May 2004 Archives
Sunday was a beautiful day in Bushnell Park. Couples walked arm in arm. Children ran ahead, playing in the bright sunlight on the lawn beyond the Capitol. The crowd of people was no different from others I have seen over the years - families gathered for jazz concerts or Mark Twain Days. It was an all-American-looking crowd. There were people wearing T-shirts with slogans, shorts and jeans, sneakers and sandals. There were small children propped on parents' shoulders or pushed in strollers. There were folks in wheelchairs and elderly couples being helped by volunteers. You could see a rainbow of ethnicities, races and ages.
Connecticut's Capitol never seemed so normal and yet so gay as it did last Sunday, when thousands of people gathered to participate in the rally for marriage equality. Sponsored by the Love Makes a Family coalition, this rally celebrated Massachusetts' becoming the first state to grant marriage licenses to same-sex couples. More important, the event served as a forum for homosexuals, heterosexuals, parents, elected officials, religious and civic leaders to decry Connecticut's obsolete and discriminatory laws and to call for a new law allowing marriage licenses for same-sex couples.
I have attended many rallies in my life, but the energy and excitement at this one was truly special. Looking at the openly gay people surrounding me, I was struck by how indistinguishable this group was from any other crowd. These people standing on the lawn holding their children's or partners' hands were the same people who have been demonized by some religious leaders, bullied in school and victimized by hate crimes. These were the same people who, regardless of their contributions to society, have been made to feel like second-class citizens. Because they want the right to marry whom they choose, they are considered so dangerous that President George W. Bush, promoting his personal religious beliefs, wants to amend the Constitution to make sure they will continue to be discriminated against.
Elissa Kohen, associate rabbi for Congregation Beth Israel in West Hartford, is a longtime supporter of the Love Makes a Family coalition. She addressed the rally accompanied by her partner and their son. She told the crowd that her religion, Judaism, "speaks in an unequivocal voice: We are all created in the image of God." She also reminded us that we live in a country that separates religion and law.
Why should gays continue to be persecuted because of those who refuse to accept that marriage is a civil contract between two consenting adults having nothing to do with religion? The unwillingness to separate the secular and the religious is at the center of this debate.
However, the many religious leaders at Sunday's rally spoke in support of civil liberties for all. The Rev. Kathleen McTigue, senior minister at the Unitarian Society of New Haven, affirmed that our civil laws grant religious freedom. She is "betting on a God with an open mind and open heart." The Rev. John Selders of the United Church of Christ spoke "as a black revolutionary spiritual leader: I support everybody's right to love and marry who they choose. My ancestors fought too hard against discrimination based on race and color not to fight for liberty and justice for all." Teresa Younger, executive director of the Connecticut Civil Liberties Union, quoted Coretta Scott King's recent support for gay marriage. King reminded those opposed to gay marriage of her husband Martin Luther King Jr.'s words that "injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere."
One of the most emotional moments was provided by Sandy Sergio, a member of Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays, who described herself and her husband, David, as a nice old couple with four kids. One of them is living in Canada so she can be married to her partner. "They are pretty outrageous," joked Sergio. "They just put a new roof on their house and are planting a garden." Sergio asks of those who would block gay marriage, "How dare they deny parents the right to attend the weddings of all of their children regardless of whom they love?"
She then called the rally to action: "Let us persist with courage, for our children."
Her words and those of the other speakers at the rally gave me hope that someday soon, a Sunday afternoon in Bushnell Park will be a carefree time of fun and relaxation for all families, straight and gay.
HALEDON, N.J. -- A police sergeant has sued the borough and several officials, claiming he was passed over for promotion because he is gay.
Sgt. James Len filed suit Wednesday in state Superior Court against the borough, Mayor Ken Pengitore, Councilman Ayman Mamkej and Police Chief Harold Engold Jr. All three defendants said they had not seen the suit and declined to comment when reached by the Herald News of West Paterson. [...]
According to the suit, Len, 42, told his wife and children in April 2002 that he is gay. He moved out two months later.
As word circulated through the police department, others began treating Len differently, according to his lawyer, Charles Sciarra.
"He was in line for promotions and was on the short list for the chief of police," Sciarra told the newspaper. "Len went from favorite son to pariah instantaneously. They did not just ostracize Jim; they targeted his job solely because it was revealed he is gay."
The suit claims several officials assured Len he would be promoted to lieutenant, but withdrew their support after learning he was gay. (source)
We are legally married. Period. If the state of Oklahoma does not want to recognize our union, the state of Massachusetts does. What we are is equal there. What we are here is unequal. I'm not going to sit at the back of the bus. - Darin Moore, about his being married in Massachusetts (story)
That pretty just says it all. This couple went to Massachusetts to get married from Oklahoma. Oklahoma does not allow gays to be married, so the couple will be moving to Massachusetts in the near future.
It's a win for the couple. They should move. And I think more and more couples may be considering this. Last night, Kent called me. He is in North Carolina at a conference. He described the place. It sounded like a nice place to live - for some people. North Carolina, home to Jesse Helms, is ultra conservative. I somehow forgot that when I jokingly suggested to Kent, that they may offer him a job there. He was quick to reply, "I don't want to live in a state that doesn't value me as a citizen." That's the way I feel also. Connecticut so far doesn't allow gay marriage, but they are talking about it. I wouldn't be surprised if something happens here in the next couple of years. But places like North Carolina, Oklahoma, and Kansas aren't going to change for a very long time, if ever.
So you have a choice. Stay and deal with it, or move to a place where you can have a better life together. The choice would be a simple one for me. I would tell Oklahoma to "fuck off", and move to Massachusetts, along with my tax dollars.
If the state wants to be bigoted and treat gay couples like crap, fine. But they shouldn't also gain from the tax dollars those couples pay to the state.
Dr. Laura must be having a field day with this one. Over in the UK, they are encouraging schoolchildren to experiment with oral sex as a way of curbing teenage pregnancy.
Pupils under 16 who were taught to consider other forms of 'intimacy' such as oral sex were significantly less likely to engage in full intercourse, it was revealed.
Britain's teenage pregnancy rate is the highest in Europe. In 2002 there were 39,286 teen pregnancies recorded. The government has spent more than £60 million to tackle the problem but so far failed to halt the rise. (source)
Call me old fashioned, but when I was 16, I wasn't having sex with anyone. Not that it didn't enter my mind, it's just that we were considered "children" and not adults. I honestly would be very upset (and disappointed) if I found out my 15 year old son or daughter was having sex. I'd like to think that wouldn't happen because I would foster a relationship with my kid that encouraged open dialogue and sex education would certainly be included.
A lot of the problem today is that parents aren't comfortable talking to their kids about sex. I don't know why. It's pretty basic stuff and if it's done right, would be a very healthy discussion on the topic. It seems that many think it's the school's responsibility to teach this. I've seen some of the programs that various schools use to inform students of sex education. They usually use a banana to show the proper way to put on a condom. They kids laugh in embarrassment, and they come away with the message that it's now ok for them to go out and have sex like rabbits because they know how to use a condom. What doesn't get taught is the very serious subject of responsibility.
Ex-gay. Does that term bother you? Are you skeptical that some people can change from gay to straight? A tremendous diversity of opinion exists about the topic and we often hear about such matters in the news. However, you may never have read about people who have reoriented their homosexuality in your local paper. Why? Because many in the print media are quite skeptical about the possibility of such change. I have had many respectful discussions with reporters and editors on this issue. However, I recently ran into a newspaper editor who doesn't even want to hear about ex-gay issues because she doesn't think ex-gays are real. (source)
My opinion, for what it's worth.... Ex-gays do not exist. They never were really gay to begin with. Some people seem confused by what the feel their sexual orientation is. I don't mean to sound callous here, but it was never an issue with me. I always knew I was gay, and never considered the thought of being something that I'm not. You see, I wanted to strive for happiness in life, and I knew that living your entire life as a lie was not going to bring happiness.
It saddens me that some seem to be lost in their orientation. They may have experimented with being gay and the may have thought that they were gay because they were ambiguous about their sexual orientation in the first place. Later, they decided to enter an ex-gay program perhaps and found that they were happier with heterosexuality. Good for them. They should do what makes them happy, but if they found heterosexuality, and are happy with that, then they never were truly homosexual to begin with.
It also saddens me that there are so many out there who willingly prey on these people's desires to change. They offer them false hopes, all the while trying to promote their own self-serving agenda, which is usually based in.... religion.
Did anyone bother watching President Bush speak last night? I would have, but there was a movie on about some possessed teenager who was being asked by a six foot tall rabbit to kill people (no, I'm not kidding!). That was more interesting.
On my way home from work, people were calling in to the radio station to ask if it was safe for "fair-minded" (i.e. Democrats) to watch the speech.
The advice was, "We think so, but we are asking people to take precautions. You should take a piece of card board and cut a hole in it. Then, sitting at least 15 feet away from your TV set, you can watch indirectly to the speech through the hold. DO NOT LOOK DIRECTLY AT YOUR TV SET!"
Well, my trash pick up is Monday morning. This means that I also do my recycling Monday morning, which means that no where in my house do I have any card board. I opted not to take a chance on permanent damage by watching the President's speech.
Kent's on his way to North Carolina, and I miss him already. He comes home on Saturday. It's going to be a long week.
Attacks on oil producing facilities in the oil-rich Persian Gulf region ahead of the peak summer driving season as well as growing demand because of the global economic recovery have made supplies tight. Traders have also factored a so-called "terror premium" into prices.
The latest rally Monday came even though the world's top oil exporter Saudi Arabia said it would increase production to 9 million barrels a day, up from its current output of 8.3 million barrels a day. (source)
How does this involve Bill, you might ask? Well, I pulled my Honda Accord up to the gas station last night. I had 1/4 tank of gas left. When it was full, I had added 13 gallons of gas, and the bill was $27.69 (at $2.13/gallon). It sucks. The worst part was that was the least expensive (I can't no longer say the "cheapest") gas they had. The mid-level gas was $2.20/gallon, while "premium" was $2.33/gallon. And, I'm told that it's going to go higher shortly.
Kent has been hounding me for the last year that when my lease runs out, I should get a hybrid. I really didn't want to. I like my 200 horse power V-6 engine, and the new 2004 models come with a standard 260 horse power V-6 engine! But, I'm now considering something that is less expensive, like a hybrid.
I have said from time to time that I'm going to get a motorcyle (yeah, I would have to learn how to drive one - gay guys don't naturally know that stuff it would seem), but Kent absolutely prohibits that idea. He says it's too dangerous. And, with the winters the way they are around here, it would suck in the winter. I have to be toasty warm even when it's 20 degrees outside, which probably says a lot about why I hate skiing.
I suppose it would be more responsible to get a hybrid, for the air that future generations breath, and so we can hopefully become less dependent on foreign oil.
I recently read a letter published in the Modesto Bee (California), about a teacher who was reflecting on his path to tolerance. The seed for that tolerance was from a gay student he had taught 15 years ago.
The student had been asked to write and essay to the topic "My Biggest Problem". Don Shaw, the teacher and author of the letter writes:
He had experienced homophobia in a variety of ways. He told of taunts and jibes and ostracisms. He mentioned no physical abuse, but something worse -- having to endure the widespread intolerance of people indoctrinated into communal forms of hatred, that hatred which often finds its severest expression in the frightening inhumanity of an adolescent subculture.
The slice of reality depicted in that essay became, for me, a learning experience. Learning usually involves some rethinking and that was the case here. I had never considered myself homophobic, but at the same time, gay rights had never ranked high on my personal agenda for social reform. "Don't ask, don't tell" actually sounded pretty good to me.
So I had to re-examine some of the teachings I had grown up with. The Christian denomination I belonged to (Presbyterian) was relatively tolerant, but since many Christians still insisted that same-sex relationships were unequivocally sinful, I decided to look more carefully at what the Bible says.
Things are changing everyday. When I was in high school, if a teacher had asked us to write an essay on "My Biggest Problem", there was no way I would have written about the daily harassment and taunting I was having to endure. There was no way I would be able to convey that I was unsure if I would be alive by the end of the school year. To do so could possibly have made me a bigger target of harassment. I graduated from high school in 1974.
Yet, 15 years ago, this student felt that he was able to write what he was going through. Today, many schools are developing Gay-Straight Alliance-type clubs and organizations they can join to at least feel that there are those around who at least care about the issue.
In some ways, things haven't changed so much. The author states, "The Christian denomination I belonged to (Presbyterian) was relatively tolerant". In Coventry, Connecticut, Kent and I contacted our local Presbyterian Church not long after moving to Coventry (that was seven years ago), and had an intention of going there, since Kent had been raised Presbyterian. I thought it would be a good way to meet new people in our neighborhood. It didn't matter to us if they had any gay people attending since that wasn't why we were attending church.
But, I also thought that it was important to be honest with the pastor of the church and tell him that we are a gay couple who would like to attend the Coventry Presbyterian Church. It was not my intention of putting the fact that we are a gay couple in his face. But rather, to make him aware of our situation so we could avoid any awkward situations in the future. I wanted him to know up front that we were a gay couple. We don't hide that fact anymore because we are not ashamed of our marriage.
The pastor flat out told me that we were not welcome in his church unless we were willing to change. Maybe if he would have used that line on me when I was 16 years old, I would have taken him up on it. But now, a statement like that doesn't go far with me. I told him that his attitude was very un-Christian and that he would do well to look inside himself and what he truly believes about the teachings of Christ. It also made me sad. We were new in town. I started to doubt if we had made the best decision by buying a home in Coventry. Would this be typical of the greeting we received?
I found those stern passages in Leviticus that include homosexuality among practices condemned by the tribal code of the Israelites. But our culture has long since declared inapplicable many other requirements of that code such as dietary restrictions and draconian demands for the stoning to death of disobedient sons and brides who cannot prove their virginity. It would seem that common sense would require a similar reconsideration of other demands from that area of Scripture.
Hypocrisy is my biggest problem with people who preach to me about how "sinful" my life is. They usually go to Leviticus and preach the same passage time and time again. At the same time, they conveniently ignore all the other things that would condemn them to Hell, according to Leviticus. In other words, the Bible to them is simply a menu of sins that they select from when it serves their purpose. Fred Phelps and his group preaches only on homosexuality. His website tells it all just by the name, gothatesfags.com (you can go there if you want, but I will not link to it). It's as if the rest of the Bible doesn't exist to him, because it doesn't further his cause when the Bible speaks of the sin of judging others.
I became convinced that there is no basis for condemning same-sex relationships on biblical grounds. It became clear to me that the only valid moral principle on the subject to be derived from Scripture is an affirmation based on Jesus's "new command" in John 13, that we "love one another."
Amen.
The full letter is given below.
A friend sent me this link and thought it might be appropriate here.
Baptists Are Saving Homosexuals (BASH) asks what conservative Christians throughout America are demanding to know:
Some United Way chapters, The Boy Scouts of America, and now the Salvation Army.... it's just getting harder and harder for groups who practice bigotry to find like-minded folks around that will support it.
The evangelical nonprofit organization is facing a major showdown with the city over a bill that would force it to offer health benefits to gay and unwed spouses of New York staffers.
If the organization leaves town, it would give up $70 million a year in city funding.
The loss of public financing - half the Army's yearly budget in the city - would cripple its programs, which serve 5 million New Yorkers, the group says.
Salvation Army insiders said they will refuse to comply with the proposed law because it goes against one of the organization's core beliefs - that marriage is for straight couples only. (source)
It's too bad that they are so hell-bent on carrying on this type of behavior. "The Equal Benefits Bill, an extension of a 1998 city law that gave domestic-partner benefits to city workers, does offer an olive branch to religious groups: Benefits don't have to be to a spouse, but can go to any family member."
But that's not good enough for them. I say, let them leave and good riddens. It really makes you wonder about how much they really care about the people they help.
It's 4:00 in the morning, and it's been one of those nights where I've tossed and turned all night long, even though I was dead tired when I went to bed. I hate it when this happens. And I knew better. Why on earth did I have all that rich food for dinner when we had a late dinner? So now, here it is, 4:00am and I feel like I've been drinking all night, but without the alcohol.
So now I'm sitting here blogging (since my cat is in my TV chair and won't give it up), sipping on green tea with honey (not my favorite), and thinking "good thoughts" in an effort to tell my body, "It's not THAT bad, come on man. I know we've covered a lot of mileage together, but you are still STUDLY!". So far, my body is responding by, "Oh PULLLLEAZE! Who is blowing smoke up your ass?!!?". I'll just keep thinking those 'good thoughts'.
Speaking of good thoughts, I was surfing the web (I just can't help myself - kind of an addiction really....), and noticed this article on why the conservatives really ought to get off they moral high horse and embrace gay marriage.
Jonathan Rauch, wrote the book: Gay Marriage: Why it is Good for Gays, Good for Straights, and Good for America. He should have added, "and Good for Conservatives." This week in Massachusetts has been a positive one for conservative values, even if those on the right don't want to admit it. [...]
Rauch's primary point is that homosexual relationships are not going to go away; and if they are an established fact of life, then the question becomes: how to treat those relationships to best secure other values in society? Conservatives particularly claim to care about such things as fortifying the institution of marriage for heterosexuals, securing the care and protection of children and encouraging strong families that help themselves rather than looking for government handouts.
Rauch argues that society would be doing far more damage to these conservative values either by trying to legally repress homosexual relationships or by offering gays some form of domestic partnership or civil union - what he calls "marriage-lite" - than by simply granting homosexuals the right to enter into full-fledged marriages.
And my personal favorite:
The threat to marriage, according to Rauch, is not that homosexuals want to get married, but that straight couples don't want to. The marriage ban exacerbates this by turning "gays into walking billboards for the irrelevance of marriage."
And, as long as the conservatives are at it, they should really step back a bit and take a hard look at the concept of the separation of church and state. It seems to me that if a legislator or governor (are you listening to this Governor Romney) is unable to separate his religious beliefs from his job in terms of drafting and approving legislation, he/she should do us all a favor and resign.
The rights of citizens on a civic level should not be denied because "the Bible tells me so". If that were the case, 99% of the women in this country would be declared "harlots" for wearing makeup. So let's all put down the Bible long enough to pass laws that aren't going to create and foster a cultural civil war, ok?
If you really want laws passed based on what the Bible says, please, all I ask is that this be done fairly and uniformly. Most would agree that "sin is sin", so why be so unfair and just pick on the homosexuals? If you are really going to be fair about this, and we are going to use the Bible as a basis for our laws, as we seem to be willing to do when it comes to homosexuals in general, and gay marriage in particular, then we should be fair and take into account these passages from the Bible:
"Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind ... nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God." 1 Corinthians 6:9-10
That kind of sucks for a LOT of us, doesn't it? Including I would think some of the legislators.
"Stone disobedient children" (Deuteronomy 21:18-21)
Think of how much would be saved in child-care-related costs to society, not to mention the reform schools that our tax dollars pay for.
1 Timothy 2:15 says only women who have children will be spared hell
Does this mean that lesbian couples who have children with gay men are spared?
Men are worth more than women - Leviticus 27:1-7 actually provides dollar comparisons!
Well of course they are! All you have to do to understand this is to look at how much women get paid compared to men, doing the same job. I don't agree that that is right, but it's in the Bible, so don't argue with it.
"Whosoever he be of thy seed in their generations that hath any blemish, let him not approach to offer the bread of his God. For whatsoever man he be that hath a blemish, he shall not approach: a blind man, or a lame, or he that hath a flat nose, or any thing superfluous, Or a man that is brokenfooted [sic] , brokenhanded [sic], Or crookbackt [sic], or a dwarf, or that hath a blemish in his eye, or be scurvy, or scabbed, or hath his stones broken; No man that hath a blemish of the seed of Aaron the priest shall come nigh to offer the offerings of the Lord made by fire: he hath a blemish; he shall not come nigh to offer the bread of his God." Leviticus 21:17-21
I figure this one has cut out 98% of all of us. Kinda sucks.
Men aren't allowed to trim their beards or shave their heads (Leviticus 21:5)
Hear that skin heads? Let me think, shaving.... well, ALL the men in my office except for two that come to mind will go to hell for this one.
Unisex clothing like pants for women and blouses for men is an abomination unto the Lord... "The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the Lord thy God" (Deuteronomy 22:5)
Lesbians, for God's sake, STOP WEARING MEN'S CLOTHING!!! Gay men, stop wearing less-than-masculine clothing. And you punk rockers out there, you are basically screwed by this passage. Sorry. As far as drag queens are concerned, I'm gonna pass on commenting on this, because I don't want to be beaten up.
God prohibits clothing made of more than one type of fabric... "Ye shall keep my statutes. Thou shalt not let thy cattle gender with a diverse kind: thou shalt not sow thy field with mingled seed: neither shall a garment mingled of linen and woollen come upon thee" (Leviticus 19:19).
This pretty much kills the fashion industry altogether. As for the farmers in my town, pay especially close attention to the cattle issue. Do not allow diversity in your cows! The last thing we need is to give the cows ideas.
Jesus said that the sole reason God created women in the first place was to provide company and service to men (1 Corinthians 11:9)
Hey straight men, here's one you will like!!! :-)
Matthew 13:10-14 says that Jesus doesn't want everyone to understand what he's saying, so he speaks in parables to his disciples and most of the rest will go to hell. According to Revelation, only 144,000 souls can enter heaven (it probably sounded like a bigger number at the time than it does now...)
Hummm, makes me wonder if Pat Robertson is the second Jesus because I don't understand a damn thing he is saying.
"When thou goest forth to war against thine enemies, and the Lord thy God hath delivered them into thine hands, and thou hast taken them captive, and seeth among the captives a beautiful woman, and hast a desire unto her, that thou wouldest have her to thy wife; then thou shalt bring her home to thine house; and she shall shave her head, and pare her nails; and she shall put the raiment of her captivity from off her, and remain in thine house . . . And it shall be, if thou have no delight in her, then thou shalt let her go whither she will; but thou shalt not sell her at all for money, thou shalt not make merchandise of her, because thou hast humbled her" (Deuteronomy 21:10-14)
The "shave her head, and pare her nails" part made me think of Demi Moore in GI Jane (scary how my mind works!). I read this three times, and I still came away with, "...and the point is???". I guess you had to be there.
Premarital sex is punished by burning the woman alive according to Leviticus 21:9
Thank God only homosexuals perform premarital sex (since we can't gat married in 99.99999% of the world). I'm sure this is not a heterosexual problem.
Leviticus 25:44 tells Jews to enslave surrounding tribes
This has happened in this country. If the Jewish establishments were to close their bagel shops, I don't know what I'd do. I am a slave to bagels! Therefore, indirectly, I suppose I am a slave to the Jews? I also like cream cheese on my bagels. I wonder if that's breaking some law?
"And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished. Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money" (Exodus 21:20-21).
Somehow, you have to justify beating someone to death. If it's for the money, you are fine. Maybe what we did at Abu Gharib Prison is justified then, as long as we beat the prisoners for money? Maybe our soldier has wagers going?
Exodus 21:7-10 says men can sell their daughters into slavery
I know some daughters who feel that way now. I wonder how the Bush daughters feel about now?
Jews, Moslems, Hindus, Buddhists and everyone else who is not Christian will all go to hell "He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God" (John 3:18)
Well, whatever happens in Iraq, it's comforting to know that they are all going to Hell for not being Christians.
Romans 14:2 says vegetarians are heathens!
You ever cook a nice dinner for guests and make a beef roast or steaks, and then find out that one or two people coming are vegetarians? You don't know weather to go to the trouble of cooking something special just for them, or wait until they arrive, and stoning them to death right in your front yard for being heathens.
"All non-marital sex ensures an eternity in flames" Jude 1:7
This seems to be a gay issue (oh, and all those high school and college students, and adulterers). Other than that, no need to worry about this one.
Time for my shower and to get my butt in gear for the day. And for the record, vegetarians are always welcome in my home, as long as you don't mix more than one type of fabric in the clothes you will be wearing!
If anyone is interested, I've added a new photo album of early spring pictures around our home. It can be found by selecting Early Spring Photos Around Our Home under Photo Albums on the right, or by clicking here.
Most of you aren't old enough to remember the paranoia that the United States had in the 1950's. Then, the world was black and white. It was just the United States and Russia. We were the only two super powers in the world, and the only ones with nuclear weapons. All other countries were viewed as being on one side or another, but no other countries were even on our radar screen in terms of being a threat.
It was so much in the mind's of the American People then, that when my mother gave birth to me, they gave her ether, which basically knocks you unconscious. Back then, it was really the only way of controlling pain. When she was going under just before I was born, she actually thought that the Russian's were invading. Aside from the fear of that happening, she probably never gave a second thought to how hot Russian soldiers are, but that's another story.
As I read this article, it occurred to me that we are getting to the point of being as paranoid now over suicide bombers as we were in the 1950's over a Russian invasion. Funny how history repeats itself.
The FBI has issued a fresh alert to law enforcement agencies to watch for possible suicide bomb attacks inside the United States.
An intelligence bulletin circulated yesterday to 18,000 law enforcement bodies urges them to look for obvious signs of trouble,Time.com reported last night on its Web site. Among them: people wearing heavy, bulky jackets on warm days, smelling of chemicals, or trailing wires from their jackets. A more subtle indicator: tightly clenched fists, which could conceal a detonator rigged to go off when a button is released.
"If you shoot him, you're still not safe because his hands relax and the bomb explodes,'' a counterterrorism official told Time.com.
The bulletin said suicide bombers may disguise themselves in stolen military, police or firefighters' garb, or even as pregnant women, the Web site reported. (source)
BOSTON - Gov. Mitt Romney of Massachusetts began cracking down Thursday on same-sex marriages by out-of-state couples, taking steps to invalidate their marriage licenses and asking the attorney general to consider taking action against the cities that issued them.
Earlier this week, as gay marriage became legal in the state, Romney's administration demanded copies of marriage license applications from four cities and towns that were defying the governor by issuing licenses to out-of-state couples.
On Thursday, the governor said he had received the applications from two communities, Provincetown and Springfield, and found 10 out-of-state marriage applications that the state would not record, effectively nullifying those marriages. Out-of-state applications from the other two cities, Somerville and Worcester, would be treated the same way, he said.
"We certainly won't record on our public health records marriages that are on the face of them not consistent with the law," Romney said at a news conference, his first public appearance since same-sex marriages began on Monday. (source)
Nothing new here, but it continues to amaze me how Massachusetts has ended up with a governor who is such a homophobic bigot. I can understand fully that it goes against his religious beliefs (he is Mormon), but let it go already!
People have dealt with it. Gay couples have been married. The sky didn't fall. Hell did raise up and engulf the Earth. The more he picks away at this, the more he looks like an intolerant moron. If I were on his staff, I would tell him that it's time to accept this and move on. Doesn't Massachusetts have more pressing issues to deal with?
I can't believe how slow they were today at my sandwich shop. It took forever. I go to lunch around 11:30 just to avoid the lines, but today it was nuts. The weather is great though. Still, it's kind of a blue day for me. I'm working and finishing up a project, but I'm just not really "there", if you know what I mean.
My feelings on marriage are all over the place, so it's probably best I not write about that. I'm not sure I could form a coherent thought on it today. I'm very very happy for all of those in Mass. who can get married. You are my inspiration and you will make change! Well, ok, I did form a coherent thought after all. :)
There are two new photos out of prisoner abuse at Abu Gharib Prison in Iraq. I added them to my photo gallery. Some of you have told me that I'm "anti-American" for posting such "propaganda". Posting those photos made me ill. Any civilized person would have stopped this abuse. It's a matter of decency. I post the photos because I believe that we, as a nation, must admit to this atrocity and make amends to these deeds. And I'm not talking about the people who did this. They will probably be made scapegoats and will pay dearly. What I would like to see happen is for the high-level people who knew of this and approved of this pay as well. I don't believe for one minute that these soldiers did this entirely on their own.
So, for those who still feel I'm "anti-American", would you please explain to me what purpose it would serve to make someone strip out of their clothes, and force them to crawl on their hands and knees through broken glass, while our soldiers gathered around them, laughed at them in their pain, and took photos to further humiliate them? I just don't get it. The broken glass incident was one of the photos that was not released to the public.
So, I post the photos out of a sense of fairness. If you do choose to view the photos, just be warned that they are graphic in nature. Enough of that... too depressing.
I have a pet peeve about some news sites on the internet. More and more, they require a "subscription". They aren't asking for money. They just want to know who is coming to their website. The information they ask for is a bit strange also. They ask for your zip code and age. If you don't put the information in, they won't let you in. I guess they are doing some kind of demographic study based on age group.
At any rate, it's a pain in the ass because I would direct people to their site when they have an interesting story, but I hate to link to them because most people don't like supplying any information on line, and will simply stop reading. The Washington Times and The New York Times are infamous for this.
California supreme court to weigh gay marriage vs. mayoral powers
In the debate over gay marriage, all eyes are shifting from Massachusetts to California. That state's supreme court will hear oral arguments on Tuesday, May 25, regarding whether San Francisco mayor Gavin Newsom (pictured left) misused his power when he allowed the issuance of 4,000 marriage licenses to gay and lesbian couples earlier this year.
The highly charged hearing will have everything and yet nothing to do with same-sex marriage, since the justices already declined to address the civil rights issues involved. Those battles will have to percolate up through the state courts.
Of course, what is at stake here are the thousands of marriage licenses that were issued to gay couples. Will they end up being invalidated?
Gay Republicans in North Carolina said state party officials told them their group isn't welcome at a convention this weekend because "homosexuality is not normal" and their agenda is "counterproductive to the Republican agenda." (source)
Well, what did they expect? We are talking about the same part as our current President. The same President who has such a low opinion of gay families that he wants to pass an amendment to the US Constitution to stop them.
I honestly don't understand why we give the Republican Party time of day. I'm not that much of an activist anymore. I am actually quite domestic. I care about my town I live in, state matters, and the country. But, very little that concerns my life is centered around being gay - gay marriage aside. Gay marriage is different because it does effect every aspect of our lives.
When I heard my President get up and call me a second-class citizen, unworthy of full civil rights, that did it for me. He lost my respect. What I don't understand is how some in our community have so little respect for themselves or the gay community to cater after these people. Astonishing.
Kent sent me this article on the "slipper slope" argument being used against gay marriage. I love it. It's extremely well written and thoughtful.
The maddening "slippery slope" argument against gay marriage. By Dahlia Lithwick
Anyone else bored to tears with the "slippery slope" arguments against gay marriage? Since few opponents of homosexual unions are brave enough to admit that gay weddings just freak them out, they hide behind the claim that it's an inexorable slide from legalizing gay marriage to having sex with penguins outside JC Penney's. The problem is it's virtually impossible to debate against a slippery slope. Before you know it you fall down, break your crown, and Rick Santorum comes tumbling after.
Still, as gay marriages started happening in Massachusetts this week, we heard it yet again as James Dobson of Focus on the Family insisted on Hannity & Colmes that "you could have polygamy. You could have incest. You could have marriage between a father and a daughter. You could have two widows, or two sisters or two brothers." (Two widows?) Dobson further warned, "Once you cross that Rubicon, then there's no place to stop. Because if a judge can say two men and two women can marry, there is no reason on Earth why some judge some place is not going to say, this is not fair. Three women or three men, or five and two or five and five."
Continue reading full article on Slate.
National Mental Health Association Rejects Ex-gays
Are there gays are are really EX-gays, or were they just confused to begin with? As for me, I've always known what I liked and never swayed from it, so I honestly don't understand someone feeling so low in self-esteem that they would do that to themselves? I honestly wouldn't have a clue on how to turn off the gay part of me, because it doesn't define me and is a small part of what I am as a person.
All that aside though, people have a right to pursue their happiness. If that means being ex-anything that makes you unhappy, I suppose you should try to change it. The thing the bugs me is that they try to change others by their tactics. They get a few "doctors" together who say, "oh yeah, gays can change, saw it happen once...", and before you know it, they are being cited in legal briefs that are arguing against a gay rights ordinance in some town or city. After all, if you can change and be straight, why should we be forced to pass a law that stops landlords from evicting gay people or refusing to rent to them?
Former Boy Scout leaders unveiled a plan Wednesday that asks current members to wear a patch on their uniforms identifying themselves as someone a Scout can talk to about their sexual orientation without fear of being thrown out of the group, reports the Chicago Sun-Times. [...]
Under the plan, Scouts who display the badge will be seen as an ally to kids who may be questioning their sexuality. The Scouts who have the badge promise not to reveal the information to leaders who may move to expel the Scout. (source)
Most of you know that the Boy Scouts of America will terminate the membership of any scout leader or boy scout who is found to be gay. I think this is a great idea, but isn't it making a target out of kids who would like to be understanding to gay kids?
Let's say I'm a straight kid and also a boy scout. I have no problem with gay scouts and I want to show my support by wearing this badge. If I were the Boy Scouts of America, I would suspect anyone who wore the badge.
We will look back 20, 30, 50 years from now and recall this as the day marriage ceased to have any real meaning in our country. The documents being issued all across Massachusetts may say 'marriage license' at the top -- but they are really death certificates for the institution of marriage as it has served society for thousands of years. - Dr. James Dobson (source)
Rebuttal to this
Gay Marriage Drove Us to Divorce!
Who says anti-same-sex marriage arguments are based in bigotry? It's all about LOGIC
It's amazing the lengths that some people will go to in their political efforts. We have all heard of the efforts of the Massachusetts legislature to try to stop gay marriages from happening in the first place. These efforts included two bitter sessions trying make it unconstitutional to even recognize gay relationships. It was later toned down a bit when the legislature decided that it had a better chance at passing an amendment to the state constitution if they allowed for "civil unions".
They have to vote on that same proposed amendment next year, with no changes, before it will go before the voters. If the voters approve the amendment, it will become part of the state constitution, and gay marriage will be illegal in Massachusetts.
But it will face an uphill battle. By next year, thousands of gay people will be legally married in the state and many of the politicians who voted for or against the bill may no longer be in office after November. In addition, many people will start seeing gay couples who are now married just as they are and wonder what the big deal was in the first place. That is my prediction. And if that happens, attempts by the legislature to continue on this path will most likely be seen as simple bashing against gay families.
But there are some in the legislature who will never forget how this all happened. It happened when the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts ruled that it was unconstitutional not to allow gay couples to have full access to marriage. The legislature went back to the Supreme Judicial Court for "clarification" to ask if "civil unions" would be "adequate". The court ruled, "The history of our nation has demonstrated that separate is seldom, if ever, equal...". In other words, civil unions weren't good enough and were no substitution for marriage.
Now, two legislators are calling for the justices to be fired for... do their jobs. I've written about this before. At the time, it was just Rep. Goguen who was calling for the ouster of the entire majority of the court that voted to allow gay marriage. Now, Rep. Travis filed a bill calling for the removal of Justice Margaret Marshall. Talk about manipulating the process.
As for me, I've recovered somewhat from our Attorney General backing down from allowing gay marriages in our state. I think it's interesting to note though that Rhode Island and New York Attorney Generals have said that marriages issued in Massachusetts will be recognized in those states. This is nothing but great news of course. It will be interesting to see how many others will follow. There won't be many for sure since 38 of the states have laws preventing gay marriage.
The important issue right now is the tremendous victory we have had this week with the ability for gay couples to be married in a state. That's remarkable.
Well, it's official. Connecticut State Attorney General Richard Blumenthal said today that Connecticut law does not allow for same-sex marriages.
Connecticut's marriage laws have not been analyzed since 1980, when the attorney general's office ruled that state statutes did not specifically define marriage.
Blumenthal said there is nothing in Connecticut law that allows or authorizes marriage licenses to be issued to same-sex couples.
Blumenthal said Connecticut statutes refer to a "bride" and "groom" and a "husband" and "wife" and said these terms are commonly understood to refer to a man and a woman.
He declined to say whether Connecticut can recognize same-sex marriages from out of state.
"An answer would require me to make law, not interpret it," Blumenthal said.
Romney said in a letter to leaders in 49 states that out-of-state gay couples would be prohibited from marrying when same-sex marriage became legal in Massachusetts unless the laws in their home state permit the marriages. The first marriages began taking place Monday in Massachusetts.
Blumenthal said it would be up to Romney to decide whether to allow Connecticut couples to marry in Massachusetts.
"The bottom line here is that the legislature and only the legislature has the authority to grant this authority to same-sex couples," Blumenthal said. (source)
So, I guess our battle with this is over. It's a sad day for me. I am angry, and I am disappointed. We live in a country that is suppose to offer equal rights and benefits for all it's citizens. Now, I know that is truely a crock of shit. I need time to let all of this soak in. Until then, I'm off line for awhile.
I haven't felt this degraded and humiliated in a very long time.
Kent and I went to our usual brunch this morning at Monet's Table this morning and while having a delicious breakfast, I read that Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal is going to make a determination on Monday if same-sex marriages performed elsewhere will be deemed valid in Connecticut. He is responding in part to a letter Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney sent to the attorneys general of the other 49 states, inquiring whether same-sex marriages are permitted.
Meanwhile, Attorney General Richard Blumenthal said Friday that he plans to issue an advisory opinion Monday on whether same-sex marriages performed elsewhere will be deemed valid in Connecticut. He is responding in part to a letter Romney sent to the attorneys general of the other 49 states, inquiring whether same-sex marriages are permitted. [...]
Connecticut's statutes and case law, Murphy said, make it clear there are only four categories of marriages deemed invalid in this state. They include marriages between blood relatives; marriages performed by an unauthorized person; bigamist marriages; and those in which one or both parties never intended or consented to be married.
"We do not have any laws at all that say same-sex couples cannot get married," Murphy said. (source)
We weren't going to go to Massachusetts to get married because we felt that it wouldn't be legal when we returned to Connecticut. Well, apparently, that may not be the case. When I read this, I was overcome with hope.
I actually wanted my home state of Connecticut to marry us, but would it really matter? Connecticut will not issue a marriage license to a gay couple. We have tried that, and we were denied. But, if the will honor a gay marriage from Massachusetts, isn't that in the end, the same thing? I mean, they are honoring the marriage. Would we not then get the full protection of marriage, at least at the state level?
I can't wait for Monday to happen to see what the Attorney General rules. He seems like a fair man, and if the law is as clear as what I've stated above, it would seem that there is only one way he can rule.
If any couples out there are looking for some wedding card companies that cater to gay couples, you might want to check out this:
Lyons school officials will start screening entertainment for the high school's annual pre-prom dinner. They made the decision after a couple of juniors hit a sour note with school board members with a racy skit about Adam and Eve.
The students prepared the skit "The Apple Bit'' for class. They were asked by prom sponsors to present it during the pre-prom dinner last month. Included among complaints by board members is that the skit contained sexual innuendo that Adam might be homosexual.
Next week the school board plans to discuss the skit and a new procedure for reviewing student material. Lyons School Superintendent Edwin Church says the students are "top-notch,'' and didn't mean to offend anyone. (source)
It sounds to me that it's not the students who have the problem. They are doing what students should be doing when approaching learning - keep an open mind because you may miss the truth if you have blinders on. If college and life taught me anything, it's how to be a free THINKER.
Oh... and by the way, in case anyone is interested, Adam was homosexual. I don't want to "offend" anyone, so I won't even discuss the sexuality of Jesus (hint, read about the interactions between John and Jesus).
It's heating up again in Arizona. About 50 gay and lesbian couples will show up at court and city offices around the state to try to obtain marriage licenses. It's a test of the state's laws, enacted in 1996, banning same-sex marriage.
They will board buses and will stop at 10 different offices and will take all ask for application forms.
Then on Tuesday, six pastors who have performed same-sex weddings will show up at a registrar's office in Phoenix with marriage affidavits, to demand that they be recorded as civil marriages.
The real test could come on Tuesday when as many as six pastors who will have performed the wedding rites show up at a registrar’s office in Phoenix with marriage affidavits, signed by couples, witnesses and notaries, and demand they be recorded as civil marriages.
"We will refuse to leave until they are recorded," said the Rev. Brad Wishon, the organizer and the pastor of Gentle Shepherd Metropolitan Community Church in Phoenix. Offices in Yuma, Flagstaff, Prescott, Sedona, Tucson and other communities also will be tested, he said.
"The issue, at hand, is that gays, lesbians and families are denied access to social and religious institutions and rights easily accessed by their heterosexual counterparts," said Wishon, a pastor for 14 years in St. L ouis and Phoenix. (source)
"You don't save money by denying people rights in America," said Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass. [...]
Rep. Tammy Baldwin, D-Wis., cited the case of a lesbian couple in Vermont who joined in a civil union and had a child together. When one of the parents died in a car accident last year, her partner applied for Social Security survivor benefits for the child. Even though she was the child's legal parent under Vermont law, the Social Security Administration denied the request.
"There are so many examples like that," Baldwin said.
I think it's appalling that some people are even making the argument that gay couples should not have access to federal benefits because it might "break the bank". Totally disgusting.
Today at lunch I went to my favorite sandwich place, got my lunch to go, and proceeded to leave. Then I spotted the Hartford Advocate with three words in large letters on the front page, "THE BIG DAY".
They were referring to next Monday of course, the first day that gay and lesbian couples will be able to legally marry in Massachusetts. I grabbed a copy.
It was such a beautiful day (wish now that I had my camera), that I went down to the Connecticut River to have lunch. There, I sprawled out on the grass at the park, took in some sun, and read the entire article. It’s a great article. I also fell asleep for a bit in the warm sun. It's so peaceful there. This is an except from the article, and a link to the full article.
On May 17 at 8:30 a.m., the doors of Northampton (Mass.) City Hall will open for business, as happens every day. Only on this day, there will likely be a large crowd outside, many of whom were here two weeks earlier walking in Northampton's Pride March.
For many gay couples, this day will mark the end of a long wait, and the beginning of a new life together, one that is loving, committed and most importantly, recognized by the state of Massachusetts. It follows a six-month court-imposed waiting period following the Supreme Judicial Court's ruling in the Goodridge v. Dept. of Public Health case in November. [...]
Right now, Massachusetts is a flashpoint in a battle pitting the forces of multiculturalism and secularism against the forces of fundamentalism and nationalism. To the cultural conservatives, the goal of this culture war is to remake America into a righteous Christian state, in accordance with their interpretation of scripture. To do this, they will try to convince everyday Americans that their baseball and apple-pie culture is being threatened by a subversive group of intellectual elites who represent dangerous values. These elites, they'll say, influence government and control the media and are bent on brainwashing average Americans into accepting their fallen and debauched ways.
In the 1920s, the symbol of that shadow group was the Jew, in the 1950s, it was the communist, now it is the homosexual. These conservatives will use Massachusetts as a villain to further their national goals. They will look to use the homosexual bogeyman to scare African-Americans, Hispanics and Catholics into the conservative fold. They will look to bloody liberal candidates in the campaign by connecting them to deviant sexual practices and they will try to turn the nation's attention away from Iraq, away from the economy and to the sight of gays walking down the aisle. (source)
Good morning!
I'm dragging a bit this morning. I went to bed late (12:00am - late for an old man like me) and the coffee hasn't kicked in yet. Reluctantly, I peeked at the news. Nothing really bad happening I suppose, or maybe I'm getting numb to it? I don't know.
You all probably know that this coming Monday (May 17) will be the first day that gay couples can get married in Massachusetts. Some have mentioned a three day waiting period. I'm not really sure what that is all about, but I have read that there is some procedure (you got to love government and their procedures) that you can go through to have it waived.
At any rate, it looks as though Boston came out yesterday and said that they will not go against the Governor in regards to marrying out of state couples. I guess I can see Boston doing this, but I never thought that Cambridge, home of Harvard University, would cave in to the Governor's wishes.
So basically, the only areas of Massachusetts left that have said that they will allow out of state couples to get married are Worchester, Provincetown, and the Boston suburb of Somerville. Even Northampton, a western Massachusetts city with a large gay population, said they would adhere to the Governor's guidelines (another surprise for me, and another town that I will stop going to - they can do without my business). Sorry, but I will not support or reward bigotry.
Kent and I talked about going to Provincetown to get married this summer and take a vacation there. It was actually Kent's idea. I wanted to do it. I still want to go. But, I have decided not to get married. It's stupid and annoying that I have been with this man for 30 years, and I can't even get married to him. I want my home state to marry us, and to recognize our marriage. If we married in Massachusetts, we would walk away with a marriage certificate that would mean nothing once we crossed the state line, or, left Provincetown for that matter.
My marriage to Kent is better than that. I don't want to bring home a marriage certificate from Massachusetts and then have to tell Connecticut, "Here, we are married. Now can we share health insurance, and all the other protections of marriage? Please?? Pretty Please???". It's degrading, because without a court battle, Connecticut is going to tell me, "NO!".
I have strived my entire life to make my life extraordinary and to have my short time on earth really mean something to the people who know me. In college, a friend once told me, "Never let your soul suffer at the hands of a fool". I have never forgotten that. This time, the fool is my state, the Federal Government, and my fellow citizens who do nothing to help our fight for equal marriage rights; content to allow us to be second-class citizens.
There is nothing sacred about marriage, and for once, straight society can't point the finger at gay people and blame us. The state of marriage today rests solely with them.
Today, marriage is nothing more than a mechanism for rights and privileges from the state and Federal Government. A lady at work told me a few days ago, "Marriage is not a civil right. It's a sacred institution." I told her, "Fair enough. I'll tell you what. You give up the 1,688 rights and privileges given by the state and Federal Government to your 'sacred institution', and I'll stop bitching and feel less like a second-class citizen. Are you willing to do that".
With that, she turned and walked away. Actions speak louder than words.
The last couple of days, I've been avoiding the news. It's just too depressing. And then last night, someone sent me a video to watch. Without really realizing what I was going to see, I saw the execution of Nicholas Berg. You know, I really didn't want to see that and I really don't want that in my mind.
The people (I'm try to be civil here) who did this to him say it was for retaliation for the way the United States degraded the prisoners in Iraq. Our government of course said that these acts will be avenged. Where does it all end? I guess, when everyone is dead.
I went to bed feeling like the world was going to crap. And I realize that so much of the world doesn't care about life in any form. To them, it's about some cause. I can't effect that, and I don't know what the answer is.
From reading some of the forums covering the execution of Nicholas Berg, many Americans are saying about Iraq, "Nuke 'em!", and "nuke the cock roaches!". They want to pull our troops out and obliterate the nation of Iraq.
That's part of the problem, isn't it? We are looking for a quick fix to the problem. Do the people saying this really think that blowing the country away with a full-scale nuclear attack would solve the problem? How naive can people be?
And even if it did solve this particular problem (which it wouldn't), do they even stop to think beyond their anger at what horrors we would unleash by using such power? I read a bit more, then turned off my monitor. I had had enough.
I realize that the only thing I can really effect is my immediate environment, and to try to add joy and happiness to my family and the people I love, and to try to keep them close and safe.
I wish I could look upon the world as my cats do, with amazement and wonder. Their main concern is if it will be hot today, and if I will remember to leave the air on for them. Oh yeah, and they have to try to keep track of all the birds outside.
That's what life should be.
(Oklahoma City, Oklahoma) A national ad campaign that began running Monday in USA Today is advising corporations not to relocate in Oklahoma.
Headlined "Oklahoma Going Out of Business" the featured a map of the state with a "closed" sign hanging from it.
"Companies thinking of relocating to or doing business in Oklahoma should look hard at Oklahoma's worsening culture of intolerant exclusion and its resulting brain and talent drain," the half page ad said.
"Studies show that a state's level of tolerance for its gay and lesbian citizens directly impacts its success in attracting the talented people and creative atmosphere essential for economic growth in today's competitive marketplace," the $100,000 said ad which appeared in the paper's Money section.
The ad was sponsored by LGBT civil rights group Cimarron Equality Oklahoma in response to a proposed amendment to the state constitution to ban same-sex relationships. The amendment proposal passed the legislature last month (story) and will be put to voters in November. (source)
I suppose it will take a court challenge to get Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney to shut up about the 1913 law. Obviously, different people interpret the law differently. Most argue that the Governor's interpretation of the law in regards to gay couples is too broad.
Not being a legal mind, and just a lowly person who happens to be 1/2 of a gay couple who wants to get married, I think the Governor is simply using the law (that hasn't been enforced in decades) for his own bigoted means.
In the meantime, people like me will wonder that if we do take Provincetown up on it's offer to get married there, will we be greeted by a letter weeks later that says our marriage has been nullified by the state of Massachusetts?
It's so much fun being in the middle of all of this. I suppose it's a process, right?
BOSTON -- Out-of-state couples will be able to receive marriage licenses in the seaside gay mecca of Provincetown after the city decided Monday to defy the governor's residency edict, likely setting the stage for another gay marriage legal battle. Gov. Mitt Romney immediately issued a statement Monday, threatening legal action against clerks who defy his interpretation of the law.
The Board of Selectmen in Provincetown, on Cape Cod, decided that gay couples who live outside Massachusetts will still be issued marriage licenses, as long as they attest that they know of no legal impediment to their union. (source)
A great summation of the mindset of Donald Rumsfeld. This is an excerpt.
"I take full responsibility," said Donald Rumsfeld in his congressional testimony last week. But what does this mean? Secretary Rumsfeld hastened to add that he did not plan to resign and was not going to ask anyone else who might have been "responsible" to resign. As far as I can tell, taking responsibility these days means nothing more than saying