November 7, 2008
How Not To Defend Marriage
I wonder if they Prop 8 people realize what they did when they got their law passed - the new California law which prohibits future same-sex marriages and voids all the at-the-time-legal same-sex marriages that have occured over the past months?
They have essentially undermined the institution of marriage completely. As of now it is clear that the State can unilaterally, without the consent of the couple in question, dissolve a legal marriage. Some of these same-sex marraiges were conscecrated in in churches. Prop 8 has made it clear that the State can void a church's rites and rituals as it sees fit.
So, while they were pretending to be worried that the State would force them to perform gay marriages (which was never even on the table) instead they have changed "'Til Death do us part" to "So long as 51% of the electorate continues to believe that we should be allowed to remain married".
Great job there, dumbasses. Way to protect the instituion of marriage.
Posted by edgore at 11:43 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
March 19, 2005
Leave Me Some Dignity
Just so there is no question about it - I don't want to be kept alive through artificial means. Just in case that ever comes up.
Posted by edgore at 5:35 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
November 11, 2004
It just gets better
So, hooray! John Ashcroft is leaving as Attorney General! No more "Let the Eagle Soar" and covered up statue boobs!
Oh...wait...maybe it's not so good. Our president, in his wisdom, has choose Albert Gonzales to replace Ashcroft. You may remember him as the wacky next door neighbor in the Abu Ghraib scandle - the one who wrote the memos arguing that during a war the president can use torture and suspend whatever national or international laws happen to restrain him.
He's also the guy who determined that we can hold citizans without charges indefinately because we feel like it.
I'm told that we are supposed to be happy about the job he has done advising the President because at least we don't have Muslim Internment camps.
Yeah...this is the guy who should be the head of law enforcement in the U.S. Right.
Posted by edgore at 12:45 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
May 17, 2004
Pete and Lou Got Married II
So, today same-sex marriage became legal in Massachusetts. Time to sit back and watch civilization not collapse because of it. From all the descriptions I have heard of the event in Cambridge, where they opened the clerk's at midnight so that people, some of whom have waited 50 years, wouldn't have to wait a moment longer, things went great. 10,000 well wishers compared to about 100 protesters - all of whom came in from Kansas.
And what lovely people, with their "God Hates Fags" signs. Touching, and it really makes me think they are moved by their deep religious convictions, and not blind stupid hate.
Here's a link to David Weinberger's blog entry covering the event.
Posted by edgore at 4:22 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
January 2, 2004
Absolute power
Whenever somebody tells me not to worry about the additional power being given to government and the possible abuses of power as we (well, they) trade freedom for "security", I like to point them to stories like this.
What frightens me is that if little douchebags in the TSA are pulling crap like this, what do you think is going on in the White House? What/who are THEY making people flush down the toilet?
Posted by edgore at 12:07 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
November 18, 2003
Pete and Lou got married
So, today the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled that it was against that state's constitution to deny gays the right to married. I personally think this is a good thing, and really pretty obvious. I also hope that it is the beginning of a change that will spread through the country.
I am really annoyed though at the response from religious groups and the right - they just don't make any sense. Claiming that this is going against 3000 years of "Traditional Marriage" is insane. Have these people ever bothered to actually read the bibles that they thump? According to the bible "Traditional Marriage" includes polygamy, bothers and sisters getting married, and women being required to marry a man that rapes them. Marriages were also usually for reasons other than love - usually political, economic, or social.
Let's face it - over the last 3000 years the institution of marriage has changed enormously, and it will continue to change. This is just one more change, and I think, not really all that big. It doesn't, as some have claimed, endanger marriage - I know that my marriage won't be weakened by it one bit. Churchs aren't going to be forced to perform services for anyone they don't want to, and nobody is going to be forced to go to any gay wedding. All this is about is the legal rights of two unrelated people in a commited relationship, and the rights that the state grants them in recognition of that. It doesn't matter if they can't procreate - do we deny equal protection to a couple that can't have, or chooses not to have, children?
The other thing that bugs me is that they keep complaining about the courts "creating new laws" even though over 50% of people don't agree with them. This is, of course, bullcrap. The courts are interpreting an existing law that very specifically says that the state cannot deny equal rights. The founding fathers structured our government specifically so that the courts COULD do this against popular opinion - they are there to protect the minority from the majority.
Posted by edgore at 4:06 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
September 20, 2003
Alex - I'll take "Third Riech" for $50
Sooo...Finally Ashcroft has declassified the information about the use of that part of the Patriot Act that is let's the government seize business and library records, and prohibits anyone from ever talking about it. You may have heard Ashcroft rail against hysterical (that's conservative-code for female) librarians for their foolish (codeword for red-communist) fears about the use of this power.
Turns out, according to a justice department spokesperson...it's never been used.
John Ashcroft said just a couple of months ago that this was a vital tool in the war against terror.
But it's never been used.
Mr. Ashcroft....I'm sorry. You are a really bad liar. Either this has never been used (and is therefore an overreaching power grab) or you are lying - by which I mean using it, and you don't want to tell us (and will claim that you are allowed to lie in the defense of freedom).
Which is it? Hmmmm?
In either case, I guess it's not as bad as Bush finally admitting that there is no evidence of a connection between Iraq and 9/11 - but that there is certainly a connection between Iraq and al Qaida.
Alex - I'll take duplicity for $140 billion...
Posted by edgore at 12:04 AM | Comments (5) | TrackBack
April 24, 2003
Nike "right to lie" case in Supreme Court
Yesterday the U.S. Supreme Court heard the Nike "Right to Lie" case, in which Nike is claiming that it had the right to lie in letters sent to School sports coaches and other material in which they claimed not to be using "sweatshop" labor, when in fact they were all along...
Nike doesn't deny that they lied - rather they are claiming that they have a first amendment RIGHT to lie, and that this was not commercial speech, but rather, participation in a dialog about global trade issue.
Yeah, right, whatever. They were lying to people because they wanted to reassure them so that they would continue to buy Nike shoes. This should be an open and shut case. Of course, it's not, and our beloved Administration is weigging in, say that Nike should win, since doing otherwise would allow anybody witht he money to file a case to harrass and stifle the actions of corporations.
This is from the same idiots that think it's a good idea to allow the RIAA to file and execute DMCA supoenas without judicial oversight, which they can then use to harrass people who they believe (but need not prove) are violating copyright.
This is the sort of thing that just bugs the hell out of me. Corporations, whcih are nothing more than legal constructs made out of paper have claimed all the rights of human beings under the constitution, which pretty explicitly says it's about PEOPLE, and now are able to exercise those rights on a level that no human has the resources to match.
William Gibson's dark corporate future, here we come.
Posted by edgore at 8:43 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
March 5, 2003
Boycott Fascism!
Wired News: Privacy Activist Takes on Delta
Yet another crazy assault on our privacy and ability to travel without government interference has cropped up in the form of CAPPS II. Basically, you will have background check run on you before you can travel by air. This includes a credit check.
This is pointless - it's not going to do anything to improve security (Terrorist's don't have credit? Whaaaa?), and it's a huge intrusion of privacy.
Since Delta was the first company to step up and volunteer to participate, why not boycott them?
Posted by edgore at 1:49 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
