It’s amazing what people are doing in an effort to keep people from voting. I read this off The Blue Lemur. It would seem that the Republicans will stop at nothing to get their way.

I hate to even ask the question, but if Bush is re-elected, how will we ever know that his victory was real?

As campaigns across the country roll towards their bitter end, politics have grown ever-dirtier, with two flyers raising red flags of racism, RAW STORY has found. Both benefit the Republican Party, though one is unattributed.

In Wisconsin, flyers purporting to be from the “Milwaukee Black Voters League”, (image below) erroneously tell African Americans they can’t vote in the presidential election if anyone in their family has even been found guilty of a crime. An image of the flyer is reproduced below.

Not good news folks, but I thought I'd let you know.

Take life as it comes. Don’t let it get you down. Yeah, that’s what we have to do!

Already passed into law:
Louisiana (later struck down in state court)
Missouri

Proposed amendments to make marriage “one man, one woman”:
Mississippi
Montana
Oregon

Proposed amendments to make marriage “one man, one woman” and to go further by making civil union type arrangements illegal as well:
Arkansas
Georgia
Kentucky
Michigan
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Utah

Source

A voter's guide circulating in some Catholic churches in Connecticut and elsewhere says there are five “non-negotiable” issues that Catholics must support as voters to remain in communion with the church.

The “Voter's Guide For Serious Catholics,” produced by a San Francisco-based organization, says abortion, euthanasia, embryonic stem cell research, human cloning and homosexual marriage are “intrinsically evil.” (source)

Cool. I'm “intrinsically evil” just in time for Halloween!

Is it the 1950’s all over again for gay Americans? Apparently, in some parts of the country, it is.

It’s hard to believe that in this day and age that an organization would threaten to blackmail anyone into submitting information about themselves. The threat if they don’t respond is to tell others in the community that they are gay. I guess that they believe, in their quest “to help parents when choosing a school for their children”, that they are trying to keep gays away from their children. Are they insinuating that we are child molesters or do they fear that their children might learn some other valuable lessons about life, such as living a dignified life with honesty?

The way some people in this country think scares me.

A judge has ordered a Texas company to stop sending email masquerading as freedom of information requests to Missouri schools after some administrators were threatened with outing.

The mass emails were sent by Abilene, Texas-based StarProse Corp. seeking information on school administrators, principals and teachers.

The e-mail messages appeared with the subject line, “Open Records Request,” but actually sought personal information. The emails threatened to list as gay anyone who does not respond to the information demand. The company said in the emails that the information was needed “to help parents when choosing a school for their children.” (source)

7:35am - Wake up with Max mauling me. I slept very well last night. I'm feeling great. Kent gets in the shower, and I go downstairs to make coffee.

9:35am - We leave home in route to Monet's Table. For some reason this morning, I'm feeling like listening to Mahler’s First Symphony (“Titan”). Kent finds this odd because Mahler is too heavy for me. Perhaps I'm changing.

9:42am - We arrive at Monet’s Table for breakfast. They always have their regular things to eat, and they always have some specials that are always wonderful. Today, I opt for one of the specials. It’s salmon and whitefish cakes with eggs. Over the salmon and whitefish cakes is a rich lobster-chardonnay sauce. It was just right and was a great accompaniment to Mahler!

While there, Shirley, one of the sisters who owns Monet’s Table, came up to talk to us. We’ve become good friends with the sisters. We talk about what we are doing for Christmas. Somehow, the topic of my birthday came up and I tell her that my birthday is on December 31st. She said that I had to come by because they were having a big celebration. I told her that I may not celebrate this year because I’m not too happy about turning 50. She looked at me and said, “Wait until you turn 78!” She has a point. I stopped complaining. So, instead of going to Cavy’s for my birthday, I suppose we will go to Monet's Table. There is nothing quite like having friends around you at special times.

11:10am - We arrive at Buckland Hills Mall. We decide that we are just going to have some coffee and browse for books. The mall is a very dangerous place for me. I suppose I look a bit strange. I carry my cell phone with me and hooked to my ear is my wireless Bluetooth headset for my cell phone. That attracted all the tech heads that wanted to sell me other stuff, such as this device that you hook to your cell phone to make it come out of your car speakers. I move on and resist the urge to try yet another toy.

We head off to Filene's and leave Filene’s $350.00 poorer. I saw some clothes that I just had to buy because I have a closet full of nothing to wear. I did buy some silk pajamas for those cold winter nights that are coming. I don't know if you've ever worn silk before, but it doesn't suck.

We get back to Barnes and Noble where I buy a few magazines and yet another Rupert Everett movie (I won't bore you with the details). Ok, I will. I bought Another Country. I've never seen it before and heard it was good. I suppose the fact that since Rupert came out of the closet he hasn't been able to find work had something to do with it as well.

1:20pm - We arrive back home and when I pull into the driveway, realize that we forgot to go to the drugstore for a prescription I need (high blood pressure medication - nothing serious, just marginal, but I have a doctor who worries about needle pricks). Me, I just worry about pricks in general.

1:50pm - On our way home, we run across a stop sign that has been re-painted by what I assume to be some of our local school children. The word “STOP” has been painted over and a big question mark is on the sign. I wonder if it’s in reference to where our country stands now on a variety of different issues. Or perhaps it’s in reference to the upcoming election on Tuesday, that will take our country six (6) weeks to figure out who won the election. Personally, I would have painted “!” on the sign. I’ve included a picture of the sign below, along with a few others I took this last week.

2:57pm - Kent breaks up a cat fight. Can’t we all just live in peace?

Tonight we are going to Costa del Sol for dinner tonight at 7:00. It's a nice Spanish restaurant in Hartford.

The stop sign I wrote about

I left for work before the sun was up last Thursday. This was what I saw from our driveway

The open amphitheater at one end of the park. Some of the fall colors are still with us

The Florida Republican Party said it has a list of more than 900 felons who will vote illegally in this year's election.

“We believe this is simply the tip of the iceberg and there could be potentially additional felons who have registered,” said Mindy Tucker Fletcher, spokesman for the Florida Republican Party. (source)

I thought that once a felon had served his time, he/she could apply to have their voting rights restored. It seems fair to me, in a way. People who are equal citizens who pay taxes are allowed to vote. When felons become part of society again, any wages they earn will be taxable, so it seems only the fair thing to do to give them voting rights.

Or am I assuming too much? We tax them but they have no access to their representation?

The folks in charge of the U.S. president’s re-election campaign seem to have forgotten that the first two letters of WWW stand for “world wide.”

Just days before the presidential election, the Bush campaign’s official Web site, GeorgeWBush.com, is turning away Web traffic from abroad. The virtual blockade began Monday, according to Internet traffic analysis company Netcraft.

The site appears to be rejecting visitors from most points outside the United States, while allowing access from most U.S. locations and Canada, according to Netcraft, which is based in Bath, England. The company monitors Web site response times from numerous locations around the globe, including New York; London; Amsterdam, Netherlands; and Sydney, Australia.

An attempt by a CNET News.com reader in the Netherlands to access the site brought up an “Error 403 Forbidden” page with the message: “Access Denied: You don’t have permission to access ‘http://www.georgewbush.com/’ on this server.”

Representatives at the Bush campaign office did not immediately return calls for comment. (source)

An Atlanta golf club is expected to challenge the city’s four-year-old gay rights ordinance over a gay member who argues her partner should get spousal club benefits.

Druid Hills Golf Club was ordered by Mayor Shirley Franklin to change its policies about the gay member or face sanctions, citing a 2000 ordinance that guarantees equal rights for gays in public accommodations.

Club leaders recently sent a letter to the club’s 1,100 members arguing the club should not change its policies to provide full benefits for partners of unmarried members. (source)

Didn't we go through this fight once before?

Oh wait! That fight was about black and interracial couples.

Yes, straight marriage in the United States is so sacred that you can measure its sanctity in piles of fresh, green cash for the creators of ‘marriage’ and ‘love’ reality TV shows. You can also measure the sanctity of marriage in how quickly people are willing to throw ‘true love’ to the wayside on public television in exchange for a briefcase full of money.

Who can really believe in the sanctity of marriage in this country anymore? Apparently our President does. After all, he is the political leader in the fight to keep gays and lesbians from obtaining equal marriage rights. As President Bush so succinctly states, “I believe marriage is between a man and a woman.” Oh yes, and he also says “we’ve got lawyers looking at the best way” to keep it that way.

Well, I say that if President George Bush believes so strongly that gay marriage would destroy “traditional marriage” – why isn’t he out there campaigning against other threats to the American Family? Why isn’t President George Bush out there hitting the bricks to introduce a constitutional amendment to keep perfect strangers from marrying (or not marrying) each other on television for large sums of cash? After all, aren’t these television ‘love’ reality shows kind of like public prostitution? Surely having millions of Americans watching people screw each other over for money in the name of marriage has far more damage potential for the American family than gay marriage. Or how about when public celebrities (and idols to millions of American youth) like Britney Spears can get married and divorced in the same day. (Oops, Mr. President, I'm afraid I was a little drunk, but I'm straight, so that's okay...) (source)

President Bush said on Wednesday 380 tons of missing explosives in Iraq might have vanished prior to the arrival of U.S. forces and he blasted Democrat John Kerry for making a campaign issue out of it.

“A political candidate who jumps to conclusions without knowing the facts is not a person you want as your commander in chief,” Bush told more than 17,000 supporters at an airport rally as he began a day of campaigning in Pennsylvania, Ohio and Michigan. (source)

“A political candidate who jumps to conclusions without knowing the facts is not a person you want as your commander in chief”.

You mean like taking our country into war with a country when we had no facts about weapons of mass destruction?

You mean going into Iraq to capture Osama bin Laden when we didn't know for a fact that he was even in the country?

You mean promising the American People that this would be a quick war and over in six months when you knew for a fact that it would take us much longer to achieve what you wanted to achieve, which apparently did not include capturing Osama bin Laden? And now, after 1,112 Americans have been killed in Iraq (as of today), and the end to this conflict no where in site, you accuse John Kerry of acting without the facts?

We went to war in Iraq for one reason, to bring Osama bin Laden to justice. How did you put it Mr. President? I think you said dead or alive? Osama bin Laden was the man who was behind the September 11, 2001 attack on America. You said we were going after him. YOU LIED.

You are in no position to criticize anyone for jumping to conclusions without facts.

We have to own this one because we allowed this to happen. Some of the soldiers who did the actual torture of prisoners are now being charged with crimes. The last one, last week, was sentenced to eight years in prison.

While these soldiers are being charged with these crimes, does anyone actually buy that these acts were done by a handful of hoodlums who were acting on their own? I understand that there were specific people who did these acts. I also realize that these acts happened because the atmosphere at Abu Gharib, and our attitude let this happen. But if anyone out there actually believes that people much higher up in the Administration didn't know this was happening, you are deluding yourselves.

I know there are some who think that I am anti-American for saying these things. And yes, I did receive your hate mail. Thank you very much. I also received hate mail for posting the Abu Gharib abuse photos on my website. I was even told that I will hold some responsibility for the deaths of our soldiers because I posted these photos. BUNK! Take that argument to President George W. Bush who sent our troops into harms way without even adequate body armor. Families of individual soldiers had to obtain the amour on their own at a cost of $1,400 for their loved one in Iraq. Our government then refused to even reimburse them for that expense. Totally shameful.

So why would I post such photos? Very simple actually. I’ll explain it by simply saying, “You can’t fight evil by doing evil.” If you are of a religious leaning, you will understand that. If not, let me put it another way.

I think America should be and must be better than the world’s thugs and bullies. We are in a position to set the example on humane and just behavior. We suffered a huge blow on September 11, 2001. We were angry. We went after Osama bin Laden (or so we were being told), let him escape, and ended up beating the hell out of Iraq. And now, after everything is said and done, the irony is that most of the prisoners in Abu Gharib that suffered at our hands, have been freed because it was determined that they hadn’t committed any crimes, other than being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Some are actually trying to get compensation through international legal courts for what happened to them at our hands.

Are their “bad guys” in Iraq who want us destroyed? Yes, absolutely. But that doesn’t mean that the entire population does. It also doesn’t mean that the Iraqi’s who don’t want our brand of freedom are our enemies. We are arrogant as hell in this country. We (or some of us), have freedom and equality. We think that everyone in the world should have our brand of freedom. In many countries, that culturally just will not work. Unless of course, we want to destroy their culture and Americanize them. Not even that would surprise me.

The United States has manifestly failed to uphold obligations to reject torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading behavior in the “war on terror” launched after Sept. 11, 2001, Amnesty International said on Wednesday.

The human rights group condemned the U.S. administration’s response to the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington as one which had resulted in its own “iconography of torture, cruelty and degradation.”

“The war mentality the government has adopted has not been matched with a commitment to the laws of war and it has discarded fundamental human rights principles along the way,” it said in a report.

Amnesty’s report -- “Human dignity denied: Torture and accountability in the ‘war on terror’” -- accused Washington of stepping onto a “well-trodden path of violating basic rights in the name of national security or ‘military necessity’.”

At best, Washington was guilty of setting conditions for torture and cruel treatment by lowering safeguards and failing to respond adequately to allegations of abuse, it said.

At worst, it had authorized interrogation techniques which flouted its international obligation to reject torture and ill-treatment under any circumstances. [...]

Photographs that surfaced in April showed U.S. soldiers posing, smiling and giving the thumbs-up sign as naked, male Iraqi prisoners were stacked in a pyramid or positioned to simulate sex acts with one another.

A prisoner in one photo was directed to stand on a box with his head hooded, and wires attached to his hands, and was told that if he fell off the box he would be electrocuted. (source)

Already banned in Georgia, gay marriage could sustain another setback when voters decide November 2 whether to amend the state constitution to further forbid it.

More than 3 million registered voters throughout Georgia are expected to cast ballots in this year’s election – pointing to what could be the state’s largest turnout ever. That windfall could seal the fate of gay marriage with a recent poll showing most Georgians are in favor of adding an anti-gay marriage amendment to the state constitution.

Furthermore, in a 5-2 vote, the Georgia Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that the gay marriage amendment, in its current wording, will remain on the November 2 ballot. The ruling came amid a heated dispute between both sides of the issue and just a week before the presidential election. [...]

A majority of Georgia lawmakers want the constitution amended to prevent any court action from overturning the current state law which already bans gay marriage. Opponents of the measure appealed to the courts, saying the version to appear on the Nov. 2 ballot omitted a critical second paragraph that would not only ban same-sex marriages, but threaten same-sex legal unions and domestic partnership benefits, as well. (source)

This is how change happens. I’ve always thought that if straight soldiers could just see their gay counterparts working along side them, the situation would change. I’ve talked with friends who are in the military and many of the straight soldiers know the soldiers who are gay within their unit. They don’t tell their superiors about it, but they know. It’s pretty hard to keep the lie up about why you aren’t dating or at least can’t tell anyone about who you are dating, or have no stories to share when you talk about those people important in your life. I think that most people who you work with, once they get to know you, see that as being greatly unfair.

At the end of the day, the important thing you need to know is if you can trust your fellow soldiers to cover you back. And in the field (such as Iraq), being gay or straight is just not the hot issue anymore.

Hopefully, Congress will get that idea soon, before we loose more good soldiers to don't ask, don't tell.

Further information

A new survey from the University of Pennsylvania shows that 50% of junior enlisted service members say gays and lesbians should be allowed to serve openly in the military. The National Annenberg Election Survey reveals a significant increase since 1992, when two similar surveys found that only 16% of male service members held the same view.

The Annenberg poll follows a report last week from the Urban Institute, which estimates that 65,000 lesbian and gay Americans serve in the armed forces. “Despite the military’s gay ban, service members have seen firsthand the contributions of lesbian and gay Americans,” said Sharra E. Greer, director of law and policy for Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, an advocacy group for gay service personnel. “Heterosexual service members serve alongside lesbian and gay colleagues every day, and they are increasingly comfortable doing so.” (source)

The amendment that seeks to write a ban against gay marriage into the state Constitution could pose problems for straight people in Kentucky if voters approve it next week, say legal experts and those who oppose the measure.

The trouble, they say, is in the second clause of the question, which would declare a “legal status identical to or similar to marriage for unmarried individuals” not valid.

The ambiguity of that language is “like -- looking into the legal well and wondering how deep is it?” said Louisville attorney Sheryl Snyder. “It boggles the mind all the things that this could impact, which is why amending the Constitution should be a very thoughtful process, not something that is lightly done on the issue de jour.” (source)

I'm probably going to get into trouble for saying this with my straight friends, but hopefully, they will understand.

I thought that the argument for amending the constitutions in the states that are going to amend their state constitutions, such as Kentucky, was to protect the sanctity of marriage and keep it “one man, one woman”. Fine. But now that it looks as if straight unmarried couples could be effected by these nasty constitutional amendments, they are all of the sudden concerned that unmarried heterosexual couples will loose some of their benefits.

SO FUCKING WHAT?

I’m pissed as hell that they don’t want to share the burden in this little adventure. This is what discrimination is folks. This is why it’s so ugly. You can’t have it both ways.

Let’s at least be honest about it. You want to keep marriage from the HOMOSEXUALS ONLY. Just say it and be honest about it. But at the same time, you want heterosexual couples to not have to suffer from this law either.

I hope they do suffer right along with the gay couples who will have what few rights they have stripped away. Maybe then, we can start to see change.

The grass is always greener on the other side of the fence. Well, your side of the fence just became my side as well. Get used to it.

I apologize to my straight friends who read this, but this had to be said. It’s about conviction and what is right and what is wrong.

Just astonishing. Sometimes you read a story and have to just sit back and wonder, “What is happening to the world?”

(Salt Lake City, Utah) A debate between two Salt Lake City area candidates for the US House of Representatives shows divisions on whether to an amendment to the Utah constitution to ban gay marriage, and uncertainty about whether the Constitution should be used to stop polygamy.

The issue arose during the taping of a debate between Republican Representative Chris Cannon and his Democratic challenger Beau Babka for airing tonight on TV station KUED.

The question was posed by two female polygamists in the audience, and relayed by moderator Ken Verdoia.

Cannon, who supports the proposed ban on gay marriage, said he doesn't know about polygamy.

“I don’t know where we should go. I don’t have an answer,” he said.

Babka said he will vote against the amendment on Nov. 2 because he doesn’t believe the constitution should be used to disenfranchise any group of people.

But he also said he wasn't sure how to answer the polygamy question.

He said religious freedom is important, but he is concerned about the exploitation of women and children in polygamist families. (source)

Renowned baritone and 30-year Metropolitan Opera veteran Robert Merrill has died of natural causes. He was 87.

Merrill’s wife, Marion, told the New York Times the opera star died at home Saturday while watching the first game of the World Series.

Merrill made his Metropolitan debut as Germont in “La Traviata” Dec. 15, 1945, and celebrated his 500th performance there March 5, 1973. He remained on the Met roster until 1976. (source)

President Bush said in an interview this past weekend that he disagreed with the Republican Party platform opposing civil unions of same-sex couples and that the matter should be left up to the states.

Mr. Bush has previously said that states should be permitted to allow same-sex unions, even though White House officials have said he would not have endorsed such unions as governor of Texas. But Mr. Bush has never before made a point of so publicly disagreeing with his party’s official position on the issue.

In an interview on Sunday with Charles Gibson, an anchor of Good Morning America on ABC, Mr. Bush said, “I don’t think we should deny people rights to a civil union, a legal arrangement, if that’s what a state chooses to do so.” ABC, which broadcast part of the interview on Monday, is to broadcast the part about civil unions on Tuesday. (source)

It’s not that I’m smarter than anyone else in America. I’m not. But, every single time, EVERY TIME that the Federal Government or anyone in the Bush Administration talks about gay marriage, they always talk about “if that’s what a state chooses to do”.

This issue is larger than the states. It’s all nice and easy for the President to shrug it off and let the states deal with the issue of how best to turn gay Americans into second class citizens, but they conveniently never mention their roll at the Federal level in this argument.

Folks, there are over 1,000 rights afforded to marriage at the Federal level! This is never mentioned by the Bush Administration because...

I can’t make it any plainer than that.

5:30am - Got up. It's too damn early. Cat is mauling me. In the distance I can hear Kent in the shower. I'm not a morning, afternoon, evening, or night person.

9:30am - I go into the kitchen at work for some coffee, and I see this label on the coffee pot that says, "Breakfast Coffee, not as heavy as real coffee". I'm like WTF?! I immediately think that the people responsible for putting up the protect marriage billboards around the state have struck again in the kitchen! I want REAL COFFEE damn it!

I put on a new pot of the real stuff, and return to my work where I'm on a deadline.

9:50am - Return to kitchen where there are about 6 people hovering over the coffee. I say, "Don't even think of taking all the coffee that I BREWED!" They all stepped away from the coffee pot. Half the pot was left. I got my fix. All is back to normal. I return to my desk to work on deadline. Coffee, like gay marriage, terrorism, and missing enriched uranium, are important subjects to me.

5:30pm - I'm home now. The day went great after the coffee kicked in.

It's so quiet out. The sun is setting, there's a chill in the air, and not even the creatures of the forest are out and about. It's peaceful.

Remember way back in the 1980s, when Dick Cheney racked up one of the most anti-gay voting records in the House of Representatives? In 1988, he was one of 13 members who even voted against funding for AIDS testing and research when it was still called a “gay plague.” Well, Cheney’s come as far as many other Americans, and for the same essential reason. The more people in our families, workplaces and communities come out of the closet, the harder it is to regard them as deviants who need to be cured or converted or jailed. (source)

The maple tree in our front drive way

The fall colors of Vermont

Motion!

A convention on our front porch

Virginia's refusal to allow birth certificates of children born in the state but adopted by same-sex couples outside of Virginia to show the names of both parents is endangering the children a court was told Monday.

A legal brief filed on behalf of three families, two in Washington, DC, and one in New York, who adopted children born in Virginia, says that "Schools, hospitals or others may refuse services or access to records without a birth certificate that specifically names each legal parent." [...]

The Commonwealth of Virginia argues that the form lists a mother and father and officials would not issue birth certificates listing two parents of the same sex for fear that it would confuse the record-keeping system that must be "uniform and consistent."

The Commonwealth also argued that because unmarried couples in Virginia cannot adopt children, the state could not recognize legal adoptions that occur out of state by such couples. A lower court judge agreed, and now the case is on appeal at the Virginia Supreme Court. (source)

So let me get this straight (no pun intended)... Same-sex parents who want to make the adoption of their children legal in Virginia can't because it would mess up their filing system?

You know, I've heard a lot of excuses to discriminate against people, but this one honestly takes the cake.

Way to go Virginia!

It's a scary thought to me, but the next president will probably redefine the United States Supreme Court, replacing at least three of the current justices.

The highlighting below is my own.

Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, the second-oldest man to preside over the nation's highest court and its premier conservative figure, is undergoing treatment for thyroid cancer.

Rehnquist, 80, underwent a tracheotomy at Bethesda Naval Hospital in suburban Maryland on Saturday, the Supreme Court announced Monday. It said he expects to be back at work next week when the court will next be meeting to hear cases.

Even so, Rehnquist's hospitalization little more than a week before the election gave new prominence to a campaign issue that has been overshadowed by the war on terrorism. The next president is likely to name several justices to a court that has been deeply divided in recent years on issues as varied as abortion and the 2000 election itself. (source)

The state Supreme Court tossed out Georgia's hate crimes law Monday, meaning state lawmakers will have to revisit a roiling debate that divided them deeply four years ago.

The law barely passed the Legislature in 2000 after bitter arguments about whether some crimes are worse than others when bigotry is in the heart of the accused. It passed only after protections for gay people were removed and the law rewritten to vaguely refer to "bias or prejudice." Of the 48 states with hate-crimes laws, Georgia's was the only one not to specify who would be protected. (source)

Issue 1 is a constitutional amendment regarding the definition of marriage.

The text of the amendment is as follows (highlighting my own):

Only a union between one man and one woman may be a marriage valid in or recognized by this state and its political subdivisions. This state and its political subdivisions shall not create or recognize a legal status for relationships of unmarried individuals that intends to approximate the design, qualities, significance or effect of marriage.

In other words, all civil union arrangements are out, not only for gay couples, but for everyone. EVERYONE. If the state of Ohio believes for one second that Issue 1, if passed, will not effect their economy and the businesses they attract, they are sadly mistaken.

Most people don’t want to live in an atmosphere of intolerance, especially if that intolerance is going to effect them. What about a will, or power of attorney? In the case of Kent and myself, we are drawing those up to take the place of what we can’t have through marriage. In other words, we are trying to approximate the design, qualities, significance or effect of marriage. If we lived in Ohio, would we even be able to do that, even if we were a heterosexual couple?

The people of Ohio should remember the old saying, “Be careful what you ask for. You may just get it.”

Voters on Nov. 2 will decide whether to approve a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage and prohibiting public domestic partner benefits for any unmarried couple.

Supporters say state Issue 1, placed on the ballot by a citizen-initiated petition drive, is necessary to ensure activist judges do not alter state law and require Ohio to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states.

The amendment also will insure judges will not look for back doors into marriage by calling it domestic partnership or civil union, said Phil Burress, the Cincinnati-area leader of the campaign to pass the issue.

“If somehow a court says we will not call it marriage, you are going to be unionized, it’s just marriage by another name,” Burress said. “It’s an end-run around the law and destroys the institution of marriage.”

But opponents argue the amendment is too broad and too vague, particularly the second sentence, which forbids a legal status for unmarried individuals “that intends to approximate the design, qualities, significance or effect of marriage.”

Opponents say the amendment could impact legal contracts, visitation rights or property rights of any unmarried couple. There’s also concern that, although the amendment speaks only of the “state and its political subdivisions,” it could impact a private company’s ability to offer domestic partner benefits. (source)

From this morning's New York Times:

BAGHDAD, Iraq, Oct. 24 - The Iraqi interim government has warned the United States and international nuclear inspectors that nearly 380 tons of powerful conventional explosives - used to demolish buildings, make missile warheads and detonate nuclear weapons - are missing from one of Iraq's most sensitive former military installations.

The huge facility, called Al Qaqaa, was supposed to be under American military control but is now a no man's land, still picked over by looters as recently as Sunday. United Nations weapons inspectors had monitored the explosives for many years, but White House and Pentagon officials acknowledge that the explosives vanished sometime after the American-led invasion last year.

...

The bomb that brought down Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, in 1988 used less than a pound of the same type of material.

...

Earlier this month, in a letter to the I.A.E.A. in Vienna, a senior official from Iraq's Ministry of Science and Technology wrote that the stockpile disappeared after early April 2003 because of "the theft and looting of the governmental installations due to lack of security.

Huge Cache of Explosives Vanished From Site in Iraq, By James Glanz, William J. Broad and David E. Sanger, The New York Times, 24 October 2004

Let's see. President Bush declared an end to major combat operations on May 1st, 2003. So I guess he regards it as part of our "success" in Iraq that 380 tons (that tons, not pounds) of explosives disappeared on our watch. He must, because "the Bush administration would not allow the [International Atomic Energy Association] back into the country to verify the status of the stockpile." The IAEA was involved because the explosives are dual-use, many countries use them as detonators for their nuclear warheads.

A letter published on the York Daily Record:

There's been much criticism of Kerry's innocuous remarks about Cheney's daughter. To quote Paul Begala, "Spare me the righteous indignation." The fact is that Dick Cheney stands behind a president who has vilified the gay community as "sinners" and a "threat to the institution of marriage." If I were running for office with someone who thought so little of any of my children, I know that I would be unable to support him.

Where was Dick Cheney's indignation when our own Sen. Rick Santorum equated homosexuality with bestiality? Would Lynne Cheney say that Alan Keyes "is not a good man" for saying that her daughter's lifestyle is based on "selfish hedonism"?

Who first brought up Cheney's daughter in public? Dick Cheney. On Aug. 24, in response to a question from an audience member about homosexuality, he replied that he thought gay marriage was a decision best left to the states.

The question remains: Does Dick Cheney want to be vice president so much that he is willing to support an administration bent on denying his own daughter basic civil liberties?

This feigned outrage reflects the Republican Party's inability to reconcile their own official views with the reality of their hypocrisy.

PAT WELLEN
WEST MANCHESTER TOWNSHIP

6:17am - Wake up early, even though this is sleeping in for me. Max (American short hair cat) needs huge amounts of attention.

6:30am - I quietly get up and put on a robe (you got it, I sleep naked!), and try not to wake Kent. But he awakens and heads off for the shower. I go downstairs to make us some coffee.

7:30am - We head off to Vernon Diner for breakfast. We usually go to Monet’s Table every Saturday morning, but Kent has a departmental “retreat” all day today starting at 9:00, so that won’t work because Monet’s Table doesn’t open until 9:00.

We talked about the war in Iraq, U.S. policies, our allies, or current lack there of. We also talked about possibly moving to Canada once again. There’s a lot involved with that of course. We would leave our home behind, our jobs, and start a new life in a country that valued us as citizens, where we could be free and be married. Real freedom. But I don’t want to give up on my country yet. I still hope that people will want to be fair minded to gay couples and to let us be equal. We’ll see. I hate talking about this because I don't think we should have to talk about this. It shouldn't be an issue.

8:55am - We are home. Kent is getting ready to leave. I am a bit board and thinking about how nice a hot shower sounds.

2:30pm - Knock on the door. I open the door. Two women are standing there. One hands me a pamphlet entitled, “Would you Like to Know More About the Bible?”, as she says to me, “Would you like to hear what the Bible has to say about you?” I replied, “No, that’s ok. I’ve heard for many years from people just like yourselves what the Bible has to say about people like me.”

With that, I closed the door.

4:00pm - Kent comes home from his meeting. He dresses in work clothes to go out to mow the lawn for the last time this year. A lot of leaves have fallen and litter our yard and driveway. While mowing the lawn, the same two ladies return and give him the “we’re here to save you speech”. He declines. They walk away, hopefully for the last time. Maybe I should just put a big rainbow flag out on my porch, or would that just invite the neighborhood kids to spray paint the word, “F A G” across our garage doors?

5:30pm - Lawn done. Ready to go out to dinner. We head for the mall and end up and Red Robin where I eat a cholesterol-laced “Blue Burger” (greasy hamburger with blue cheese). Yeah, I know, it probably sounds gross to you, but at the time, it sounded good.

7:00pm - My body is saying, “What the hell did you do to me?!” Note to Bill: chill on the red meat.

9:00pm - Watching some dumb movie that I tuned into but didn’t watch from the beginning. Three college-age guys are traveling down the road. One has blue hair, the other is bald from shaving his head, and one has a Mohawk. They look as if they are from another planet. They are crossing the border into Wyoming to buy beer.

The conversation starts off from the bald guy, “Most people think I’m gay, even the chicks, but I’m not gay. But gay guys are totally cool to hang with. I don’t care if others call me a fag.”

The Mohawk guy says, “I don’t know man. I would care if someone called me a fag.”

The bald guy responds, “Dude, they aren’t calling you a ‘fag’, they are calling you a name to make themselves look better. I’m calling you a ‘fag’!” [much laughter]

They arrive at the store and the store owner sees them and thinks that they’ve escaped from the local mental institution. He picks up the phone and offers to call the institution to come and put them back in. The blue-haired guy says, “No, we aren’t from the institution, we are just from England.” The store owner says, “Oh, that explains it.”

Owner’s wife comes out and looks at them in horror. Owner tells his wife, “Don’t worry, they are from England!” She say, “Oh!”, with great relief. She then looks at the blue haired guy and says very slowly as though she is talking to a foreigner, “H e l l o. I t ’ s v e r y n i c e t o m e e t y o u.”

After that they go to the back of the store where the beer is. There are two people talking about the end of the world that is at hand. The three start talking to them about it. “How will you know when it happens?”, the blue-haired guy asks. She said, “There will be devil creatures who will come into this world to take it over.” He asks her, “How will we recognize them?”. She answers, “They will have the sign on them. The ‘666’.”

With that, he starts acting very strangely. He starts dancing around, pulls down his pants, turns around, and displays the tattoo on his butt cheek that says “666”. She screams and runs out of the store. The manager gets his shot gun out from behind the counter, and everyone leaves the store.

I turn off the TV, and say quietly to myself, “What the hell did I just watch?”

I go to bed.

This weekend, Kent and I will be finishing up the information our attorney has requested for the legal documents she will be drawing up for us. I'm hopeful that they will be sufficient when the time comes that they are needed. I worry too damn much about this stuff but I've heard all the awful things that can and do happen. And, after everything, I worry that anything our attorney does, will be contested. I guess there's no way around that. The deadline for me is our travel to San Diego this Christmas. I want the legal papers drawn up before that trip.

And this from the Oregon Statesman Journal:

Marriage is supposed to bestow the benefits of love, comfort and fidelity.

It promises to endure in sickness and health, in times of plenty and want.

But emotion aside, there are many other benefits to being legally married in Oregon.

Married people can sue others for the wrongful death of a spouse. If one is ill, the other half of a wedded couple can visit hospital rooms or make medical decisions without providing legal papers.

They can't be forced to testify against each other in court. If a spouse dies, a husband or wife may inherit their property and money without challenge in court.

None of these benefits applies to unmarried couples.

Even with wills, medical directives and powers-of-attorney, many benefits are not guaranteed if challenged in court, attorneys say.

I'm a bit disappointed in Oregon. I really thought that they would vote Measure 36 down, but it looks now as though it will pass. I know that it's not all about hate. But from my end of things, the receiving end of the different legislations being pushed into law around the country, it feels very much like hate.

It feel like society is telling me, “You FAGGOT! You don't deserve what we have because you are queer and LESS THAN US.” Of course, it's much more sterile than that, but the effect at my end, both real and emotional, are the same. I'm left with more questions than answers. Is my country leaving me behind? Do the really care about citizens like me, or am I just there to supplement their tax base and heterosexual couples who can get married? After all, if anything happens to me, Kent won't see one dime of my Social Security that I have paid into. My 401K retirement will be taxed in one total sum and then given to him, what's left of it. He can't roll it over into his retirement.

And I'm left wondering, is this what Christianity is? It's confusing to me because I've always been a Christian. I was raised a Christian, went to church regularly, my friends were Christian, it was all around me. Either I was totally oblivious to what people thought, or I didn't want to accept the hateful side of it. I'm wondering if it was always there, if that is what Christianity is, and I just didn't see it.

And I'm wondering if I ever understood America. I always thought naively that we all wanted equal rights and liberty for all. Is that all crap? Is that what the bedrock documents that formed the foundation of this country believe, and they've just been hijacked by religious fanatics? I wish I had more answers because this country no longer makes sense to me.

I try not to take it personally. It's not like they are passing these bills so that Bill Cannon won't be equal. It's against one single class of citizens. But, for the life of me, I can't make equality less than personal.

Marital benefits

Federal
There are more than 1,100 federal laws relating to marriage that do not apply to same-sex couples, no matter the outcome of Measure 36 or a lawsuit before the Oregon Supreme Court contesting the marriage licenses issued this year to gay couples by Multonomah County.

The benefits include Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid payments, immigration, taxes and others.

Federal law also gives states the authority to not recognize same-sex marriages from other states. If Measure 36 passes, Oregon would be included, supporters say.

State
There are 279 state laws relating to marriage, including:
Joint state tax filing.

Automatic property and money inheritance without a will.

Medical and funeral decisions without a legal directive or will.

Entitlement to child-support money upon divorce.

Right to sue for wrongful death of a spouse.

No requirement to testify in court against a spouse or disclose any confidential information.

Entitlement to deceased spouse's retirement benefits and life insurance.

Right to transfer property and gifts between spouses without state taxation.

Civil unions
Civil unions may extend state benefits of marriage to gay couples, but other states and the federal government can choose not to recognize them. Federal benefits of marriage, such as joint federal tax filings, are not available to civil-union couples.

Benefits by contract
Many gay couples hire attorneys or draw up legal documents for medical directives and powers-of-attorney.

The contracts may be contested in court. They also may not be recognized in other states. For example, a medical directive does not have to be honored in a state where an Oregon couple is vacationing.

Gay and lesbian couples may own property jointly, adopt common children of the relationship, write wills, gain power of attorney for end-of-life decisions and medical care (unless one partner is still lawfully married).

There are many benefits provided by private companies that may or may not be available to same-sex couples, including family payment plans for health clubs, car insurance, health insurance and retirement plans. (source)

5:30am - Woke up to my 18 pound cat lying on top of me letting me know in his own way that "I'm the most wonderful person in his whole world".

5:45am - Kent comes in to wake me up. It's our "bagel day" at Charlies.

7:10am - Get to work. Feel blah. Work on SQL query problem and realize that it's too damn early for brainy work. Coffee hasn't kicked in yet.

10:30am - Realize that last week was the sixth anniversary of Matthew Shepard's death on October 12th, and I didn't even remember. I'm sad that I didn't, and now that I remember, wonder if anything has changed in Wyoming. I did a quick Google search, and found out that the Fireside Lounge where Matthew's killers met him has closed for lack of business. The Marriage Caravan Express, a bus load of 44 Californians traveling cross-country to campaign for same-sex marriage rights, stopped in Laramie. They had some support, and had a brief ceremony of remembrance outside the boarded up bar. I guess some support is better than what Matthew got. I wish I hadn't searched. Now my mind is going on this. Back to work.

12:20pm - Had lunch (don't ask where, it was a junk food place). The conservatives may be worried. Bill "sex fiend" O'Reilly (I don't personally mind sex fiends as long as they are honest about it, which he isn't) is saying that the race for President is going to be very close. That's good. New York City says it's sunny and beautiful out. I'm wondering what world they live in. Over me, it's cold and cloudy and is starting to drizzle. Back to work.

12:45pm - Read about throw away underwear at Gary's site. It's unsettling.

4:30pm - Completed SQL work and wrote some reports. Time to go home.

5:30pm - Went to the store and bought fillet mignon, portobello mushrooms, peppers, onions, pears (it all works, I promise) for a romantic dinner at home.

6:00pm - Get everything put away, and start marinating the steak. Build a fire in the fireplace with the new oak firewood I had delivered five weeks ago. Pour a glass of merlot, turn on the TV and listen to how much Bush has f@*&*ed up the world today.

6:30pm - Kent gets home. He gets the gas grill going outside and starts the steaks.

7:15pm - Start dinner, turn off the news, enjoy dinner. I go watch TV only to find that it is boring tonight. I opt for some music that I haven't heard in a long while. I listen to Sibelius Symphony No. 2. An awesome work. I'm reminded that the work comes from a different time when America stood for something better than bullying and intimidation. I can hear hope in the work and eventual triumph. Will we be so lucky today?

9:00pm - Go back downstairs and make a cup of Earl Grey tea (with raw sugar - I used to use honey from our own Coventry bees, but have switched to raw sugar for no logical reason, except for the fact that I am an ever-evolving person) to have with my fresh baked apple pie (small slice - girl has to watch his figure!).

9:30pm - Go to bed and hopefully sleep through the night. And on yeah... make this entry.

This is a change. A student who was harassed constantly from 1993 to 1998 because he was perceived to be gay, has lost his case against the school, because he is straight.

His sexual orientation has absolutely nothing to do with this. The reason for the harassment is irrelevant. The fact that the school did not stop it is totally relevant, and having the principal claim that they didn't have the resources to stop it completely is a cop out. You do what it takes to stop it. Because of this, Mr. Jubran's education and future have been compromised. I think that deserves a bit of consideration, and a hell of a lot more than $4,000 (which was overturned in the ruling).

(Vancouver, British Columbia) A former North Vancouver student who claims he was bullied for five years is appealing a court ruling that said because he is straight he wasn't protected under the law.

Azmi Jubran, had told the Human Rights Commission tribunal that even though he is not gay he was routinely called "faggot," "homo" and "gay" while attending Handsworth Secondary from 1993 to 1998. He had a variety of objects thrown at him and was kicked and spat upon. Students threatened to drop him in acid and to rape him with a broom. During a school camping trip his tent was urinated on.

Principal Terry Shaw testified he had never seen a student harassed as badly as Jubran was, but with almost 13,000 students and only 70 teachers, he didn't have the resources to stop it completely.

The tribunal condemned the attacks and awarded Jubran $4,000 in damages. But, the school board appealed and a judge overturned the commission decision saying that the bullying wasn't homophobic because Jubran is straight. (source)

The Ohio Supreme Court on Thursday rejected the last pending legal challenge to placing a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage and recognition of same-sex couples on the Nov. 2 ballot.

The court ruled 6-1 on technical grounds, saying it did not have jurisdiction over the claim, that opponents did not make their claim far enough ahead of the election and that a lower court had already ruled on the same issues.

"This thing is definitely going to go forward," said David Langdon, an attorney representing Cincinnati-based Citizens for Community Values, which gathered the signatures to place the issue on the ballot.

Opponents had argued the initiative was invalid because it lacked the required summary and certification from the Ohio attorney general, but they said they weren't surprised by Thursday's ruling. (source)

A new poll released this week shows Sen. John Kerry with a slight edge over President Bush among likely Oregon voters. Those same voters also appear to be leaning toward a ban on same-sex marriage in the state. (source)

I'm actually a bit surprised by this. I thought that Oregon would endorse Kerry, no surprise there. But I really didn't think they would be inclined to pass their gay marriage ban. I thought that of all the states that were looking at passing a state constitutional amendment, Oregon would have been the one to decline.

We'll wait and see what happens. If it does pass, what will happen to the marriage licenses issued to gay couples already? I thought they were a more liberal state. Shows what I know about Oregon.

My only experience with Oregon was the summer that Kent and I spent there back in 1976. We were going to summer school together. We were in Eugene, Oregon. It was raining and we came out of this store, both with our umbrellas open. This guy comes up to us and says to us, "Well, aren't we cute with our little umbrellas?"

He was trying to pick a fight because he didn't think that guys should use umbrellas. While he's standing there getting soaked, Kent turns to him and says, "Well thank you. We enjoy them."

With that, we walked away from him, got in our car, and drove away. He looked like he didn't know what the hell had just happened.

A military judge jailed on Thursday a U.S. army sergeant, described in court as a typical all-American boy, to eight years in prison for sexually and physically abusing Iraqi prisoners.

The sentence for Staff Sergeant Ivan "Chip" Frederick, 38, is by far the toughest of those handed down to three soldiers now convicted over abuses at Baghdad's Abu Ghraib prison. [...]

Frederick, who sat impassively through the two-day court martial at a U.S. base in Baghdad, appeared shaken and looked at the floor after judge Colonel James Pohl announced his verdict, which included a dishonorable discharge and a demotion. [...]

In his testimony on Wednesday, Frederick admitted beating and humiliating prisoners, saying he had been trying to prepare them for interrogation.

Frederick painted a picture of life inside the jail in which prisoners were stripped naked, sometimes with women's underwear put on their head and physically and mentally abused.

He also told how Iraqi police smuggled in guns and drugs for prisoners and how he was too scared to report the abuses.

"I was afraid of retaliation by other soldiers. We all walked around with loaded weapons. It was very high stress." (source)

Photos of abuses

A letter by Christopher Lelandm a novelist and professor of English at Wayne State University. It was posted today in the Detroit Free press.

Source: Slate

If you are like me, you are out there wondering what has happened to American politics. I am approaching fifty years old, and in my entire life, I don't remember the politics being so divisive and mean-spirited. I'm not just talking about the presidential race either. It's across the board, and both Democrats and Republicans are to blame.

The election can go either way at this point. I have no idea who will be elected President. When I hear stories about firms hired to register voters throwing away voter registrations they feel belong to Democrats, I suppose the whole election is up for grabs. And then of course, as with every election it seems, we start hearing stories around this time about how we lack voting machines that are accurate.

As a citizen, I do not want Bush to be our President for four more years. I think he has failed our country in Iraq. I don't feel we are any safer now than we were four years ago. If anything, he has made us more of a target by pissing the entire world off at us. I don't like the way he has divided our country and turned so many of us against each other. In so many areas, he has done to this country what Osama bin Laden was unable to do, turn us against each other.

The Republican Party has been bought, it seems to me, by the radical religious right. Abortion, gay marriage, and school prayer, all have meaning in the religious arena. But, in terms of civil policy, they do not and should not have a say. We call this the separation of church and state, and the line must be drawn in clear and concise terms. At the present, we have a government that is hell bent on severely blurring that line, and much public policy is being formed based solely on religious grounds. That's very dangerous.

At the state level, 12 states will vote on November 2nd on whether to pass a state constitutional amendment outlawing gay marriage and, in some cases, even the ability for gay couples to form legal contracts or civil unions. In those states, the arguments being presented against doing that are based on how it will effect unmarried heterosexual couples and what negative legal effects it may inadvertently have on them. No thought is given to how it will effect the legal arrangements of gay couples. They are, after all, people too, aren't they? Are they not still, American citizens?

Think about that for a minute. They are actually placing an amendment into their constitution for the soul purpose of limiting the rights afforded to citizens. All of this is based on religious dogma. It has nothing to do with protecting marriage or protecting children, and the proponents of these hateful amendments can provide no reasonable examples of how allowing gay couples to marry will harm the current state of marriage. It is simple bigotry wrapped up in religious thought and imposing itself into civil matters. The alarming thing is, it's working. We are allowing this to happen.

So, what happens to those of us who don't buy into the religious dogma. Well, we are the outsiders. Right now, in this year, the easy target is homosexual couples. But don't expect that to last. Once the states have finished applying discrimination against gay couples into their state constitutions (and I believe most all of them will succeed in doing that), someone else, some other group, will be the next target. This is the slippery slope that we are going down.

And all of this flies in the face of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution which states that no State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. It is extremely troubling to me that we are about to have twelve states abridge the privileges of a significant number of their citizens, and deny them equal protection of the laws and yet, no one seems to care.

So if we get to the point that our own United States Constitution no longer matters, what does that leave us with? Answer: a religious state governed by the views of the religious majority.

I took a long walk today at lunch time. I've been depressed lately. When I turn on the news, it's more of the same. Finger pointing and accusations. Right now, the topic is finding who is to blame for the shortage of flu shots. Tomorrow, it will be something else.

So today, I made a decision. In a couple of weeks, my partner and I will officially be voted into second-class citizenship by millions of my fellow citizens in possibly twelve states in this great country of ours. I've reconciled myself that. It was a bitter pill to swallow, but I've done it.

Although I may live long enough to see some sort of recognition of the relationship I have with my partner of 30 years in my state of Connecticut, I will never live long enough to get married in the United States to see it federally recognized. I've reconciled myself that as well. I will never realize what it feels like to be a full fledged citizen with equal rights to everyone else in this country.

So it would seem that my depression isn't because of me. It is because we are about to truly live in a class system where there are not only different economic levels of citizens, but, there will be a class of citizens who do not have equal rights. We've been through this before in this country, and for the first time in my life, I understand exactly the frustration and disappointment that lead to the race riots in this country.

What am I going to do about it? One thing. I'm going to stop caring so much about issues and people who obviously care nothing for us. Today on my walk, I realized that aside from my country declaring openly that I will not be able to be equal, I've always known that I haven't been equal. Yes, I've been able to sustain a lasting relationship with the man I love, buy a home together, live a quiet life together, and, through it all, have happiness in our home. I am going to go back to that. I'm going to go back to simple joys, such as lighting a fire in the fire place on a cold night, making some hot spiced apple cider, and talking to Kent about our day, our lives, and what really matters, our love for each other.

The following editorial appeared today in the Daily Campus, the student newspaper at the University of Connecticut.

It is on a topic that I have been fighting with the Red Cross over for a long time. It's nice to see that some are striving for fairness.

Earlier this month, UConn held its annual blood drive. In accordance with Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulations, people at an increased risk of HIV/AIDS were not allowed to donate. In its Blood Donation Eligibility Guidelines, the Red Cross describes being "a male who has had sex with another male since 1977, even once" as one of the risk factors for infection that makes an individual ineligible to donate blood. This guideline singles out gay men and should be applied to all people who have had unprotected sex.

It is a lifelong restriction and its vague wording does not specify the nature of the sex act. The sexual experiences of gay men vary widely, but the FDA chooses to group all men who have sex with men together and impose harsh restrictions on their ability to donate blood. In contrast, a man who has had unprotected sex with a woman, or a woman has had any sort of unprotected sex, only must wait one year. The same lax ceiling applies to a person who has had unprotected intercourse with a prostitute or an intravenous drug user. This is a slap in the face of all gay men from a usually respectable organization.

An FDA panel agreed to continue to restrict men who have engaged in homosexual activities after reviewing the guideline in 2000 because "they did not have enough scientific evidence" to revise it. Even with the advanced testing implemented in 1999, an FDA officer estimated that two HIV-positive units would be released a year if men were allowed to donate five years after their last homosexual encounter.

The nature of HIV makes a five-year limit too short. After initially manifesting flu-like symptoms, HIV can remain asymptomatic for many years and AIDS usually does not develop for 12 to 13 years. Although the virus is multiplying in the body during this time, the tests the American Red Cross uses to detect it are not 100 percent accurate and they are susceptible to human error. A more cautious waiting period would be 15 years from the at-risk activity - no one should contract HIV from a blood transfusion.

The 15-year period should apply to all people who have had unprotected sex, not just homosexual men. It does not treat everybody equally. The FDA should not limit individuals from donating blood based on who they have had sex with, but on whether or not the sex was protected. It's easy to dismiss the emergency of AIDS if one imagines it is restricted to only one marginalized social group. But the rise of HIV/AIDS infections in homosexual men has slowed and it is time to recognize that AIDS can affect all of us.

Opinion letters from the New York Post that I found interesting.

John Kerry and John Edwards have shown themselves to be two no-class guys by each bringing up Dick Cheney's lesbian daughter, Mary, for no good reason at the debates.

Both of these men, Kerry and Edwards are without substance.
Pete Calogero
Brooklyn

---

Did Kerry take a cheap shot at Mary Cheney?

Sure, he did.

But it pales in comparison to the cheap shot against an entire class of Americans that the Republicans have taken by sponsoring the federal marriage amendment.

It is the height of hypocrisy for the Cheneys and the Republican Party to cry foul about the stigmatization of one private citizen — who happens to be a campaign employee — when their demagoguery disparages all gay Americans.

Dennis Feldman
Manhattan

I don't get it. Republicans are up in arms that Kerry and Edwards mentioned in passing that Mary Cheney is gay. In this morning's New York Times, columnist Bill Safire wrote this:

The memoir about the Kerry-Edwards campaign that will be the best seller will reveal the debate rehearsal aimed at focusing national attention on the fact that Vice President Cheney has a daughter who is a lesbian.

That this twice-delivered low blow was deliberate is indisputable. The first shot was taken by John Edwards, seizing a moderator's opening to smarmily compliment the Cheneys for loving their openly gay daughter, Mary. The vice president thanked him and yielded the remaining 80 seconds of his time; obviously it was not a diversion he was willing to prolong.

Until that moment, only political junkies knew that a member of the Cheney family serving on the campaign staff was homosexual. The vice president, to show it was no secret or anything his family was ashamed of, had referred to it briefly twice this year, but the press - respecting family privacy - had properly not made it a big deal. The percentage of voters aware of Mary Cheney's sexual orientation was tiny.

The lowest blow, New York Times, 10/18/2004

Only if a tiny percentage of voters watched the Vice Presidential debate in 2000.

Only if Alan Simpson, a long-time friend of the Cheneys, also delivered a low blow during celebrations at President Bush's inauguration:

In his opening remarks, Mr. Simpson noted, "Not one of us doesn't have someone close to us who is gay or lesbian." Then he invoked Mary Cheney, the daughter of the vice president, who attended the inauguration with her partner. Mr. Simpson said that after Ms. Cheney said she was a lesbian, her father, Dick Cheney, "protected and loved her as his very special, special daughter." (NYT 1/26/2001)

Kerry and Edwards deserve an apology from Safire and his ilk. Mentioning that Mary Cheney is a lesbian is no more embarassing than mentioning that Lynne Cheney is married. Safire will, I hope, assert his essential decency by apologizing with sincerity.

(You'll have to read the last paragraph of the Safire column to understand the last sentence.)

It's been a hectic few days. I had some big projects at work that have been pulling my time away from personal things I'd like to accomplish, such as enjoying the fall colors. With two big projects wrapped up yesterday, I'm hoping to get some hiking and fall color watching in this weekend.

Last night I took Kent to Cavey's in Manchester. They have two restaurants. The upstairs is Italian and the downstairs is French. We went to the French restaurant. It was absolutely an awesome evening. We each had new dishes and I actually learned that I love Foie Gras! They make a mean martini and the wine list is well, pretty much anything you can imagine, right down to a 1955 Mouton Rothschild for $1,255. We opted not to get that bottle because we thought it would be a bit heavy for the dinner.

We didn't have dessert because I had a chocolate mousse cake make just for the occasion.

My birthday is December 31st. I will be the big 5-0 this year (hard to believe, no snickers from the audience and yes, everything still works thank you very much!), and want to do something wonderful! So, we are thinking of coming down to New York City for a fun time. Any of you NYC bloggers reading this have any ideas for us?

A few things in the news of interest that I should mention.

New York State to honor Canadian marriages for state workers
In Albany, New York, gay partners of New York state government workers who were married in Canada are entitled to the same public pension benefits as married heterosexuals in the state of New York, determined in a landmark ruling on Oct. 14, 2004 by state Comptroller Alan Hevesi. Of course, this has touched of a furor among conservative groups, with Governor Pataki reviewing the ruling.

NYC Mayor Sues To Block Gay Benefits
New York Mayor Bloomberg is suing to overturn a law that would force companies doing business with the city to offer benefits to the domestic partners of their employees.

In May, the legislation was passed by city council. It was then vetoed the following month by Bloomberg who said that the law would “hurt the city”. Two weeks later, the council overrode his veto by a 41 - 4 vote.

The legislation is to take effect October 26. It would require contractors that do more than $100,000 of business each year with NYC to offer the equal benefits.

The legislation would have made health coverage available to tens of thousands of additional people in the New York City region and because many companies which do business with New York are national corporations it could also provide same-sex benefits to hundreds of thousands of people across the country.

San Francisco has the same policy. They force companies who do business with the city to conform to the city's non-discrimination policy for gay people. United Airlines, who has a huge hub in San Francisco refused to honor it, saying it would cost them too much. After negotiations with United Airlines and San Francisco broke down, San Francisco told United that all contracts would be voided and they could relocate to some other city. United changed it's mind.

Sometimes, it takes brass balls to end discrimination and to have courage. Mayor Bloomberg, if I may, YOU HAVE NO BALLS!

Investigation into Trashed Voter Registrations
This is really disturbing and just goes to show you how far some will go to ensure that one candidate wins the presidency.

An employee of a private voter registration firm alleges that his bosses trashed registration forms filled out by Democratic voters because they only wanted to sign up Republican voters. [...]

“They were thrown away in the trash. I grabbed them out,” said Eric Russell. One of those forms belonged to Daren Gray, who was shocked to learn that the re-registration form he filled out was never turned in.

“I'm pretty mad, upset. I'm still gonna vote,” said Daren Gray. Russell doesn't know how many democratic registrations were tossed in the trash but guesses the number could be very high since Voters Outreach of America operated in Las Vegas for more than two months.

So, the registrations of those that were thrown out will think they will be able to vote on election day. When they show up at the polls, they will find that they were never registered and will not be able to cast their vote. When you start doing this, how much of democracy do you have left?

Recruiters on campus collide with Don't Ask, Don't Tell Policy

In a week in which Yale Law School celebrated the 25th anniversary of its non-discrimination recruitment policy, federal legislation that would stiffen penalties on colleges which ban military recruiters moved to within one step from becoming law.

If signed by President Bush, the bill, which sailed through Congress on Saturday with an overwhelming majority, would suspend federal funding to colleges that block U.S. Department of Defense recruiters from campus. Many universities, including Yale, had kept the recruiters from their campuses because the military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy on sexual orientation violates the schools' non-discrimination policies.

And they can get away with this because the homosexual community is the last group of citizens that can still be discriminated against. This will change in time folks. Don't loose your hope and your faith. My personal feeling in regards to don't ask, don't tell is that it's days are numbered. I wouldn't be surprised that within two years from now (if Kerry is elected), it will be gone. The reason: we are loosing too many troops in the war, enlistment of those who can serve is low, and morale is low. They have a stop-loss policy in place just to keep those who are in, and yes, that includes the gay service members. That means, for the sake of this war, they are willing to turn away from the policy to keep members. Talk about hypocrisy.

I also feel that the basic makeup of military personnel have changed. Sure, you will always have the bigots around who don't want to serve with a gay service member, but attitudes have changed just since ten years ago. Most people don't care as long as they can rely on you and you do your job.

I spotted this letter in the Lexington Minuteman.

Who can say why gay marriage is bad?

Thursday, October 14, 2004

I am still waiting for someone who is against gay marriage to explain how it affects him or her. Catherine Ryan's commentary of last week is a case in point. She said that the gay community “has many valid issues that should be addressed, but not at the wholesale destruction of the traditional family.” And then she stopped.

I have heard and read this statement often since last spring, but no one explains it. I do not understand why widening human rights negatively affects those who already enjoy those rights.

My husband and I have a “traditional family,” and we are grateful for the societal and legal supports we have to be strong partners and to raise our children. Our family is not threatened by gay marriage. In fact, our family life is enhanced by our knowing that our friends and neighbors who are gay have the same legal protections and supports to raise their families.

Why would anyone want to deny basic human rights to a whole segment of our society? It isn't just. It isn't fair. It simply is not right.

Margaret Micholet

Eastern High beating may have been gay bashing

By TODD HEYWOOD

The brutal attack at Eastern High School last month may have been an act of gay bashing, possibly resulting from homosexual panic.

Lansing police Detective James Gill and Ingham County prosecutor Stuart Dunnings III have both confirmed that homosexuality appears to have been a factor in the severe beating of the 16-year-old student on Sept. 17. The victim remains hospitalized.

Police arrested Jeremy Lee, 17, who was charged with assault. He is now in Ingham County Jail.

Authorities said the victim is believed to be gay. When asked if the victim’s sexual orientation was the motivation in the Sept. 17 attack, Gill said, “Yes. That is correct.”

Authorities said the attack apparently stems from a verbal confrontation Lee and the victim had last year, when they were both students at Walter French Academy, the defunct charter school. “I think the defendant made an innuendo that the victim might be gay,” Dunnings said of last year’s incident, “and the victim came back with, 'That's OK, I suck your dick.'”

Lee claimed he went to Eastern on the day of the beating to pick up academic records and only saw the other student by accident. Gill said Lee told him he had gone to Eastern “to drop out.”

“He said he heard music coming from a room,” Gill continued. “He went to the room, and the victim came out and brushed up against him. The accused started thinking about what had happened at Walter French and started hitting him.”

But a school official disputes Lee’s contention that he was at Eastern to pick up records. “He was not a student at the school,” Mark Mayes, a spokesman for the Lansing School District, said. “There were no records pertaining to him at the school. He had no legitimate reason to be at the school.”

Jeffrey Montgomery, executive director of the Triangle Foundation in Detroit, said “gay panic” could be involved. Lawyers argued in the Matthew Shepard and Jenny Jones cases, among others, that that the defendants became violent after their sexual orientation was questioned.

“From what’s known about this incident, it seems clear to me it is a very good case of gay panic,” Montgomery said. “We all know gay panic is a potent motive to do damage, sometimes irreparable damage, to victims.”

The Triangle Foundation monitors and tracks hate crimes and other acts of discrimination against the gay community in Michigan.

Lee's attorney, Greg Bell, says he does not believe that homosexuality was a factor in the attack. He said Lee has told him what the motivations were, but Bell declined to discuss them.

Lee has been charged with assault with intent to do great bodily harm less than murder. He is being held on $100,000 bail pending an Oct. 13 court appearance.

The victim, who was in a medically induced coma until recently, is awake but unable to talk, Gill said. The victim does recognize his mother and grandmother, added Gill, but remains in critical condition.

The attack was caught on the school’s security cameras. The assault has led district officials to implement a plan that requires students to keep their student IDs visible.

The hottest post-presidential debate chatter Thursday wasn't about the whereabouts of Osama bin Laden, the high cost of health care or wayward scowls. It was over the appropriateness of discussing the sexual orientation of Mary Cheney, the lesbian daughter of Vice President Dick Cheney.

While the Kerry/Edwards-Cheney family spat made for good sound bites, experts say it was little more than late-season politics at its most partisan.

Mary's mother, Lynne Cheney, said Democratic presidential nominee Sen. John Kerry was “not a good man” for mentioning her 34-year-old daughter's lesbianism during Wednesday's debate. Dick Cheney said Thursday that he was “an angry father.” (source)

On my way home last night, they were discussing this on the radio. The show I was listening to was a talk/news show. Some of it is tongue-in-cheek. One announcer stated that although Cheney has referred to his daughter as “gay”, he has never referred to her as a “lesbian”. Perhaps he was upset because, although he knew she was “gay”, he didn't yet know that she was a “lesbian”!

I almost drove my car off the road laughing.

My opinion in this. In the vice presidential debate, it was Cheney who brought up his daughter being gay. He initiated this. It is a well know fact that she is gay (I don't say that proudly) so, as some has mentioned, Kerry did not “out” Mary Cheney.

Having mentioned his daughter's gayness in the vice presidential debate, she became fair game. Vice President Cheney is the one who opened the door on this. And, Kerry said nothing derogatory what so ever about Mary. The context of his even mentioning her was to show the family strength of everyone who was running.

Cheney is merely using this, as he does everything else, as a political ploy. He seriously needs to grow up.

That's very discouraging to have to say, but it is the truth. We shouldn't be surprised after November 2nd. This is the reality that we face in this country. I fully expect that all the states with a proposed state constitutional amendment will easily pass.

Oregon isn't the only state where voters are grappling with the question of gay marriage.

It's just more intense here.

Ten other states have constitutional amendments similar to Measure 36, which would amend the state constitution to define marriage as between one man and one woman, on their ballots Nov. 2.

According to a Sept. 28 New York Times article, support for the measures is more widespread in other states than here in Oregon. Voters in Arkansas, Georgia, Kentucky, Michigan, Mississippi, Montana, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma and Utah are all expected to pass the measure by an easy margin - some, like Kentucky, by as much as 75 percent. (source)

I had a revelation last night. The revelation came to me in our difficult battle for marriage rights. The President has said that when people get a taste of freedom, they want more. I would submit that the same holds for equality. My personal struggle in the fight for equal marriage rights for our partnerships has been an emotional one, as any reader of this blog will attest too. But why has it been so personal? Why have the emotions over this been so raw to me? I've been through many personal battles in my life. Some have dealt with family acceptance, while others were fighting hospitals for the decency to allow the partners of those afflicted with AIDS to visit their partners.

I didn't realize at the time that what I was fighting was not a hospital that wouldn't recognize the relationship of a gay couple. I thought it was a gay issue. I thought that because at the time, I was struggling day to day to just make the lives of my friends a bit more bearable. They were struggling with life and death decisions. I didn't feel that they should have to fight hospital staff for something as simple as holding and comforting each other.

But that wasn't it. The thought of marriage making issues like this go away never occurred to me. You see, I'm a product of my surroundings, and this society. I've grown up with the notion that marriage is the union of a man and a woman. Not because that was drilled into my head. It never came up. It also never occurred to me that it wasn't right that I shouldn't be able to have access to marriage with my partner to make my life as fulfilling as it could be. I never thought that there would be a possibility that I would be able to realize marriage in my life.

On the other side of that coin, it was drilled in to my head loud and clear how loathsome homosexuality was. We've all heard the derogatory gay jokes and had to sit there and laugh along with everyone else, just to keep our secret. Sometimes, these jokes would surface in the most unsuspecting places, such as Thanksgiving Dinner, or at Christmas time, or in a casual chat with people you thought of as friends. That was my environment.

So now that the marriage carrot has been dangled in front of us, what do we feel? For the first time in my life, I have the HOPE FOR EQUALITY. And like freedom, I want it! I want it more than anything. I want it so bad that I can almost taste it. I want to be a full member of society. I want to stop feeling bitter about not being a full member of society. I want to take pride again in my country because we are all equal under the law.

Last night at the debate, I once again heard both President Bush and Senator Kerry say that they both believe that marriage is between a man and a woman. Neither one support equality for gay couples. Senator Kerry did say that he believes that the government should support civil-union-type liberties for gay couples, such as hospital visitation and inheritance. But, he didn't explain how he was going to do that, and I question his sincerity. Why shouldn't I? He and President Bush are throwing numbers and statements around all over the place and marketing them as facts when there are so many untruths that it boggles the mind.

If Kerry is elected President, this civil union type of liberty will fall under the same priority as don't ask, don't tell. It's a nice idea to get rid of don't ask, don't tell, because we are at war, still kicking out gay service members who are fully qualified to do the job, yet asking straight troops to stay in and be deployed time after time to the point of exhaustion. So, if we can't get rid of don't ask, don't tell, what makes you think that civil union type liberties will be a priority for Senator Kerry?

Aside from all of this, one thing that I think gets overlooked is the fact that gay couples are being talked about. Think about it. In the last election, gay marriage was not even on the scope of discussion. Several times during the presidential debates, the issues that gay couples face in their fight for equality have come up in debate questions. That is significant.

One question raised last night surprised me a bit:

SCHIEFFER: Mr. President, let's get back to economic issues. But let's shift to some other questions here.

Both of you are opposed to gay marriage. But to understand how you have come to that conclusion, I want to ask you a more basic question. Do you believe homosexuality is a choice?

The question has nothing to do with gay couples or gay marriage, but really speaks to something much deeper; If being a homosexual is not a choice, how then can we as a free society morally justify the systematic discrimination that exists against homosexuals in society?

In 38 states, it is still fully legal to fire a homosexual for no other reason but the fact that he/she is a homosexual. The Federal Government has time and time again declined to issue federal civil rights protections for homosexuals. Just this year, House Republicans rejected a Senate-approved proposal to include crimes targeting gay men and lesbians in the nation's federal hate-crimes law.

Of course, we could just skip all the expensive scientific research to try to figure out if being gay is a choice, and simply ask a real live homosexual, like me.

My base answer is: Yes, of course it's a choice! I couldn't wait to choose to be gay. I love to feel threatened day in and day out with verbal and physical assaults, being called a faggot on an average of once a week because I dare to not hide what I am, feeling like I'm a second-class citizen, feeling rejection from my family and some friends, risk being fired from my job, and, at the end of the day, wonder if I have any real self worth accompanied by the occasional bouts of depression that make me wonder if life is really worth it. Who wouldn't want that?

But I will spare you my base answer and just say, no, being gay is not a choice. I've known I was gay since I was six years old. I didn't know what gay was then, but I knew I was different from other boys. At age 9, I had my first crush on a boy. And all of this without once making a decision to be... different.

As for Mr. Kerry and Mr. Bush, I would only ask them, "When did you decide to be straight?"

Ohio Gov. Bob Taft says he will cast a "no" vote on Election Day on Issue 1, the proposed constitutional amendment that would ban gay marriage in the state.

In a statement, Taft said he has decided the amendment is unnecessary considering Ohio's Defense of Marriage Act, which states that marriage is the union of one man and one woman.

Taft also said he thinks the amendment's language is too broad and is "an ambiguous invitation to litigation that will result in unintended consequences for senior citizens and for any two persons who share living accommodations." (source)

I've had many discussions with people about the need for laws specifically to add time to the punishment resulting from a crime that was committed because of bias against some individual because of race, religion, or sexual orientation. Many well read people will come to the conclusion that all crimes are hate crimes.

That has always bothered me, because it seems like a cop out and it belittles the nature of the crime. Let's take a glaring example. Matthew Shepard was given such a severe beating, that he lapsed into a coma and died in a hospital five days later. You can say that the crime was horrible and that there are already laws on the books to punish that. That's true. The boys who did that to Matthew are each facing two life sentences, to be served consecutively. They will never set foot outside the prison that holds them, until they die of old age. I think justice was served. Sure, except for the death penalty, you could punish them more by just adding more time.

But what about crimes such as the one described below? The purpose of hate crime legislation is to try to prevent the crime from happening in the first place. The impetus for the crime itself was biased that was carried to a violent conclusion. Hate crime legislation would punish not the biased itself, but would punish that violent acting out of that biased, even if significant injuries didn't result from the assault.

The police are calling the crime below a hate crime. Yet, Texas has no hate crime law. No additional time will be taken into consideration for the biased.

Many will disagree with me on this. I realize that. But, I've seen first hand what hate can do. People are free to hate anyone they wish, but if they act on that hate thinking they will get away with it, we end up with crimes like the one described below.

What do you think?

Further reading
Should Crimes Against Gays Be Considered Hate Crimes?

A 17 year old high school student is badly beaten, in what police are calling a hate crime. The Cleburne, Texas, high school senior is suffering several broken bones in his face. Police say he was at a party, when he was beaten because his attackers believed he was a homosexual. Three teenagers are now in police custody. All 3 boys are charged with 2nd degree felony aggravated assault. (source)

Female relatives of gay men have bigger than average families, a controversial study into the biological basis of homosexuality reveals.

However, this was only the case when the women were related to the man through his mother, the study found.

The findings are important because they provide an explanation for an apparent contradiction of the “gay gene” theory, which implies that if homosexuality is genetic then its determining genes would die out as gay men tend to have fewer children than heterosexual men.

However, the problem is resolved if the genetic factors that lead to a predisposition to homosexuality and a corresponding lower fecundity in men cause a higher fecundity in the men's female relatives. Such a link means that genetic factors that predispose boys to becoming homosexual will never die out in a population because their sisters, mothers and maternal aunts will continue to spread the genes by having more than the average number of children. (source)

Hummmm... Well, that doesn't hold true in my family. I'm not sure what constitutes average, but I would venture to say you would have to have more than three kids to be average, at least in the United States. I'm also the only gay guy in my whole family, as far as I know. Maybe homosexuality just runs in some families more than other families. I've known twins brothers who were both gay, as well as their sister, who is a lesbian. In my family, just me.

Also, what about lesbians? I wonder if they have their own study. Come on girls! Don't hold out on us!

Further reading

I first wrote about this a year ago on September 29, 2003, and again on October 1, 2003.

The Sandals Caribbean resort company has now decided that gay couples can stay at their 13 resorts. How nice of them. I don't know what prompted the change in their policy. I suppose it was public pressure or perhaps a loss in revenue.

Whatever caused it, it's not enough for me. Trust and loyalty have to be earned, and simply saying that we can stay there now is not enough. Coors beer did the same thing years ago and our community is still boycotting them, to a large extent because of their on-again-off-again tactics towards our community. Some at Coors welcome our patronage, some don't.

Discrimination is wrong and there should be a price to pay for doing it. The price as far as I'm concerned is a lack of my patronage. If Sandals wants to truly show that they are sincere, perhaps a contribution to a cause within our community should be considered. For me, that would go a long ways in showing their sincerity.

A holiday company which turned away gay couples from its resorts unexpectedly lifted the ban last night in the face of a campaign by an ex-government minister and sexual equality groups.

Sandals, the Caribbean resort company, announced it was lifting its ban on same-sex couples from 13 resorts, just before a spokesman was due to appear to defend its policy with the former minister, Barbara Roche, on BBC Radio 4's Today pro gramme this morning. The company has resorts in Jamaica, St Lucia, Antigua and Bahamas.

Sandals was under commercial pressure from London's mayor, Ken Livingstone, who had banned its advertisements from the tube because of its homophobic attitude to clients. Mr Livingstone was seeking to extend the ban to London's taxis. (source)

“In Texas, there is a history of devaluing the lives of gay men and lesbians, which means people who murder them tend to receive lighter sentence because of who their victims are. But today justice was done. This is the first time a gay basher has been convicted of capital murder in Texas.”

Those were the words of Dianne Hardy-Garcia of the Lesbian and Gay Rights Lobby back in 1994 after Donald Aldrich was sentenced to death in Texas for the murder of Nicholas West, a young gay man in Tyler, Texas.

Today, Donald Aldrich is scheduled to be executed in Texas for the murder of Nicholas West. Another accomplice, Henry Earl Dunn was previously executed in February 2003 for the same crime. And, a third man, David McMillan, who was 17 at the time of the attack, received a life prison term.

In testimony, Dunn said he was at the Bergfield Park in Tyler, Texas on November 30, 1993. The park was known as a homosexual meeting spot where West, a medical clerk, was lured under the guise of seeking sex but was abducted and taken to a remote area of Smith County. There West was stripped, ordered to his knees and shot as many as 15 times.

Mr. Aldrich justified his actions by saying, “If you can walk into a 7-11 and rob a 7-11 for 15, 20 bucks, get your face on videotape, have somebody that's gonna call the police; or if you can go into a park, rob somebody that's out in the dark, come away with a hell of a lot more - because of the fact that they're homosexual and they don't want people to know it, they're not gonna go report it to the police. Who you gonna go rob? Where you're gonna get in the least amount of trouble.”

And that is the crux of the problem, isn't it? They felt they could pull this off because of society's attitude towards homosexuals. This was the third robbery and beating they had done that week, all of homosexual men. None of victims reported the crime. I can't help but think that society holds some blame for this. If there had been a place for Nicholas and others like him to meet without being harassed, would this have happened? We are social animals. We will do what we can to be with people we connect with. Nicholas was no different from any of the rest of us.

I used to be against the death penalty. I'm still not sure where I stand on it, to be totally honest. I am against the taking of life - all life, but I've concluded that I'm not even qualified to offer an opinion. The real qualification comes from being on the side of Nicholas West, where the bullets were being fired, where the assault was being inflicted. He is the one who received unimaginable pain and suffering, to say nothing of the absolute horror he must have endured. If we are to offer a fair judgment on if we are for or against the death penalty, we should have to feel what Nicholas felt as well. And that's just not possible. He's gone, and by the end of this day, another one of his killers will be gone as well.

One thing that surprised me was that Donald Aldrich has a website. On this site, he posted an article that appeared in the Houston Chronicle on July 22, 2004. It read:

July 22, 2004

Suit challenges injection makeup

By HARVEY RICE, Houston Chronicle

A death row inmate has filed a lawsuit accusing Texas of using chemicals in its lethal injections that violate the constitutional ban on causing unusual pain and suffering.

The lawsuit by Donald Loren Aldrich, 39, sentenced to death for the 1992 hate slaying of a gay man, is one of a growing number of lawsuits alleging the use of lethal injection by Texas and other states violates the Eighth Amendment prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment.

It's amazing to me that Mr. Aldrich can say that lethal injection is cruel, given that he, Mr. Dunn, and Mr. McMillan lead Nicholas West to his death where they stripped him of his clothes, taunted him, and slowly and methodically shot him to death with 15 bullets. Surely, lethal injection will be far more merciful than the death Nicholas faced at their hands.

Further coverage:
Inmate to die Tuesday in slaying of gay Tyler man
Killing the Killers of Nicholas West
From the Attorney General of Texas on Henry Dunn
10/12/2004 - Donald Aldrich executed
10/13/2004 - Aldrich Execution Gives Closure

Following is the what happened that night. I will warn you that it is very graphic. But, I think it should be remembered, because of what Nicholas had to endure that night.

A week or so ago, I did a search on the Internet for a lawyer. I didn't pick just any lawyer, because our needs are not ordinary. I found one and called her. As with any lawyer I suppose, I got her answering machine, and left a message. Three days later, I got a call back.

I explained to her that we are a gay couple, and I wanted to know how to protect what he have together. Unlike heterosexual couples that have the protection of marriage that deal with many of these things, we have to try to secure what we can through legal documents and just hope that they are honored. In other words, we try to rig the system into honoring a relationship that legally doesn't exist. To the law, after thirty years of being together, Kent and I are “legal strangers”.

After we talked with her, we realized that we made a very wise decision in choosing her over a lawyer that does not specialize in all the “gotchas” of law, where gay relationships are concerned.

But it was depressing. We both now have to decide a lot of issues. When she is done, we will have a will, power of attorney, and many other documents. She strongly suggested that we carry some of the documents with us when we travel, in case we are in an accident. I asked her why we would have to do that. None of my friends and acquaintances do, to my knowledge. With each question I asked, she painted a scenario for me, based on what has happened with other gay couples that she had represented. In the case of an accident where say, Kent, is hospitalized, I would have to present the document to the hospital and hope that they would give me visitation rights to see Kent. They wouldn't have to as there is no legal reason for them to do so, other than this document drafted by a lawyer stating that is our wish. She told us that if we were to have the accident in Connecticut, Massachusetts, California, New York, or Vermont, we would probably be ok. Other than that, she said, it all depends on what the hospital wants to do. In a conservative state, we would probably have a problem.

So, where does that leave us?

After that meeting, I became depressed. I thought that the depression was due to the fact that the answers our lawyer needs are dealing with our life and death decisions. In that regard, we are no different than anyone else. But there's more to it than that. I was never so naive to think that with legal documents we would be fully protected. What really became clear to me is just how messed up this country is for gay people. We tell ourselves that we are a free country. We tell ourselves that we all have equal opportunity and equal freedom.

It's all crap.

We aren't free. We aren't equal. I don't even feel like I can be openly affectionate towards Kent in public. I have a great fear of that. I know at the very least we will be called faggots. It's happened before when we've tried to be open. At most, one or both of us will be physically assaulted. Is that freedom? Is that equality? In North Hampton, Massachusetts, where we were yesterday, I don't even feel like we can be open, and it is in a very liberal environment. When we take vacations, we have to look for a place that is gay friendly to every extent possible. Why? Very simple. So that we, for a little while at least, can go to a place where maybe, just maybe, we can actually be who we are and not be afraid, just for a little while. So, last night at dinner, I pondered this to Kent and said, “Maybe if we come back again in another life, it will be better.”

There are those among us who want to make us legally less than equal, and that seems to be ok with my fellow Americans. Why is that ok? Why am I so bad that a state amendment would be put in place to protect certain legal and civil institutions such as marriage from someone like me? Are you listening Ohio? You, and many other states will make this decision on November 2nd to decide what rights I will get and what rights I will be denied. And I can't do a damn thing about it. It is predicted that most of the state amendments making gay marriage illegal will pass with ease. So, what does this say about America? What does it say about the people around me – my fellow Americans?

I've lost my hope for America. I've lost my pride in America. And, I've lost my faith in the American People being fair. We talk about the Constitution of the United States. We hold it up high and say with pride, “This is what we are about. This is what America is about.” Yeah right. It's what America is about, until we want to change it. If the principle of freedom and equal rights is sound, that can't be changed because some don't like others within our society. This is what will happen on November 2nd. And most Americans who aren't gay, won't give a damn about that, as long as it doesn't effect them.

Kent and I talked about leaving America. I never thought that would happen. I would have given my life for this country. Somewhere along the way, America changed and turned into a country of bitterness and sub-communities who don't seem to care much for each other.

We have talked that if George W. Bush gains re-election, he will most likely be able to appoint more conservative judges to the U.S. Supreme Court. We will see more of the same and perhaps with four more years with him as President, the Constitutional Amendment against gay marriage will gain momentum. Anything can happen. We have already gone down a path that prior to 9/11 I would not have imagined. Is what happened on 9/11 connected to the marginalization of certain groups of people in this country?

On another issue that came up in our discussion with our lawyer, was the issue of what should be done with us after we are gone. What about our home, our possessions, and even our bodies? We have both chosen to be cremated, and have talked about buying a plot in a small local cemetery not far from our home. It's a nice peaceful cemetery on a small hill. In the cemetery are some very old graves dating back one hundred and fifty years. But we starting thinking about something that shouldn't even be a consideration. Our tomb stone will have our names on it. It will undoubtedly look like we were a gay couple together for life. I imagine that our grave will be the target of vandalism and destruction. Even though I most likely wouldn't know about it, it's like the final insult to our love together. So, we have started to even rethink that. I guess at this point, we are just thinking of having our ashes scattered some place, without a trace that we ever existed.

Maybe that's not all bad. Why stay in a place that's so dark?

I read this absolutely awesome letter that captures so much of what I feel. I wanted to share it. It was spotted on Oregon State student newspaper.

Measure 36: What can gay people do?

by Sanjai Tripathi

The text of Measure 36 reads as follows: “It is the policy of Oregon, and its political subdivisions, that only a marriage between one man and one woman shall be valid or legally recognized as a marriage.” That means no gay marriages.

Pretend you are gay for the next 10 minutes. Some of you already are, but for everyone else, just imagine you always had your “evil eye” on people of the same sex. You probably wished it was different, that you could be “normal” like all your friends, but eventually you realized that it's just the way you are.

It's a decent time to be gay. We haven't quite achieved the enlightened society, but we seem to be coming to an inflection point. There have certainly been worse times.

Hitler had homosexuals sent to concentration camps and killed. He was afraid they would pollute the gene pool. That seems a bit counterintuitive, doesn't it?

In the 1980s when they discovered AIDS, they first called it GRID for Gay Related Immunodeficiency Disease -- this, despite the fact that certain immigrant groups and hemophiliacs seemed to also have a high incidence of disease. Imagine how the poor hemophiliacs felt when they were told they were dying from a “gay disease.”

The topic was so unmentionable at the time that President Ronald Reagan didn't even say “AIDS” in his eight years in office. Imagine how many lives would have been saved if he had had the courage to take action.

So same sex marriage = child molestation and bestiality?

Kent and I love each other. We share everything together. We have a house together. We visited an attorney yesterday to try to protect ourselves because we cannot get married. We are exactly like any heterosexual couple in love, with one very small difference.

So, if heterosexual marriages haven't lead to greater child molestation or bestiality, why would our marriages be any different? I don't know about you, but I've never wanted to be with a goat.

Complete morons.

If gay and lesbian couples are allowed to marry, Smith added, he believes it eventually will lead to granting legal protection to marriages involving more than two people, and to such sexual behaviors as child molestation or bestiality. (source)

As with most issues being discussed during the presidential and vice presidential debates, you have to take the facts with a grain of salt. It seems that the candidates disagree on just about everything, yet every candidate has his own set of facts to back up what he is saying. The fact that his facts completely contradict the facts of the other candidate doesn't really seem to matter much to them. What set of facts are we, the voters, suppose to believe?

One topic all the candidates have been consistent in is marriage rights for gay couples. Kerry/Edwards don't believe gay couples should be able to get married. The believe that gay couples should be able to form civil unions (separate but equal, hopefully, but I doubt it). We assume that they are talking about civil union recognition by the Federal Government in addition to the states, but they have never really been pinned down on this subject to that extent.

The Republican ticket is a bit more conflicted on the subject. Bush believes that gay couples should not have recognition by the Federal Government or the states. He advocates an amendment to the U.S. Constitution to prevent gay couples from ever achieving marriage at the federal and state level. I would also venture to guess that he would also have an issue with gay couples even having civil union status. He's a bigot, but at least he's an honest bigot, on this topic at least.

Vice President Cheney is a complete and total wuss on this issue. There's no other way to say it. He believes that the states should be able to decide for themselves the best way to address (treat) gay couples. He therefore doesn't think the President should pursue an amendment to the U.S. Constitution, but will stay out of the President's way because the President “makes policy” and he (Cheney) will support the President.

Mary Cheney, how does it make you feel that your own father thinks that the relationship you will have with your partner is just second rate, at best? I would really like to know, because I just don't understand how someone in your situation can sit around all these months and hear all the discussion coming from the White House on the amendment, and say nothing. You have done nothing but help your party use our community, your community, as a political football to win votes. It's sickening and pathetic.

I give Kerry/Edwards a “D” on this. Bush/Cheney get an “F”.

Cheney Accused Of Flip Flopping On Gay Marriage In VP Debate (ChicagoPride.com)

When the candidates were asked about same-sex marriage and the need for a constitutional amendment that is being pushed by Bush, Cheney reiterated his position from earlier in the campaign.

Cheney, with his daughter Mary an out lesbian in the audience, spoke supportively about gay relationships and said that “people ought to be free to choose any arrangement they want.” But, he acknowledged that Bush supports passage of a constitutional marriage to ban gay marriage, and said, “He sets policy for this administration, and I support him.”

Edwards said it was obvious that the Cheneys loved their daughter and that “you can't have anything but respect” for them. “I believe marriage is between a man and a woman and so does John Kerry,” Edwards said. But, he added, “We should not use the Constitution to divide this country.”

Cheney was offered an opportunity to respond and used it to thank Edwards for his “kind remarks” about his family, but declined to refute Edwards charge that Republicans were using gays to maintain support from the party's conservative base.

“Tonight we saw the worst kind of flip flop,” said Human Rights Campaign President Cheryl Jacques.

I read this letter from the UCONN student newspaper, The Daily Campus. All I can say is, it was a good thing I wasn't there.

OK, so it has been almost a week and I am still sick to my stomach every time I think about last week's football game. How many of you had a great time at the Pitt football game last Thursday? How many of you think you will remember that game for the rest of your life? Well I for one will never, ever forget that game. Unfortunately, I probably won't remember it for all the good things that happened on and off the field. Overpowering the fun is frustration, fear and anger. All it took was one man, three letters, a few beers, a poor guy named Nuzie and silence.

"Nuzie, You suck you f-ing [homosexual]!"

After my appointment with my cardiologist Tuesday, I was feeling a bit down. I decided to go to one of my favorite places to just be quiet. The nice thing about living in Connecticut is that you don't have to go far to be in a nice place. I'll share a couple of photos from my trip below.

A mushroom I came across on my way to the lake.

This is one of my favorite places to just sit and reflect. I had the whole lake all to myself. It was so peaceful. The fall colors are starting.

[T]he following facts are simply indisputable. The fundamental rationale for the war - the threat from Saddam's existing stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction - was wrong. Period. In the conduct of the war, it is equally indisputable that the administration simply didn't anticipate the insurgency we now face, and because of that, is struggling to rescue the effort from becoming a dangerous mess. Period. So the question becomes: how can an administration be re-elected after so patently misjudging the two most important aspects of the central issue in front of us? It may end up as simple as that. Maybe, in fact, it should end up as simple as that.

Andrew Sullivan, "The underlying fact", October 7, 2004

If you read Andrew Sullivan, you know that he was a vigorous and vocal supporter of the invasion of Iraq. In fact, earlier in the above entry he makes it clear that he still thinks it was right to start the war. I disagreed with him on that, but this one he's got exactly right. We cannot re-elect a President whose judgment is so grievously flawed.

A state judge Tuesday threw out a Louisiana constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, less than three weeks after it was overwhelmingly approved by the voters.

District Judge William Morvant said the amendment was flawed as drawn up by the Legislature because it had more than one purpose: banning not only gay marriage but also civil unions. (source)

This was the good new of my day. I had hope that the Louisiana amendment against gay marriage would be tossed out. Not only did the amendment prohibit gay marriage, but it would have also have banned civil unions as well. All in all, a pretty mean spirited piece of legislative crap.

The exact wording was:

Amendment No. 1, Regular Session, 2004, A JOINT RESOLUTION

“Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of Louisiana, to enact Article XII, Section 15, relative to marriage; to require that marriage in the state shall consist only of the union of one man and one woman; to provide that the legal incidents of marriage shall be conferred only upon such union; to prohibit the validation or recognition of the legal status of any union of unmarried individuals; to prohibit the recognition of a marriage contracted in another jurisdiction which is not the union of one man and one woman; to provide for submission of the proposed amendment to the electors and provide a ballot proposition; and to provide for related matters.” (source)

In time, every sad ending will become happy.

The sad ending is only because the author stops telling the story.

But it still goes on.

It's just untold.

From the movie Twin Falls Idaho

Think about it.

I spotted this letter to the editor in a Maryland paper. I get hope from people like this who are friends who are straight. I'm fortunate to have many in my life.

Gay bashers have some unpleasant company

I am not a homosexual. I have friends who are. Contrary to the hate letters condemning them that have been published in The Herald-Mail recently, I've yet to be bitten on the neck and my blood sucked dry by any of them, nor have I turned to a pillar of salt by shaking their hands, nor has Satan paid me a midnight visit.

Is he really red like in the old fables and does he still have horns and carry a pitchfork? I should probably address this question to the authors of the homophobic letters since they seem to know how all souls on Earth are supposed to be.

Some other questions for you saints who write paranoid letters about homosexuals: Did you know the KKK shares your hate position, as did the Nazis, who sent the gays off to gas chambers? And let us not forget those paragons of Christian virtue, the Spanish Inquisitors, who quite naturally murdered many an "unnatural" gay. Would it surprise you to know the greatest writer of all time, Shakespeare, wrote his love sonnets to another man?

If only those darn Elizabethans had strung up old William, then we wouldn't have had to suffer reading that stupid "Hamlet" in high school.

Also if those Renaissance folks would have crucified old Leonardo da Vinci (yes, a gay), then we wouldn't have any prints of Jesus in "The Last Supper" to put up on our walls.

Your observation regarding homosexuals as being "unnatural" is so astute, it's plain to see in nature only male and female beavers fall in love, and thus should a male and a female human - 'cause we're just like beavers, although how do we explain the tail and bark chewing?

Back to my friends. They hold down responsible jobs and pay taxes, and do not seek to influence others, but only to be left alone with a little measure of dignity.

Who do they think they are? They act like they're comfortable with the way they are and that we shouldn't make a big deal about their difference and shouldn't make fun of them behind their backs. They expect the government to recognize some sort of civil union between life partners so they can inherit property and have health insurance benefits.

We should banish them to some place in town - in the middle so we can watch that they don't do anything "unnatural?" Give the males interior-design magazines and the females basketballs and take away their pens and pencils? God forbid they produce another writer like our national treasure Tennessee Williams. There's enough boring poetry and plays already in the world.

Bush has been complaining a lot about Kerry's “global test” lately, which is odd for two reasons. First, it was barely a throwaway line, not a serious proposal that we'd put defense of the United States up to a vote by world leaders. Second, because there's ample precedent for something similar:

“When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.” (emphasis added)

-- from The Declaration of Independence of the Thirteen Colonies

Thank's to Jack O'Toole for reminding me.

It's been a nice weekend. I was able to sleep in both days and the weather has cooperated. The leaves on the trees around our neighborhood are slowly changing and the temperatures are cooling. I love autumn in New England. It is really a very magical time. And the changing colors of the trees are at times breathtaking. I do look forward to this time of year, but after Halloween, for me, it's winter. Life in New England would be perfect if it weren't for winter. I just hate it. But, we are going to San Diego this year for Christmas, so at least that will give us a break from the cold weather a bit.

I published the presidential debate transcripts. Why? I suppose because I've become very aware that most people are so terribly misinformed. They don't read the newspaper or really have any opinions of their own. A few things have made me realize this in the last few days.

The first came as I was sitting in my doctor's office Thursday afternoon. I went to see him because of what I thought was asthma. I described a tightness in my chest when an episode would occur. The funny thing is that I never had a shortness of breath or had difficulty in breathing, something that I would associate with an asthma attack. I told him that it almost feels like a panic attack coming on, but then instead of turning into a panic attack, it peters out. He then started asking me questions very directed at what I was feeling; the tightness occurring followed by a rush of energy. I thought, “my God, he knows what I have”. He looked at me and said, “You know, gay men have given us so much great music!”. We talked about that for awhile. He asked his assistant to do an ECG on me. An ECG for asthma?

It seems that my heart beats 10% slower than it should. He was concerned about this. It's caused me extreme fatigue in the evenings especially. After 7:00pm I've been wiped out. When it gets too slow, my body uses what is at it's disposal to stimulate my heart, namely, adrenaline. That's the rush I feel, then it goes away. He sent me to a cardiologist and I will have to wear a monitor for a 24 hour period sometime this week. So, all of this has caused me some concern, but I'm off subject.

I love my doctor. He's so open with me and can say anything to me. He's totally awesome. As he's examining me, he said, “So, when are you two going to get married?” I stated to say something and he went into this story of a woman who came into his office. She was in her late fifties, Hispanic, and alone at home. Her kids were grown and her husband had passed away. Somehow, the subject of who the best person for President came up. She said, “I'm voting for Bush so we don't have gay marriage.”

My doctor asked her, “Is that the only reason? Do you know about any of the policies of his administration and what is going on in Iraq because of those policies?” She admitted that she didn't. He then looked at her in a very serious way and said, “Well, vote however you wish, but you should know that Jesus was gay.” He even quoted scripture to back it up. Well, with that little bit of knowledge, as she was leaving the office, she informed everyone that she would be voting for Kerry.

The story amazed me but sadly, I believe it. We are not informed and I'm starting to even wonder if we have any common sense in this country. The day after the debate, people were saying that they thought the debate was a tie! My take on the debate is this, in plain terms. Bush got his ass handed to him on a silver platter. How anyone could think of that debate as a tie is beyond me. How many times did the President say, “It's tough work”. He's the President of the United States. The parents who sacrificed their sons and daughters to this stupid war in Iraq that didn't have to happen, deserve better than “It's tough work”. He's a total and complete moron.

The gay marriage issue is a major issue for me, but despite that, I'm not and never will be a single-issue voter. I think his policies on foreign affairs are downright dangers, his policies on the environment are reckless, and his “compassionate conservatism” is an oxymoron. Equally frightening is his complete and utter lack of knowledge on how things work in a general sense, along with the people he surrounds himself with.

I've come to realize that prejudice and the lack of understanding of other people go hand in hand. It's not that people are bad or evil, but their beliefs and action can lead to evil deeds. I was talking to my brother on the phone today, and he made a comment about Jews and how they like money. He also said that most of this country's problem comes from our support of Israel. I love my brother. But, I'm sure that he doesn't know one Jew and as far as he is aware, has never met a Jew. It reminds me of the time I was in grade school when my best friend was a little black child. I didn't see his color. He was simply my friend. Then, one day, my brother said to me, “Don't play with his kind.” I had no idea what he was talking about. That was my first experience with prejudice. Not long after that, my friend's family were burned out of their home by the good people of Emmett. Don't bother looking it up on the Internet. You will find no trace of it, any more than you will find so many other lynchings that have occurred against black people in the past.

I have made it a point to have everything to do with other people different from myself. I have many Jewish friends that I love dearly. They have enriched my life in indeterminable ways. I'm still not ok with Gefilte Fish yet, but I'm working on it.

Will we ever as a people get over our petty differences and learn to care about each other, not despite our differences, but because of them? This is truly what is wrong with this nation today and sadly, our President is characteristic of the problem.

The lease is up on my car and we've ordered a new one. It has to be built apparently and won't get here until Dec.-Jan. time frame. I was going to try to get a smaller car this time, but it didn't work that way. We decided to get a four door and a larger car for going out to dinner with people and other social occasions.

But the weird thing in this car is all the "stuff" it comes with. Satellite radio and a Navigation computer. I honestly didn't think I needed all of that but Kent reminded me how bad my sense of direction is. This thing tells you when to turn how far to go, where the restaurants are, gas stations, emergency rooms, you name it.

It's weird to have a car talk to you. The wave of the future I guess, but I remember my grandmother's old Studebaker. It was ugly green, reliable, and had a charm about it. And, in a pinch, us kids could use it as a slide. Now that's a cool car!

And back then, we didn't have "car payments". You could either buy the car or you didn't have a car. Life was simpler then; the days when I was 7-8 years old and before I got my first crush on a boy friend who never even knew I had a crush on him.

The Spanish government approved a bill to legalise homosexual marriages, which will make it only the third country in Europe to condone same-sex marriages -- but the move sparked fury within a still influential Roman Catholic Church.

The plan, which will also give gay couples the right to adopt, “recognises all rights for homosexuals, when it comes to qualifying for a pension, administering an estate, asking for a loan, authorising surgery for a partner but also to adopt a child,” cabinet spokeswoman Maria Teresa Fernandez de la Vega said.

Spain “is in the forefront of Europe and of the world in the struggle against centuries of discrimination,” de la Vega said, adding that about four million of Spain's 40 million inhabitants, or 10 percent were homosexual.

To date, gay marriages are only legal in Europe in Belgium and the Netherlands -- though only the Netherlands allows gay couples to adopt. Similar unions are legal in six Canadian provinces and the US state of Massachusetts.

The plan, which is to come into force next year once it obtains parliamentary approval, has been fiercely opposed by Spain's Roman Catholic Church, whose influence remains high if declining. (source)

WASHINGTON - The House emphatically rejected a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage Thursday, the latest in a string of conservative pet causes advanced by Republican leaders in the run-up to Election Day.

The vote was 227-186 - 49 votes shy of the two-thirds needed for approval of an amendment that President Bush backed but the Senate had previously scuttled.

“God created Adam and Eve, He didn't create Adam and Steve,” said Rep. Roscoe Bartlett, R-Md., on behalf of a measure that supporters said was designed to protect an institution as old as civilization itself.

Democrats countered that Republicans were motivated by election-year politics as much as anything, particularly since a Senate vote this year ended any immediate chance the amendment could be sent to the states for ratification. (source)

So much for keeping religion out of our civil laws. This is the mentality of the people leading our nation and the best they can come up with is “God created Adam and Eve, He didn't create Adam and Steve.”? And just for the record, how does he know what God's plan is?