![]()
Gone, But Not Forgotten? What The Internet Will Look Like Under SOPA Fearsgiving Week Jesus Approves of Waterboarding Beware of Asteroids ![]() ![]()
![]() All links are current as of the date of publication. All content created by the author is copyrighted 2005-2010, except where held by the owners/publishers of parent works and/or subject materials. Any infringement of another's work is wholly unintentional. If you see something here that is yours, a polite request for removal or credit will be honored. |
� |
Landmark RulingFriday, May. 16, 2008 4:03 AMKudos to the California State Supreme Court for their ruling regarding 'gay marriage.' However, that isn't going to silence or stop a drive to take the issue before the voters with a measure to amend the constitution to include language specifically stating that marriage is between a man and a woman. The usual bloviating about 'activist judges' and 'legislating from the bench' is in full swing, along with 'defying the will of the people.' It's simple. My marriage is a covenant between myself, my wife, and God. What the gay couple across the street does in their home does not, in any way, affect the sanctity or meaning of our marriage. Instead, conservative moralists want to peddle fear and hate - that I should despise our neighbors and denounce them for even thinking about raising children. Speaking of peddling fear and hate, we have President George 'Sabre Dance' Bush visiting the Middle East and addressing the Israeli Knesset, wherein he fired off barbs about electing a Democratic president would mean America would be attacked again, and also denouncing those who would negotiate with terrorists, likening them to 'Nazi appeasers.' When the Obama Campaign criticized Bush's remarks, the White House said Bush wasn't specifically talking about Obama. To attest that 'no attacks since 9/11' is a result of the ham-handed security policies we've implemented in this country is foolishness as well as flawed thinking. That A is true (no attacks) and B is true (increased security measures) does not mean B caused A. I maintain that as long as our security policies are rooted in 'magic intercept' thinking, we're vulnerable. It's like fielding a football team that with a defense against running plays only, and has no idea what to do when the opposing team lobs one down the field. Secondly, it's ironic that a president who has consistently been kowtowed to by a servile legislature should be bitching about appeasement in any form. Here's an idea. Instead of making territory a reward for Israel and Palestine, make it the penalty. Terrorists attack Israel, they have to cede territory they already hold. Israel lobs a missile across the border, same thing. Sure, it's impractical, even naive, because neither side would agree to be held hostage or answerable to an international body. It follows that the grown-up alternative is for both sides to stop acting like children fighting over a cookie and engage in serious diplomatic talks. A Missouri woman has been indicted on charges that she created a false identity and tormented a teenage girl to the point that the young girl committed suicide. It's being called cyber-bullying, and it's a federal case. All well and good. Now, I'd like to know why, exactly, there's this piece of slime lurking about America Online who has (and, as far as I know, continues to) pose as a celebrity, engaging in practices no less damaging to his victims, but nobody seems to give a shit.
|