Journal Archives from theDreamworld ... February 2004

February 2004

February 29, 2004

Today, being the 29th of February, is a day that doesn't usually exist. If only that had been the case.

Around taking my grandmother to church and fixing meals for us, I have spent the day revising my thesis, as has been the case for the last few days. Christiana has been generous enough to read through a copy I e.mailed to her, and she has made comments. Some comments were quite useful, and I made certain changes that do seem to have improved the language at certain points. Some other comments made no sense to me whatsoever, and I disregarded them. The real problem came with the end comments from Christiana, overall comments about the organization of the paper and its arguments, about the approach in terms of theory, and about the methods of citation. In retrospect, I suspect that Christiana wrote those comments quickly and while she was tired, but when I read through them this morning I was devastated. She basically didn't like a number of things about the thesis and thought that I could (and have) done much better. To a large extent she didn't even seem to like the paper much at all. After all of these days of feeling less stressed and even reenergized, I was immediately depressed. It makes me think that I'm completely fucked up to be this easily upset to such a degree, but that realization doesn't make me any less depressed.

I spent a couple hours, around dinner, playing at a game of Civilization III on my computer to try to get my mind off of things and feel successful at something. That helped a bit, and I went back to work on my thesis, but I still wasn't very upbeat.

Fortunately, Sarah called me not too long after that. She had begun working on reviewing my thesis (I had e.mailed her as well for suggestions). She was only about half way through, but she told me she really liked it so far, even though she had suggestions for certain revisions throughout. She brought my spirits up quite a bit, and after I got off of the phone with her I started to make some revisions based on some comments she had made while we talked. We talked again later, just a few minutes ago, and she e.mailed me a marked revision. She is really pleased with the overall argument and likes the thesis a lot. She still has certain issues here and there, but I couldn't fault any of her suggestions. I have yet to see every detail of suggested change within her revised copy, but based on everything we talked about, I think most of her comments will be very useful.

So now I'm feeling better, a bit more positive, and I am about to jump back in and make some more revisions based on Sarah's suggestions. Time is running short, but I'm on track to get this done. Sarah and Christiana have been great help. Granted, Christiana got me a bit freaked out, but she meant well - she was just trying to be honest, and that's one of the things I appreciate most about her. And both her comments and Sarah's are helping me see the thesis through different eyes. That's good.

Now, back to work.

Posted at 10:09 PM

February 28, 2004

My break for dinner tonight included watching Andromeda, the Gene Roddenberry-inspired sci-fi show starring Kevin Sorbo, the guy who used to play Hercules. During the first season of andromeda, I was entranced. It was simply an incredible show with fantastic special effects, good characters, and great writing. I couldn't wait until the next Saturday afternoon to see a new episode, and I was constantly rewarded with one good episode after another. During the second season, there was a great deal of change, and I'll admit that I saw no purpose in the changes and couldn't understand why the direction of the show was being rewritten. The episodes were still good, but not as incredibly fantastic as they had been in the first season. I just felt that maybe it was me and not the show. Now, in this third season, I know that it's not me at all. The show is being changed more and more and being made worse and worse. Whereas I used to be impressed and amazed by each new episode, now I am stymied and sickened by the crappy quality of each episode, specifically the writing. Each time I have watched the show this season it has sucked horribly, and I have given up hope that it will improve. In fact, I wonder each week when I will read somewhere that the show has been cancelled - it's simply inevitable, as I see it.

So that was sort of a disappointing break for me today. Once you get down to it, Saturdays pretty much suck across the board for tv. There aren't any good morning cartoons anymore; there aren't any good afternoon series; and there's nothing worthwhile in prime time. The only thing worth watching at all on Saturdays is Teen Titans on the Cartoon Network, and not only does it not come on until 10 PM, but the new episodes repeat on Sunday night anyhow if I were to miss it on Saturday. All of this is not meant to make it sound like I'm a tv junkie, which is certainly not the case. I'm just really disappointed that there's nothing worthwhile on tv on Saturdays. Saturday used to be my favorite day of the week because I'd relax most all of the day and enjoy fun and funny tv and read and relax. While I could still read and relax, it's just not the same. I guess I just miss what used to be a fairly enjoyable time for me.

I can only hope that someday there will once again be something enjoyable about Saturdays so that I can have my happy day back. Wah. :(

Posted at 9:30 PM

February 27, 2004

I am making progress on my thesis, and I'm pleased with how it's coming along, but it's amazing how long it takes to revise 45 pages of theory and critical argument. Part of me is really excited by getting this to pull together and get finished, and it's a relief to be sure, but a part of me just wants it to be over, and it's still a bit of a struggle to make sure that I keep to the task at hand and don't allow myself to "take a break" or something else that will let me wander away.

I do have different things I need to do for my grandmother, and those activities break up my time for working on the thesis (or any school project) quite a bit, but as long as I come back to work on the thesis as soon as I'm done with helping her, I'm fine. It's just the desire to take a few minutes to lie down and watch the Powerpuff Girls or listen to a couple songs from an album or check out new stuff on the sites I follow on the web. I get distracted very easily at times, and keeping focused on the thesis, particularly for so many days straight without a break is very trying (and it's my own fault since I have left everything to be finished in this small amount of time before the final due date).

Anyhow, enough whining for today. The thesis is getting better and better and I'm really applying myself to getting it finished. Another couple of days and I'll be all set, and this thesis will be done for good.

Posted at 12:37 AM

February 26, 2004

I have been back at work on the thesis for a number of days now, not just plodding along making no progress as has been the case over the past two months. Since I got the extension at the end of last semester (or, more accurately, taken the Incomplete), I have poked and prodded the thesis in the few available hours 5've had here and there around other projects. First I thought I'd finish it over Winter Break, then by the end of the first two weeks of school while things weren't so hectic, and now finally as I rush towards a final deadline of March 1st as a final deadline for Incompletes to be completed (although Phil is going to let me meet with him on the 1st to discuss final changes, and he'll take the absolute final version on the 3rd).

The difference is that for the first time in a long time, I'm making progress. I'm even actually thinking about the thesis when I'm not working on it, and my interest in the whole project has finally come back to me. For a long time there, I couldn't stand to think of the damn thing, let alone look at it, and it seemed absolutely impossible to do the work that needed to be done. I am happy to say that the past few days (since Sunday) have been very productive, and the whole thesis is now written. Even more amazing, I have made some major structural and stylistic changes that make the argument much more cohesive and make the paper flow much more smoothly. I am at a point now where I have to revise the language quite a bit - the introduction, particularly, is rather awkward and rough - but that sort of tweaking isn't so draining as the other work has been.

I only have this weekend to wrap it all up, and the current length of the thesis is now about 45 pages, so revising, improving, and tweaking the language isn't going to happen quickly simply because there's so much to wade through. I'm really pleased to finally be seeing this pull together, though, and I'm very excited about having this over and done with before the end of next week, which will be the beginning of my Spring Break. Then I can relax a bit.

Posted at 12:43 AM

February 25, 2004

Surely you're all sick of my continuous attention to the gay marriage issue, and surely you're also more than tired of me posting copies of news articles into my Journal rather than writing something from my own mind, but I was incredibly impressed with Wil Wheaton's response to Emperor Bush's "holy decree" about supporting a constitutional amendment promoting bigotry. Like I say, I was extremely impressed by Wil's blog entry, and I'm hoping you will be as well.

This Ocean Will Not Be Grasped

I wrote this hours ago, and I've debated whether or not I should post it. This is an incredibly divisive issue, and I'm sure that I will end up on more of those stupid boycott lists because of this, and that's probably not the smartest business move, considering that I have a book coming out in less than two weeks . . . but I have to stand up for my beliefs, so here it is:

When I heard that George W. Bush had called for an amendment to the Constitution that would effectively codify homosexuals as second-class citizens, I recalled something Howard Dean said recently:

In 1968, Richard Nixon won the White House. He did it in a shameful way--by dividing Americans against one another, stirring up racial prejudices, and bringing out the worst in people.

They called it the "Southern Strategy," and the Republicans have been using it ever since. Nixon pioneered it, and Ronald Reagan perfected it, using phrases like "racial quotas" and "welfare queens" to convince white Americans that minorities were to blame for all of America's problems.

The Republican Party would never win elections if they came out and said their core agenda was about selling America piece by piece to their campaign contributors and making sure that wealth and power is concentrated in the hands of a few. To distract people from their real agenda, they run elections based on race, dividing us, instead of uniting us . . .

Dean was right. Just read that again, and replace "racial prejudices" with "sexual prejudices."

I hate it when I agree with politicians, but John Kerry said what I thought as soon as I heard the news:

"This president can't talk about jobs. He can't talk about health care. He can't talk about a foreign policy which has driven away allies and weakened the United States, so he is looking for a wedge issue to divide the American people."

Personally, I don't think the government should be involved in marriage in any way. I believe that marriage is between two people who love each other, who wish to make a commitment to stay together through good times and bad. I suppose that it can also be between those people and whatever god they choose to worship, but even then . . . wouldn't it be stupid for the government to tell couples which god can bless their marriage? And who cares what sex they are?

An interesting thing has happened since San Francisco started granting marriage licenses to same-sex couples: my marriage is just fine!

That's right. Even though there are thousands of gay and lesbian couples affirming their love for and commitment to each other, my marriage -- my affirmation of love and commitment to Anne -- isn't threatened at all. As a matter of fact, the only people who can really "threaten" my marriage are . . . well . . . the two of us.

And this brings me to the first thing that's so profoundly upsetting about this entire issue: it's not about marriage, it's not about love, it's not about family, it's not about commitment. It's about hating homosexuals. It's about treating homosexuals as if they are second-class citizens. It's about dividing this country into those who support discrimination, and those who don't. It's about Karl Rove updating The Southern Strategy.

It comes as no surprise to me that, as part of that strategy, George W. Bush wants to take the Constitution, a document that is supposed to limit government and guarantee freedoms to all Americans, away from millions of our fellow citizens who are homosexual. I didn't buy the "I'm a uniter, not a divider, compassionate conservative" bullshit during the 2000 campaign, and this is just another example of Mr. Bush revealing his true colors. And this argument that it's a response to "activist judges?" That's a huge load of crap too. Mr. Bush has a lot of nerve talking about "activist judges," considering that he owes his presidency to five of them.

Ultra-Conservative writer Andrew Sullivan said it best, I think:

The president launched a war today against the civil rights of gay citizens and their families. And just as importantly, he launched a war to defile the most sacred document in the land. Rather than allow the contentious and difficult issue of equal marriage rights to be fought over in the states, rather than let politics and the law take their course, rather than keep the Constitution out of the culture wars, this president wants to drag the very founding document into his re-election campaign. He is proposing to remove civil rights from one group of American citizens - and do so in the Constitution itself. The message could not be plainer: these citizens do not fully belong in America. Their relationships must be stigmatized in the very Constitution itself. The document that should be uniting the country will now be used to divide it, to single out a group of people for discrimination itself, and to do so for narrow electoral purposes. Not since the horrifying legacy of Constitutional racial discrimination in this country has such a goal been even thought of, let alone pursued. Those of us who supported this president in 2000, who have backed him whole-heartedly during the war, who have endured scorn from our peers as a result, who trusted that this president was indeed a uniter rather than a divider, now know the truth.

Yes, I am shocked that I agree with Andrew Sullivan about anything, but that just illustrates how insane this idea is, and how it transcends political ideology.

Now, I have no doubt that this effort will fail. I believe that it will ultimately backfire on the Bush Administration, and contribute to his defeat in November. The United States just isn't the Theocracy that Mr. Bush wants to create.

There is a wonderful opportunity here, though, that I haven't heard anyone talk about, yet: we are now forced, as a nation, to acknowledge and confront the widespread discrimination against gays and lesbians, and I believe that Americans will unite against segregation now, just as we did during the Civil Rights movement.

I believe in America. I believe in the Bill of Rights, and the founding principals of this nation. I believe that goodness, compassion, and tolerance will triumph over hatred, bigotry, and ignorance.

And I am proud to stand up for these beliefs, whatever the consequences.

Posted at 1:39 AM

February 24, 2004

Fuck you, George W. Bush. Fuck you with a rusted, jagged metal dildo.

It is bad enough that the bigots of America ::cough::Republicans::cough:: want to support this Constitutional amendment bullshit, and it pisses me off that even the Democrats aren't very respectable in my estimation considering they still are trying to walk the centerline of this controversy and not support basic human rights, something that is supposed to be a major tenet of their entire party platform. Bush, however, has garnered all of my ire because he not only is determined to promulgate his bigoted ideas upon the masses, but he is clearly planning to use the issue of gay marriage as a divisive argument against the Democrats in his bid for reelection. While I shouldn't be at all surprised (and I'm not), I am disgusted with a so-called President of this country who would try to win his presidency at the expense of hard-working, patriotic Americans who just happen to be gay.

Fucking son-of-a-bitch bastard. Do the country a favor and choke on another pretzel.

Posted at 10:06 PM

February 23, 2004

I read an article about sleep deprivation a few days ago, and it has gotten me thinking. The standard belief is that people need 8 hours of sleep for the body to function well. While there are many disagreements about this - some stating that 5 or 6 is enough or that 10 are required, all depending upon the person being discussed - the average thought is that 8 hours is the base. I have known this for years, but I have also known that I can get by well on 5 or 6 hours without feeling sleepy during the day.

This article says, however, that while a person may not feel sleepy when they are sleep deprived, the body is sluggish and troubled in ways due to insufficient sleep. Get these possibilities due to insufficient sleep: high blood pressure, heart disease, reduced resistance to viruses, depression, reduced productivity, poor performance in school or work. You'll notice that I have four of those items in abundance, high blood pressure, depression, reduced productivity, and poor performance in school (at least this least one applies to this semester). Add to that the fact that I am often complaining that I just plain feel tired and worn out, and it seems like a pretty compelling case of sleep deprivation.

When you get down to it, I can honestly say that I generally only get seven hours of sleep most nights. Sometimes I get 8, sometimes 6 or less. This semester, I have probably only been getting 5-7 hours a night and never any more than that. Even assuming that 8 is enough (not the tv show, but 8 hours being enough for me to sleep), I'm falling short. And if my body naturally needs more than 8 hours, even 9, then I'm seriously lagging.

It would be ridiculous to think that my depression is simply due to a lack of sleep. I have deep-seated problems that I trouble over, and I'm lonely and have self-appreciation issues (among other things). But lack of sleep could play a big role in things, possibly even being more important than any possibility of some chemical imbalance in my brain causing things to "bring on da funk."

Now the problem is actually getting more sleep. I'd like to get more sleep and see if I feel better physically and emotionally. The problem is that I don't see how I can do that when I'm already struggling to get things done both around the house and for school. Maybe over Spring Break I can sleep a full night's rest every night. It sounds rather appealing, actually. Hopefully that will work out. A vacation of sleep sounds heavenly. In two weeks we'll see if that can happen.

Posted at 1:47 AM

February 22, 2004

Ralph Nader declared that he'll run for President as an Independent candidate. Some people are claiming he's just an egomaniac, and I'd have to agree, considering he hasn't aligned himself with any party, even the Green party me represented in the last presidential election. I like some of Nader's ideas, to be honest, and I certainly like the straightforward way he talks (consider this line from Meet the Press this morning: "George Bush is just a corporation in the White House disguised as a human being."), but he will inevitably draw voters more from the Democrats than from the Republicans because he is more liberal than any other candidate. He claims that the Democratic candidates are less of a problem than George Bush, yet he knowingly will take away Democratic votes that will likely be very necessary to defeat Bush in the election.

I am very much a supporter of having more political parties than just the two we have now in America. We need a number of other parties who are represented in positions throughout the government; only then can we have a variety of viewpoints expressed and voted upon regarding all issues. Unfortunately, Nader is making a mockery of this need. He claims to support breaking the "duopoly" of two party rule in America, yet he isn't even represented by a party. He is doing this on his own. If he truly supported seeing other parties rise into prominence, he would run as part of a defined party, not on his own. The only conclusion is exactly what Nader is being blamed for - ego. He wants to do this himself, and he thinks he is all that. Well, he's not, and hopefully he won't draw away voters who are definitely needed to defeat Bush.

Posted at 1:44 AM

February 21, 2004

Most of you have probably never really noticed, but I actively avoid making any sort of mention of religion or religious reference on this website. For the most part, I see value in all religions; each religion has very valuable aspects and each has the potential for causing trouble somehow. While I was raised as a Methodist, I was exposed to a wide variety of religions during field trips that were part of our confirmation as part of what our pastor set up. Being the natural cynic that I am, I take any organized religion with a solid dose of skepticism - any group that wants 10% or more of your earned money (before taxes) should always be held suspect, and anything they say is almost assuredly self-serving. But what about the Bible or the Koran or the Torah or the ... well whatever, there are too many to list. What about them? Well, they are all documents written by men. To say they are dictated in his own words by God (or whatever version of God/Allah we're referencing here) is beyond my scientific/rational mind; even to suggest that those religious texts are inspired by God is, I think, possibly a stretch. I can accept that certain people were inspired by their god to write, possibly even with some sense of detail, but the bottom line is that some human being ended up doing the writing, and human beings are flawed. That means they can hear things wrong, transcribe things wrong, or get things wrong in any number of other ways. In fact, all of the religious texts that are used in our world have been translated so many times from their earlier, archaic languages, that it's hard to say if the translations actually mean what was originally intended. So basically, I'm skeptical of all organized religion and all religious texts. Do I believe in God? Well, that pretty much depends on the moment you ask me. I alternately believe and don't believe in God. The times that I do believe in God, I am convinced that he is a sadistic, capricious bastard. One way or another, religion isn't a strong point for me. I can appreciate that it is for other people; I can even somewhat envy them their faith because it seems to give them so much comfort when the universe shits on them. My biggest problem is people forcing their religion or their religious ideas and morals upon others, whether individually through evangelism or collectively through holy wars. Everyone should have the right to believe as they choose, but that means that they should respect everyone else and not try to force their beliefs on others.

As I said at the beginning of this, I have avoided writing about religion or using any religious references in this website because, partly, I don't want to offend anyone, and partly because I find it difficult to articulate my exact position and my dislike for certain aspects of religion without sounding like I'm attacking someone's beliefs. I can't stress enough that I believe everyone should be able to believe in what they choose, but they shouldn't force others to share their views.

So you ask yourself, if you have made this conscious avoidance of writing about religion on your website, why change now? Well, I read a commentary in a newspaper recently (from the San Francisco Chronicle), and it very eloquently stated my position on religion while using examples that are current events. I decided to share, but I wanted to explain my own position on religion first, since I haven't really done so before. So here's the column. See what you think.

Is Your Religion Unsanitary? Is God Telling You to Love War? Loathe Gays? Restrict Women? Join the Godless Throngs Now!
by Mark Morford, SF Gate Columnist

Is your god really, really angry right now?

Is your god telling you, like it tells G.W. Bush every night, that your unwanted unprovoked ultraviolent war against a nearly defenseless nation is not only justified and righteous, but is His deepest wish?

And does your religion tell you, like it tells so many of the Christian Right, that homosexuals are a dire threat to humankind and should be stopped at all costs before the so-called gay agenda sneaks into the playground and the drinking water and the "Spongebob" scripts and starts covertly converting our blessed innocent hetero children to a life of sin?

Or maybe it instructs that gay people are simply misled, morally derailed by a hunky leather-clad Satan with great hair and Prada sandals, and, despite that sad fact, they are still all God's children and should therefore be pitied and patronized and helped over their "sickness?"

Is your religion telling you that women who dare to control their own bodies and sexual reproductive powers should be shut down and restricted by legislation and deep guilt and electroshock therapy, and the doctors who treat them imprisoned if not beaten with sticks and set on fire?

Or maybe you say no, it's not like that at all, it's much milder and nicer than that. Maybe your religion, like the carefully spoon-fed religion of millions of Americans, is quieter, calmer, a little more numbly sinister. Maybe your religion, like so many modern incarnations of dogma, is telling you simply to have faith. Does this sound familiar?

Maybe it's telling you to not think too much about the horrors and complexities and odd sexual orientations of the world, that they are simply too ugly and debauched and convoluted to really understand for mere mortals, and if you just leave it up to God and let Him sort it all out, everything will be fine. This is the church line. It has worked for centuries. It is still working today.

God has a plan, after all. This is what they say. He has an incredibly obtuse and impossibly dense master blueprint that explains all the war and death and burned babies in Iraq, all the cancer and animal cruelty and Lynne Cheney, and you are just too small and unevolved to possibly understand, or do anything about it. Right? Well, no.

Because if it is, if your religion is telling you any of these things, you might want to reconsider your options. You might want to consider dumping the whole thing and becoming one of the outcasts, one among the godless throngs, one of the spiritually inquisitive, one of the sacredly self-defined.

You might wish to radically change your perspective and your worldview, to forgo the doctrines and the pious gooey safety net of a sanctimonious religion that pretends to know all the answers, and go it alone, figure it out for yourself -- before it's too late and you end up shriveled and miserable and dead. As the saying goes, it's never too late to have a happy karma.

That great genius heretic Joseph Campbell summed it up best when he said, "The wicked thing about both the little and the great 'collective faiths', prehistoric and historic, is that they all, without exception, pretend to hold encompassed in their ritualized mythologies all of the truth ever to be known.

"They are therefore cursed, and they curse all who accept them, with what I shall call the 'error of the found truth,' or, in mythological language, the sin against the Holy Ghost.

"They set up against the revelations of the spirit the barriers of their own petrified belief, and, therefore, within the ban of their control, mythology, as they shape it, serves the end only of binding potential individuals to whatever system of sentiments may have seemed to the shapers of the past (now sanctified as saints, sages, ancestors or even gods) to be appropriate to their concept of a great society."

See? Even according to our finest minds, major religion is just terribly unhealthy, excruciatingly limiting. Causes brain polyps. Perspective warts. Fear blisters. Hate rashes. Sanctimony drip. Chronic nose picking.

Of course, it must be noted that there are millions who believe in a gentle form of organized religion, a tolerant, forgiving Christian God, persons who are warm and open minded and who do not ever attempt to shove their beliefs down anyone's throat. They are kind and selfless and practice their beliefs quietly, tenderly, in their own nontoxic way. This is glorious and good. This is not the slightest problem. This is, in fact, to be encouraged.

But, sadly, these people are strongly overshadowed, publicly overpowered, by the far more outspoken and well-organized religious fire breathers who attempt to set the spiritual agenda for America and delineate what actions we can take and what kind of sex we can have and whom we can and cannot love. It is these karmically scrunched people whom we are now working to save. And it is the call of any true patriotic, open-minded American to come to the aid of the misinformed and the lost. You know who you are.

It is not a pill, this radical change you might now wish to undertake. It is not a program. It is not a series of eight-minute power workouts on VHS or a stack of subliminal meditation CDs you play while napping and dreaming of Donald Rumsfeld baking blueberry pies in a rubber chicken suit.

It is not a class or a book or a series of daily affirmations you stick on the fridge and check off every time you suck down a yogurt drink or sneak a cookie.
It is merely a choice. A decision to drop the dead weight of a dead book from the spinning modern kaleidoscope of your ever-evolving id, and see what happens. Letting go, de-clenching, letting the spiritual blood flow, is half the battle. Dumping stagnant doctrine and tired patriarchal notions does not mean you must immediately pick up another system to replace it. You want a new worldview? You want a fresh, unbounded ideology, as flexible and porous as you are? Simply start looking inward, at the one true god of the self. And what a gift it is.

It is a perspective slap. It is a choke hold on spiritual timidity. It is a radical peeling back, a falling away, an explosion, karmic whiplash, a massive transformational belch. And it is desperately needed right now.

Ask yourself this: What would happen if you suddenly turned around and said you don't believe in that sneering angry God anymore, or in that specific, nasty interpretation of Bible verse?

What would happen if you said, hey you know what? Life is simply way too short to think that this is all there is and that the church has all the answers, or that I can't just read the Bible as this profound curious literary mythological funkarama full of sex and blood and death and random acts of kindness and not take it all so damn seriously or literally, because that's when the trouble starts?

Why, furthermore, must I think that if there is a God he must be, well, a male, and an angry misogynistic homophobic Republican male, at that, one with a thing for guns and trucks and repressed Catholic priests?

Why can I not, say, reignite the feminine divine in this exhausted, macho world? Would that really be so horrible? So confusing? Could it possibly be worse than now, what with all the hate and fear and pious finger pointing? The answer is shockingly clear: You can.

It is not too late. You can heed the call, make the change, intervene today in a hardcore religious person's desperate life, present them with a new way, a fresh path, introduce them to their own personal Jesus: themselves.

You can teach them to be one of the heathen godless throngs of America, the happily self-defined, the spiritually adventurous, unafraid to take on a deeply felt, difficult, messy, gorgeous type of individual spirituality, independent of dogma and screed and a scowling bearded father figure who pulls strings at random and builds monster warehouses of guilt and dread in your heart like some sort of dour Wal-Mart Supercenter.

It is never too late. It is your choice. Won't you join us?

Posted at 2:15 AM

February 20, 2004

So ... my ear infection seems to be going away; my migraine was worse today than it has been for a few days; I got all of my assignments done for all but one class, but I have a fucking lot to do for that, including a class presentations/discussion, and all of this doesn't count the time I need to spend on my thesis; I got my grandma through the grocery in less than two hours today, a personal best; and I've found that I'm really attracted to Jai Rodriguez on Queer Eye for the Straight Guy.

The phrase "Get a life" comes to mind ...

Posted at 10:22 PM

February 19, 2004

Oh no! It's the Attack of the Gay Agenda!

Posted at 12:47 AM

February 18, 2004

Back to the drama in my ear ...

There is no doubt that something has been wrong with my right ear. As I mentioned a couple of days ago, I was getting swelling of my ear (inside the outer ear) and I was also getting a little knot of muscle on my neck at the jawline, right below my ear (which I suppose is either due to the constriction of the muscles in that area due to the swelling or due to the swelling of the nerves in that area (or both)). In any case, I have been doing my own sort of "home remedy" so that I can hopefully clear this up on my own. When I had this in August, it was an ear infection, and the doctor visit and medications cost me well over $400, and I don't like the idea of spending that much again if I can avoid it (besides which, one of the medications was a steroid, and I certainly don't want to be taking steroids unless absolutely necessary). I was pretty worried when things first starting troubling me a couple of days ago, and I'm still concerned, but things look a bit better now.

The swelling in my ear has gone down considerably. In fact, it's worst when I wake up in the mornings, but even then it isn't as swelled as it was two days ago. The knot in my neck is still there, but it is much less tight and is practically gone. Being that this is the third day of dealing with this, I think it's too easy to say that I have it totally taken care of since there's still swelling and I'm still treating my ear (with isopropyl alcohol and anti-biotic ointment (as well as aspirin to make my blood flow a little more freely)). Things have improved, though, so I'm hopeful that I'm on the mend. It would be nice if this could be cleared up by the end of the weekend. That would be a relief for me.

In the meantime, I'll keep treating myself. I'll also be taking aspirin, not simply to make my blood flow better but because I've been getting some serious migraines the last couple of days - not as a result of the ear infection itself but due to the stress of dealing with the ear and other problems that are in my face at the moment. This too, I hope, shall pass.

One day maybe I'll live a day without drama in my life. One day soon.

Posted at 1:12 AM

February 17, 2004

Very possibly, some of you who are reading my Journal may think that I talk way too much about gay marriage, but I see it as a very important issue. This article, from the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, is a very poignant look at how both sides of the issue stand up side by side.

At the Capitol, a Gay Youth Joins in Fight
by Jay Croft

For all the propaganda about anti-gay constitutional amendments being needed to protect children, here's one kid everybody should meet: Gregory Casajuana, a 16-year-old student at Cobb County's Harrison High School.

He was among the speakers Saturday at a rally opposing a bill to make the state Constitution say that gay people can never marry -- and a push to codify the same sentiment in the federal Constitution, which President Bush has suggested he would support. Others at the Capitol included seasoned politicians and activists. But Gregory's moment at the microphone was one of the most rousing.

"I am here because just the other day I was told that I am an abomination to God and this amendment proves it," he told about 600 people gathered in the rain. "I heard this and began to cry. I wondered what has happened to our society to think that because I am gay that I do not deserve to live freely."

He spoke of his hope to be treated fairly. "Do not let the General Assembly take my hope away. Do not let the president take my hope away. And most especially, do not let my Constitution take my hope away."

A few minutes later, I met Gregory, his 14-year-old boyfriend and Edward Gray, the executive director of YouthPride, a support group for gay kids, who was with the boys. They said Gregory has his family's support and his mother had appeared with him at a previous Capitol appearance but had a family emergency that kept her away Saturday. (Lourdes Casajuana confirmed that for me today, saying she is "very proud" of her son.)

I told him how different things are nowadays from when I was his age a generation ago. A gay kid self-aware and brave enough to talk about it publicly? Eloquently? With hundreds of supporters cheering him on? Impossible to imagine.

I asked him why he had come to do this.

"They're making these decisions now and I'm going to have to deal with it sooner or later," he said, calmly, politely, answering other questions with a simple "Yes, Sir" or "No, Sir."

I turned around and looked at the crowd of people hunched under umbrellas, listening to speaker after speaker talk about discrimination, equality and fairness, which are essential parts of this. But I also heard a lot of talk about love and hate -- activists saying that gay relationships are all about love, for instance, and that people who oppose gay marriage rights are motivated by hate.

Emotional concepts like that can be distracting and polarizing. Gay-rights advocates should focus on the practical, tangible benefits that married people get that gay Americans can not, including security for their own children and families. Americans are more likely to stand up for basic fairness than to be made to "respect" or "honor" relationships they might not fully understand.

One man at the rally carried a sign that had a picture of Hitler, which is dangerously overstating the case. Enshrining discrimination into the constitution is a very bad idea, but it's not the Holocaust.

Another sign was more on target: "The Sanctity of Marriage: Britney Spears? Elizabeth Taylor? Michael Bowers?"

Another: "If your marriage needs protecting, you need a therapist, not an amendment."

And, "Preserve marriage: Outlaw divorce."

I saw gay couples there with their children. Straight parents of gay people. A woman with a sign that said, "My Gay Brother Has Rights, Too."

I saw only one person protesting the rally. In one hand he held a sign that said, "Should immorial (sic) rights be given to pimps prostitutes and child molestors (sic) because they love it?" In the other hand: "I am gay-happy because I love God and his laws not a man or sexuality."

Just a few people tried talking with the man, who was soon shouting that half the people there were molested as children and "Y'all love it when a man has sex with another boy."

The commotion caught Gregory Casajuana's attention, but just briefly.

"It's because of people like this that I speak at these events," he told me when I asked how this made him feel. "It's the problem our government has. They don't want to be accepting."

A man shouting about righteousness and perversion. A kid shaking his head and walking away.

Who needs protection from whom?

Posted at 10:05 PM

February 16, 2004

Well, my right ear is starting to swell again, just like the early stages of my last ear infection. Granted, it hasn't swelled shut yet, nor has a tight knot of muscles formed in my neck and jaw in close proximity to that ear yet, but it is definitely swelling.

Oh joy! Like I have the time, money, or patience to deal with this again.

Posted at 2:10 AM

February 15, 2004

I rant about Republicans on a regular basis, and at times it may seem unfair. Surely there are some Republicans out there who aren't asinine, selfish bigots who want the world to bow down to them (and by the world I mean the natural world (environment), the financial world (economies), and the human world (all nations and races and religions)). I even have the example of Andrew Sullivan, who seems very sensible and rational compared to most Republicans. I like to believe that's true, that there are decent people out there who consider themselves Republicans, but it's so easy to stereotype all Republicans this way when there are so many examples of how they are exactly that way. Here is yet again another maddening example of Republicans who find themselves above the world, above humanity, and above justice and reason. It makes me sick.

New Scholarship Created for Whites Only

BRISTOL, Rhode Island (AP) -- A student group at Roger Williams University is offering a new scholarship for which only white students are eligible, a move they say is designed to protest affirmative action.

The application for the $250 award requires an essay on "why you are proud of your white heritage" and a recent picture to "confirm whiteness."

"Evidence of bleaching will disqualify applicants," says the application, issued by the university's College Republicans.

Jason Mattera, 20, who is president of the College Republicans, said the group is parodying minority scholarships.

"We think that if you want to treat someone according to character and how well they achieve academically, then skin color shouldn't really be an option," he said. "Many people think that coming from a white background you're automatically privileged, you're automatically rich and your parents pay full tuition. That's just not the case."

The stunt has angered some at the university, but the administration is staying out of the fray. The school's provost said it is a student group's initiative and is not endorsed by Roger Williams.

Mattera, who is of Puerto Rican descent, is himself a recipient of a $5,000 scholarship open only to a minority group.

"No matter what my ethnicity is, I'm making a statement that scholarships should be given out based on merit and need," Mattera told the Providence Journal.

His group took out a full-page ad in last week's issue of the university's student newspaper to tout the scholarship, which was for $50 until two donors came forward to add $100 each during the weekend, Mattera said.

It's not the first brush with controversy for the group. The school temporarily froze the Republicans' money in the fall during a fight over a series of articles published in its monthly newsletter. One article alleged that a gay-rights group indoctrinates students into homosexual sex.

There are many scholarships available to all people that end up going to whites because of a variety of reasons. The need for affirmative action is still clear, still necessary. While I don't see anything wrong with scholarships for people of white backgrounds (perhaps a scholarship for Irish-Americans or German-Americans or something of that sort), I find it wrong to offer scholarships only to white students when the stated reason for do so is specifically based upon discrimination and aristocratic bias. These people think affirmative action isn't needed? They should walk a mile in the shoes of a black man or a Hispanic woman. Affirmative action, sadly, is still very necessary. This sort of stunt by Republican bigots is a clear example that the need for such federal protection of minorities is far from over.

~~Posted~~ Written at 12:34 AM

February 14, 2004

Can you feel the VD love?

It's Valentine's Day (or so marketing executives would make us believe). I have mixed emotions about this holiday - none good. A large part of me despises this "created" holiday for the money-grubbing origins that created it. Another part of me aches at the idea that people the world over are celebrating their love and togetherness on this day while I am here alone. Websites like Be My Anti-Valentine are exactly what best expresses my cynical nature. But I can't help the true romantic in me feeling the loving ideas that I'm suppose to feel, either.

All I know for sure is that in this time of mixed up, sad and frustrated feelings, I found this website and found myself laughing harder than I've laughed at anything in a very long time. It doesn't matter how many times I see it, either. This thing makes me really laugh every time I watch it. Enjoy the website. Enjoy the day. Everybody needs VD.

Posted at 1:20 AM

February 13, 2004

It's Friday the 13th, and I'm exhausted. I really don't know what it is, but I have been extremely tired all day. Even a nap in the afternoon, something I never do, didn't seem to help. I'm still completely beat. I don't know if this is the effects of some sort of cold or if it's depression-related or if it's something to do with the phases of the moon or anything as bizarre or unknown as those things. All I know is that I'm very tired and not as far along with schoolwork as I would have hoped to be today.

Now I must try to sleep, not that it should be much of a problem.

Posted at 11:37 PM

February 12, 2004

Damn I'm tired. I've been running around all day, trying to get different assignments done and wrap things up. I felt tired, as well, because I didn't get a full night's sleep last night. Someday soon I have to get my sleep schedule back to normal. It's a must.

Anyhow, after classes, I had to attend the fiction reading for tonight. This time we heard from BGSU guest writer Michelle Richmond. I was not impressed. In fact, I have heard from a number of students in her class that she is very draconian with the "rules" she has for what is acceptable in their fiction stories. She apparently comes from the school of thought that believes the only way you should write is the way is the way that will get you published, specifically by using formulaic stories without any daring or originality that will follow the mold of so much crap that will appeal to a popular audience. Who the fuck wants to be the next Danielle Steele, anyhow? Not only were her stories trite and formulaic, she is grading people based on that bullshit! That sucks.

While the reading was quite a downer, I had a great time talking to Laura at Big Boy afterward for about two hours. We both had all sorts of things to talk about, and I felt a lot better after having been able to sit with Laura and enjoy her company. After I left, I talked to Christiana for two hours while I drove back to Sandusky and while I settled in, It seems like Christiana has had as bad a week as I had the week before. Some day one of us has to catch a break. Anyhow, Christiana and Laura did a great deal to make me feel better today. That helps.

~~Posted~~ Written at 12:47 AM

February 11, 2004

Although I haven't written about it here in the Journal, I have been quite frustrated and angry for a while with the positions of a number of the Democratic candidates for president regarding the issue of gay marriage. John Kerry, above all, has garnered much of my ire, and I must say that even though he is the front-runner in the Democratic pack, I have no feelings of support for him, and I can only hope that by some miracle people won't have to choose between him and Bush because this would, in my mind, end up being simply a choice between lesser evils. At this rate any other Democratic hopeful would be better, even somebody I don't like, so long as they aren't so infuriating on the issue of gay marriage. Where does al of my anger come from, you might ask? Well let me lay it out for you.

Emperor Bush is clear on his stance on gay marriage - he holds by his conservative, Republican, typically-bigoted viewpoint that marriage must be "defended" from gay people who would somehow corrupt or sully that institution. Bush doesn't really support civil unions either - he just wants gay people to stop existing because he dislikes them. Even staunch Republicans who are gay have shied away from Bush on these issues, and they find trouble supporting him on just about anything since he clearly never intends to support them but also wants to criminalize their lives.

While Bush's position is more recognized and decried by most gay people, the Democratic pack's feelings have been less criticized. Granted, anything seems better than Bush, so how can you find fault in any of his opponents, but we must find fault - accepting a candidate who is simply slightly better than the worst candidate isn't enough; we need a candidate who will stand up for gay people and every other minority group who needs to have their equality defended. John Kerry, the leading Democratic presidential candidate, has said he would support a Constitutional amendment barring gay people from every marrying. The current amendment being pursued in Congress not only bard gay marriage but also bars any development of civil unions or recognition of same sex couples for the benefits gained through marriage - basically it means that gay people would be actively discriminated against within the text of the Constitution, a document that is supposed to secure the rights of liberty and freedom of all Americans. Kerry has recently back pedaled a little bit, saying that he supports a Constitutional ban on gay marriage in the state of Massachusetts but not at the federal level, but it's questionable whether he's being sincere or simply trying to stay in the middle of the political debate. He has repeatedly said at other times that he would support the federal Constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage but that he believed that civil unions would be okay of legislated at the state level, and he said this before the Massachusetts Supreme Court made their ruling that same-sex marriage must be supported based upon the state constitution. Kerry's position seems clear - he will not, ever, support gay marriage, and he may not even support civil unions, and even if he does accept civil unions, he will never support their legislation at the federal level. I understand that he's worried about losing swing voters on this issue, but his stance goes beyond simply trying to play to the polls - he clearly does not support equal rights for gay people, and that is the bottom line. With that stance, how can gay people support this man? I know I can't, and I don't know how any gay person could.

I was (and am) a big fan of Howard Dean. Sadly, I think he doesn't stand a hope in hell anymore, and just like Carol Moseley Braun (the best candidate for president among the bunch, even though she dropped out of the race early on) Dean will be left behind because his views are considered too liberal or controversial. Much better to have a moderate candidate who can walk the center-line, people seem to think. That, they believe, is how to get someone elected. The truth is, however, that taking a stand for what is right does not make you a weaker candidate. Bill Clinton openly supported many gay rights issues, and he won both elections quite well. Bill Clinton, though, actually believed in equality among all people, and he saw the importance of standing behind the civil rights fights of gay America. John Kerry is no Bill Clinton, I'm sad to say, and electing him to the Presidency may be just as bad for gay people as keeping Emperor Bush in office. Either way, gay people are about to be screwed forever by Constitutional amendments at the federal and state levels and by other manners of discrimination that are coming down (such as gay adoption ineligibility, removal of gay spousal medical support, and even the removal sexual orientation as a protected provision of hate crimes laws).

The gay marriage issue may not seem like a big deal for a lot of gay people because many have no intention (or desire) to ever get married, and others are content with civil unions. Many others are simply apathetic. The problem, however, isn't whether you want to be married. The problem is whether you want to be considered to be equal to any other person in society. The right of gay people to marry may seem trivial, but it is not. This is a deciding moment for gay rights. Losing this battle will set the stage for other losses and for a much longer struggle to attain equality. Victory means a huge step forward, even for those who never intend to get married. John Kerry threatens the entire struggle for gay rights because of his stance on this issue. That may seem overly-dramatic, but it is true. Keep this in mind as you are voting; keep this in mind when you send political contributions. We must be heard and supported, and a candidate who does not fully support us should not be our candidate.

~~Posted~~ Written at 1:23 AM

February 10, 2004

Sooooooooo ............

Whatcha doin?

Posted at 10:52 PM

February 9, 2004

Oh NO!

M&Ms have lost their color!
Apple Jacks are shaped differently!
... and It's no longer okay for Janet Jackson to be barely-dressed during a dance number!

What is the world coming to?

Posted at 10:42 PM

February 8, 2004

My sleep patterns are getting completely fucked up. I've always been a person to stay up 'til at least Midnight and usually one or one-thirty A.M. or later. That was fine. The way things work for me going to sleep is that I really don't even try to go to sleep until I'm clearly tired and starting to nod off. If I'm not tired, I won't be able to go to sleep, and worse, I'll lay there thinking about stuff that will get me depressed or whatever. For the last couple of weeks, I haven't been tired enough on most nights to go to sleep until 3 or 4 or 5 A.M. - and that doesn't leave me long to sleep before needing to get up. So basically I'm tired or sleep in a little later than usual and find myself running behind all day.

The craziest thing is that I'm almost afraid to go to sleep because I'm afraid I'll have nightmares or something. But then when I'm waking up I don't want to face the day or leave the bed or the sleeping world. It's not that I'm "just not a morning person," either; I actually am a morning person, for the most part, but I just have such a pessimistic view of life that getting out of bed just seems to be walking into hell by my own volition.

So anyhow, my whole sleep schedule is fucked up now, and I'm having trouble getting back to where I'm sleeping for a decent amount of time without going to sleep too late or getting up too late. Maybe it shouldn't matter, but trying to keep a "regular" schedule for my grandma and trying to keep a regular schedule for classes means that I have to try to maintain a normal schedule. And that means getting about eight hours of sleep and still getting up by 9 A.M. At this point I'm thinking I should just keep staying up later and later until I'm back to being tired enough to go to sleep before 1 A.M., but that might take forever. My only hope now seems to be wearing myself out. If I'm tired, I'll go to sleep earlier.

Now if I could just just find a cute guy to have sex with me over and over again so I could be tired out. That would certainly help out.

Posted at 11:52 PM

February 7, 2004

Even though it probably seems like just about all I do anymore is post news articles that I've found interesting, I'm doing it again anyhow. This article from the Washington Post was a pretty good analysis of the big problems that Emperor Bush is forcing on this country and the lasting problems they'll create. I would love to write something as well-supported and logical, but I just get too emotional whenever I write about that miserable near-dictator destroying everything I hold dear about my country.

Anyhow, here's the article.

In GOP Country, Job Fears
by David S. Broder

COLUMBIA, S.C. -- When President Bush came to South Carolina on Thursday -- following on the heels of the Democratic presidential candidates, just as he had done (supposedly by coincidence) after the New Hampshire primary -- the headline in the State newspaper read: "Metro area job losses among nation's worst."

The story, streamed across the top of Page 1, reported that the two counties comprising the Columbia metropolitan area had shed 10,300 jobs last year and had 17,600 fewer jobs at the end of the year than were here four years earlier. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the 3.3 percent job loss in 2003 in Columbia was exceeded only by those recorded in Steubenville, Ohio, Saginaw, Mich., San Jose, and Lawrence, Mass.

Richland County Council Chairwoman Bernice Scott was quoted as saying that she now encounters more constituents with postgraduate degrees but without jobs. "It's awful," she told the newspaper. "The American dream is getting an education and getting a job. And the more education you have, the better the job. But there are no jobs to be had."

As it happened, Bush visited Charleston, not Columbia, and he chose to talk more about the war on terrorism, port security and homeland defense than the economy. But the headline here put an exclamation point on the reality that greeted all the Democratic candidates who campaigned in last Tuesday's primary -- a reality that helped power populist Sen. John Edwards to his 15-point victory.

In this time of what is advertised as booming economic growth, a lot of people -- including some who ought to be Republicans -- are hurting for work.

South Carolina is one of Bush's best states; he carried it with 57 percent of the vote in 2000. It certainly is stronger than Ohio, Michigan, California and Massachusetts -- where the local job losses have been worse.

But even in South Carolina, as I learned from talking with Republican Gov. Mark Sanford, the economy is a big political and policy worry. I went by to see Sanford the day after the primary, and the first thing he said was that "the angst that Edwards picked up on is palpable and real."

Sanford said that the old economic model for South Carolina and its neighboring states was based on "cheap land, cheap labor and right-to-work" laws that discouraged unionization. "It worked well for 50 years when the competition for business was with New England and the Upper Midwest. But that model has been tossed out the window with globalization, the Internet and the other new technology. So now if people are looking for cheap land or cheap labor, they're going to go to China or India or Nicaragua."

He pointed out that in Tuesday's primary, John Kerry ran best on the coast, "where we have retirees coming in and tourism," but "in the real industrial quadrant, the I-85 corridor, where we've been hard hit, Edwards did better with that economic message. While I might disagree with his prescription, whether you're Republican or Democrat, it's real, and we need to be watchful."

The governor added, "I don't think we're out of the woods yet." For two months, he said, sales tax and income tax receipts have been up for the first time in three years. "But I'm very cautious. I don't know if this is the end of the [home mortgage] refinancing boom combined with everyone spending their tax cut from last fall. If those two don't spark a true recovery -- 'cause right now we've had a jobless recovery -- I think there may be more choppy waters ahead."

Sanford is trying to build a new economic strategy, with the help of Robert Faith, the Harvard Business School grad he recruited to run the Department of Commerce, and advice from Harvard business guru Michael Porter. But it will be slow work, he said, and the political pieces -- tax reform and restructuring of an archaic state government -- face opposition in the Republican-controlled Legislature.

As difficult as things may be in Columbia or other cities, Sanford said, the real headache is what to do in the "one-mill towns" when that one employer shuts down or moves out.

Fortunately for Bush, he said, "South Carolina is a very conservative state," and one with deep historical, economic and cultural ties to the military. So many South Carolinians have friends or family members serving in Iraq or Afghanistan that "they want to support the president if only to support those kids who are over there." That gives Bush "a degree of insulation he might not have many other places."

Then Sanford returned to his main theme. "The economy will be a bigger issue than people realize," he said. "People will vote their pocketbooks. It's still the economy, stupid."

Posted at 12:00 AM

February 6, 2004

I used to have dates. I used to have boyfriends. I even had guys fight over me to be my boyfriend at a couple of points. What happened?

Posted at 11:32 PM

February 5, 2004

I do believe in fairies.
I do believe in fairies.
I do believe in fairies.
I do believe in fairies.
I do believe in fairies.

Posted at 11:22 PM

February 4, 2004

This movie, Elephant, from Gus Van Sant, looks quite amazing. I can see why it won so many awards already, and I can't wait for this to come out in a major theater release. Amazing stuff.

Posted at 1:28 AM

February 3, 2004

Well, I couldn't come up with a story that would work (meaning what I cam up with either would be too long for the 20 page limit or that it would suck) for the short story that was due today, so I decided to workshop Blood and Guts. It's never been workshopped before, and it does need some work, so this is as good a time as any. It would have helped if I'd decided this earlier in the weekend rather than trying unsuccessfully to write something new. As it was, I rewrote the story a little bit, but I still couldn't get the ending right. Maybe if I'd had more time I could have made it the way I wanted to, but I ran out of time and had to post the story to the listproc (e.mail that distributes to all of my classmates). Oh well - the whole point of workshop is to get suggestions on how to improve a story. Maybe I'll find the ideas I need to get the story to wrap up in a way I like. We can only hope.

~~Posted~~ Written at 1:37 AM

February 2, 2004

It's good to see that other people feel as I do regarding the proposed gay marriage ban in Georgia as well as the proposed amendment to the U.S. Constitution that proposes the same bigoted persecution. I couldn't have put it more simply than this article from the Atlanta Journal Constitution does, so I won't even try.

Homosexual Marriage Ban Protects Hate, Not Families

The Georgia Senate is considering a proposed amendment to the state constitution that would bar marriage between gay people; sadly, the bill is all but guaranteed to pass.

However, as our senators vote and debate the issue, they should at least have the decency to be honest about what they're doing.

This is not about protecting marriage or family. Talk of protecting marriage is merely an excuse, a politically convenient disguise for the real agenda behind this proposal, which is to bash gay people. In fact, those who are advocating this amendment are behaving just like those despicable bullies on the playground who try t

make themselves popular by picking on the weak and the unpopular.
And for a while, they'll succeed. This proposal will undoubtedly boost the political prospects of those who are pushing it.

But only for a while.

This bill is really about hate. It is about discrimination. It is about providing a respectable vehicle for people to advocate hate and discrimination against a minority group while denying that they hate and discriminate. It's a familiar trick in these parts. Back in the '50s and '60s, people who wanted to defend racism, but who did not want to be seen as defending racism, did so by claiming to be defending states' rights.

But they were defending hate, and spreading hate, and, in their hearts, they knew it. So did the people who supported them.

This is the same thing.

The very idea that gay people are trying to tear down marriage is nonsense; heterosexual people are doing quite fine on their own in that regard and hardly need the assistance of others. Gay people have not caused the divorce rate to soar. Gay people haven't caused the rise in single-parent families. To make gay people the scapegoat for the problems that plague modern marriage is absurd on its face.

In fact, to the degree that gay Americans wish to join in marriage, it ought to be seen as an endorsement of the institution, as a recognition that the civilizing merits and rich emotional rewards of marriage appeal not just to people of all cultures, races and ages, but to people of all sexual preference as well.

The interest of gay Americans in getting married is a celebration, a validation of marriage. It is not a threat.

Ten, 20, 30 years from now, we're going to have to go back into the Georgia Constitution to pull this hateful language out. And some of the very politicians who today will vote in favor of that language will no doubt be there when it is repealed, sheepishly trying to explain how it wasn't really about hate and discrimination, how back then they were just worried about protecting marriage and the family.

And you know what? Nobody will believe them. Nor should they.

Posted at 8:11 PM

February 1, 2004

My, my, my - who would have guessed that I'd have this much trouble putting together a short story? Well, at least I still have tomorrow to write it ... if I can just come up with a decent, workable idea.

Posted at 11:40 PM