Shock, Or Crock?
One week after the
decision by the California Supreme Court on same-sex marriage, I have to say all the
controversy surrounding it is just more election-year crockery. Of course, the same arguments as always are offered, though anyone who doesn't fear some bozo with a bible anymore than they would fear two guys kissing can cut through it all without much effort. Let us consider the issues at stake:
If we must follow everything the bible says and believe in it's inerrancy, then why in the hell did a PA bill that would've banned gay marriage get rejected for an amendment proposing to outlaw divorce except in extreme cases - a bill that could've passed in a Republican-controlled Senate and therefore "protect the sanctity of marriage"? (Isn't there something or other in the bible about how "whatever God joins, let not man separate"?) Furthermore, why aren't we calling for the execution of adulterers like Republican Vito Fossella? Leviticus 20:10 states "And the man that committeth adultery with another man's wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbour's wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death", so there certainly is a case for it. Better yet, let us ask where do we draw the line with biblically-mandated killing and the commandment not to kill, which makes for one glaring contradiction in an 'inerrant' work. After that, a discussion on whether to threaten homebuilders with eternal damnation for not putting fences around the roof of a new house is in order...
If we are to believe that heterosexual relations will be threatened by this, then what do we make of the lack of support for banning divorce, since that surely threatens marriage? Somehow I seriously doubt that your average organization of religious nuts will make a public statement decrying the evils of divorce as often and readily as they will against same-sex marriage, and the lack of public discussion over a "divorce lobby" (as opposed to the "gay lobby") is enough to support my point. It should be noted that of all the problems men have with marriage, hordes of homos wanting to join in never seem to have a significant part in the discussion. As long as the marriage strike goes on, it's not like denying or granting marriage to others is going to matter anyway and yet I get the vibe that I'm not supposed to care about that much, only how to define part of my manhood as being in opposition to men that really like men...big deal.
By the way, if public displays of affection are anything to go by, this generation of youngsters could care less as long as no one disturbs them from smooching at the bus stop. Maybe I'm reading it wrong though and they could be trying to get in every last touch and kiss before a black helicopter full of homofascists arrests the two and tosses them in a gulag, not that I've heard of it happening.
One other thing: is it me, or is all of this objection only directed at free citizens and taxpayers engaging in voluntary, consensual homosexuality and not at prison inmates being forced into it? I'm hoping it's me, because the thought of anti-gay people either secretly getting off on or completely ignoring the latter is about the only thing more ridiculous than the way they act as if heterosexual attraction is just gonna dry up and waste away unless we take lots of precious time to harass, put down, and physically harm gays mostly for existing and occasionally interacting with heterosexuals.
While I am a little upset that discussion of whatever voter referendum it was that banned gay marriage in California hasn't been mentioned much, I don't recall public majority opinion being as important before the war in Iraq began, or now as steadily increasing gas prices make things worse for car owners, among other issues with strong public opinion. Instead we just hear about how (insert institution here) is more important than what a bunch of public nobodies say or think. Then they wonder why some of the younger generation succumb to political apathy...
Labels: annoyances, politics, posted in windows
One Year Later With A Two Core Processor
It's good to see that
the machine I built last year still works great, though being the geek that I am (and seeing systems with quad-core
Phenom processors at the same price that I spent), the urge to have parts more up to date - such as a
GeForce 9600GT - is rearing its ugly head either despite or because of current financial issues.
In using the live CD for 64-bit Ubuntu Linux 8.04, I've learned just how incompatible things can be from 32-bit to 64-bit, experiencing difficulties in getting the wireless internet to stay up more than 2 minutes and finding that old C++ / C# executables won't run. For all the hype I've heard about 64-bit processors and operating systems being the norm in the next few years, this is not a good first impression. The only reason this experience wasn't a complete downer was the fact that this was Linux and not Windows Vista Service Pack 1.
Labels: announcements, posted in linux
