about the "Defense of Marriage", it just makes me want to spit. I believe that if Kenny had been allowed to marry, if there had been a social structure in place at that time that encouraged and rewarded commitment in gay people as well as straight, that Kenny would most likely be alive today.

Just who are they 'defending' marriage from? Is there some straight woman that won't be able to find a mate because the gay boys 'got' all the men? The arguments that the staunch 'Knights of Matrimony' throw out don't hold water to me.

Jan LaRue, a member of the Concerned Women of America ('concerned' with getting all up in other peoples' private lives!) - a lawyer, for gosh sakes - talks about why gay marriage is so very wrong...
Granting a marriage license to homosexuals because they engage in sex is as illogical as granting a medical license to a barber because he wears a white coat or a law license to a salesman because he carries a briefcase. Real doctors, lawyers and the public would suffer as a result of licensing the unqualified and granting them rights, benefits and responsibilities as if they were qualified.

Qualified? Qualified?!?

Yes, I guess the lovely and talented Lyle Menendez is 'qualified' to get married. No doubt the devilishly handsome Scott Peterson, with his boyish charm, will be married before you know it, taking his pick of jailhouse proposals from the coterie of killer-hags that are inundating him with marriage offers. After all, he is single!

point: A child should have a mother and a father.

counterpoint: First off, I think it pretty much goes without saying that in today's society, reproduction is not the only reason to be married. I don't remember the 'Fertility Test' when my husband and I were applying for our marriage license. There are straight couples who (gasp!) choose not to have children! And how about the couples who just can't and decide to live with it? Should their licenses be revoked? What about parents who have lost a partner to divorce or death? Should their children be taken away from them?

Then, of course, what about the straight couples who have absolutely no business having children, and have them any old way? Abusive parents, neglectful parents, parents who, in their heart of hearts, don't want children but have them because of outside pressure? Am I to believe that a loving, committed gay couple would be worse for the emotional health of a kid than parents like these? Apparently so. That's right along with the "Murphy Brown" school of condemnation - those awful, selfish women who want a child so badly that they choose to have one without being married. Selfish? Most single (by choice or not) moms (and dads) I know have very little 'self' at all - they're too busy trying to raise their kids right in a two-income society. They're always at the bottom of the list. But I digress. Maybe we could force them to marry a gay man or woman. One of the opposite gender, naturally. Serve them all right.

No doubt about it, mothers and fathers are great. I am not suggesting that the mom-and-pop deal is just another family model choice. It's not. It is the dominant one, but just as no one in their right mind today would force a woman to stay with an abusive man 'for the sake of the children', the idea that any two heterosexuals (no matter how sick and dysfunctional) are better parent material than any two homosexuals (no matter how emotionally healthy and loving) is not an idea that I am prepared to accept. I am sure that there are bad gay parents out there. But I know there are bad straight parents, lots and lots of them, and no one is suggesting we abolish marriage for straight people because of that. I might even posit that, as a group, gay parents might have a higher percentage of good parenting because they often have to go to extraordinary lengths to have children, and in the face of strong opposition. It doesn't just 'happen', and I suspect the process would tend to weed out the less-motivated.

Gender role modeling? Maybe. But the overwhelming majority of gay people have (drum roll, please)… straight parents! What happened there with the 'gender modeling'? Good parents of any kind make sure their kids have positive models around them.

And then there's always the trump card - IMMORALITY! Who sez? God sez! Whose God? My God! Oh, my God. I'm not even going to bother to discuss the Bible quotes in Leviticus that are trotted out on a regular basis - smarter people than I have refuted the 'cherry-picking' of Levitical laws employed by those who feel that God Hates Fags. To these people, I say, "Fine. You're absolutely right. No one should force you to marry a gay person." Like any self-respecting queer would want to. Our country was founded by people who left their homeland and traveled thousands and thousands of miles to be free to worship as they pleased. And, yes, they were Christians. But the whole idea (and a radical one it was) was to build a country where everyone was free to worship as they pleased - not just Christian Puritans. Freedom of religion. Freedom NOT to worship if so inclined. Again, I'll leave the debating of the Constitution to my betters, but unless I'm way off the mark here, the United States of America is not a theocracy*. Isn't that exactly what we're trying to avoid setting up in that other place…what's it called again?…oh, yes - Iraq!

Well, folks, I'd better get out while the getting's good - I can see I'm heading into deep water here. But I'm still not convinced that there is any sort of justice in the fact that a mass murderer can marry and have children, if he or she chooses a partner of the opposite sex, but a law-abiding, upstanding member of society - if gay - cannot. To my mind, Your Honor, the 'Defense' doesn't have a leg to stand on.

(*note - I wrote this in 2004 - obviously that was a naïve and foolish statement.)

Thursday, May 18, 2006

Hey, Senate Judiciary Committee…

Your personal belief system is not enough authority to deny someone else their civil rights under our Constitution.

I'm just sayin'.