8 = H8

Some random thoughts on Prop 8, the "marriage = 1 man + 1 woman, only" amendment to the California Constitution.

1) It is both sad and funny that this "Conservative Christian" initiative is being pushed by groups of people that statistically have HIGHER divorce rates than the educated/liberal/left people that oppose it.

2) Prop 8, in my opinion, is a massive violation of the 1st amendment:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances

3) If marriage were only about sex, we'd call them honeymoons instead. Sex is a small part of marriage. It's about love, commitment, trust/fidelity, support, companionship/partnership, stability and growth. It is about society and government having recognition and respect for two people who have publicly declared that they have joined together, both legally and financially, with the goal of being together for life, and, if their beliefs support it, eternally.

4) Jesus warns that the kingdom of heaven does not await for people that engage in self-destructively immoderate behaviors like: pride, envy, drink, sex, greed, rage, idolatry, fraud, dishonesty, violence, cruelty, arrogance, folly, pandering, prostitution, hatred, ambition, discord, and the like.

A human is less likely to lose himself or herself in 'wicked' behavior when he is actively participating in a committed, caring and loving partnership, with a spouse that guides and relies upon him (or her). Because of this, I really do believe that Jesus may have had some essentially "pro-gay marriage" comments... but they were either omitted or edited out of the bible by people who were not ready to accept such unfashionable ideas.

"My Friends"

Time once again for "Fun with Photoshop" (click image to enlarge)

Ethereal Slate

Second Life update: A recent land deal with a virtual neighbor to my north, carefully co-ordinated with my virtual land trust 'silent partner' has concluded successfully, which has slightly more than doubled the territory where my creative impulses can run wild.

An excellent write up of the acquisition event (with snapshots!) is available at the Not Possible In Real Life Blog, courtesy of the incomparable Bettina Tizzy. =)

And further details at Prokofy Neva's "Second Thoughts" blog.

This purchase is certainly a non-trivial commitment... but one I'm happy with.

Religulous

Saw it. Funny... nothing new to me though. I've long been an Apostle of Uncertainty after all.

Bill's message kinda boils down to "This world isn't big enough for both Religion and WMDs". And neither one is likely to go away peacefully. He calls to the 16% of us "nonreligious" types to step up and get involved. (Shades of "We are all Indpendent!" there.)

And just how would a "Global War on Ignorance & Superstition" play out? Badly, of course.

As far as I can tell, Atheists place a HIGHER value on human life, especially their own. If there is no afterlife or re-incarnation, this one life is all each of us get. No do-overs, no 70 virgins, no St. Peter & the Pearly Gates, just compost filled with preservatives and no noble self-sacrifice can make that inevitability seem any more pretty.

No "Army of Reason" can survive long against the legions of people willing to kill and die for old words in old books. To have a fighting chance, they would have to pick up the tools of the enemy: To believe in their purpose so fervently that they're willing to kill and die for it. Sadly, we're past the point where we can safely fight fire with fire.

As a species and a planet, we're doomed.

There will always be people that will abuse belief to get others to fight for them, and we, as a society, glorify the instigators that are on "our side" and demonize the ones on "that side". When instead we should have a zero tolerance towards those that promote any kind of violence at all. We should collectively shun them, ignore them, disassociate ourselves with them. Of course, both sides of a conflict need to do that or it doesn't work. Which is why it never will.

Prop 8

Two of the best video's I've seen against Prop 8:

The Funny One:


The Serious One, which speaks directly to those "party line" types that are most likely to vote *for* Prop 8:

Debait

What a painful debate. The more I watch McCain the less I like him.

Bill vs. Barney

I normally avoid anything to do with the unstable attack dog that Olbermann refers to as 'Bill Orally'.

I made an exception because I wanted to see how Barney Frank weathered the assault.

Frank may as well have been muted. O'Reilly's voice was nearly twice as loud, he yelled and shouted over everything, complete with spittle and hand chopping mannerisms that were very much like Hitler.

... No, no, I'm NOT "comparing" O'Reilly to Hitler... I'm just saying they have similar speaking styles.

Ultimately though... the above clip is a blatent piece of gay bashing thinly veiled under an economic/legislative issue.

And, as much as I'm disgusted with the waste of space that is Bill O'Reilly...

I don't see him as the problem.

The problem is that this country has a large market for his particular brand of infantile illogical egotistical hate-mongering and bullying. He wouldn't be where he is now if that weren't the case.

And that same demographic apparently gravitates towards McCain.

There can be no Liberty, Justice or Freedom in places where tyrants and bullies are glorified.

It's time for the 'average angry emasculated white males' to take their prozac and calm down.

Too long they've been clutched by the feverish fear that they've lost their exhalted position of priviledge to 'those greedy overweening minorities'.

And in their fear, they've elevated 'angry white men' like Bush, Limbaugh, O'Reilly, Hannity, & Co. in the misguided belief that they're all on the same team, that while they may be intolerant bullies, at least they'll look out for their own.

Which is as foolish as blue collar working families supporting the 'Capitalist' party that consistently exploits them, instead of voting for a more 'Labor' oriented party that would be more supportive of their plight.

Anyway. What is it... 87.5% of people that are incapable of anything but 'Group Think'?

We need better "Group Leaders" and it's up to the remaining 12.5% of us to find and help them.

Gaff-tacular!!

(click on image to enlarge it)


I've no confidence in this senile flip-flopping gaffer. None.


Regarding Germany: "[I was at a conference with] President Putin of Germany"


Regarding Spain: (Would you meet with the President Zapatero?) "... all I can tell you is that I have a clear record of working with leaders in the hemisphere that are friends with us, and standing up to those who are not, and that's judged on the basis of the importance of our relationship with Latin America, and the entire region."


Regarding Venezuela: "... ensuring that America is secure, and not dependent on oil from people like Hugo Chavez or other parts of the Middle East."


Regarding Iran: "... it's common knowledge and has been reported in the media that Al Qaeda is [being trained by Iran]. That's well known."

Referred to the "situation on the Iraq-Pakistan border."


Regarding his involvement with the Keating 5: "I was judged eventually, after three years, of using, quote, poor judgment, and I agree with that assessment."


Took credit for passing substantial deregulation legislation in 1999. Which, along with Bush taking office in 2000, ended the Dot-Com era and started the Dot-Bomb era.


Regarding the wall street meltdown: "I promise you, we will never put America in this position again. We will clean up Wall Street." (Sorry, this was your third strike as far as I'm concerned.)


Regarding (not) getting the bail-out bill passed: "I will do whatever is necessary. I just did it. In case you missed it. Heh, heh. I'm sure you didn't. I will do whatever is necessary to get this going again."


And my favorite recent gaff: "I wish interest rates were zero!" (boy, would that be great for economic growth. Not.)


To be honest, however, I wouldn't put it past the democrats to sour the bail-out deal so that McCain couldn't take credit for getting it passed, and can't fault them for not wanting to commit political suicide by passing it without bi-partisan support. I strongly suspect that the Republican's didn't intend to pass the deal regardless of Pelosi's speech.

There's an underlying gambit in play here, and I haven't sussed it out yet.

.