Month: July 2009

My father is a Fox News Follower

This little nugget came out when he said he was sorry he voted for Obama. I told him I’m not sorry about it, that it was an easy choice. I could either chose a nearly senile old man, or someone who at least made noises about changing things.

Then we got on the subject of health care. Dear old dad was parroting the Fox talking points, that the country is sliding towards socialism, or that most of the people who’ll chose the public option are illegal immigrants, or people under 30, or the like. In essence, if you’ve followed the debacle on the web about Fox News you know exactly where he’s getting his information.

I explained that we already had a form of socialism, else we’d not have the police, fire, roads, schools, Medicaid, Medicare, VA, et al. So I asked him what he thought about the fact that Medicare has a 3% administrative cost wherease most insurance companies run at 22%. Or how about the VA, who pays for that? Of course he knew these were all taxpayer funded programs.

Then we got on the subject of entitlement. If there is any generation that suffers self entitlement more than the current one, it’s the one two prior to them, my fathers generation. They see those programs like the VA as a right.

I had to ding my father on that one. The conversation got eerily quieter after that. But I also told him, turn away from Fox News. Watch anything else but Fox News for a few weeks and then come back and talk to me.

Tradition, Family and Property Wing Nuts coming to RI

I wish I could find the date they’ll be here and where they’re planning to protest. More than likely they’ll do it near the State House. I just need to find out the date.

Anyhow, these delightful people have a little “10 Reasons why Homosexual “Marriage” is Harmful and Must Be Opposed”

Here I’ll take the time to knock down their arguments:

1. It Is Not Marriage
Calling something marriage does not make it marriage. Marriage has always been a covenant between a man and a woman which is by its nature ordered toward the procreation and education of children and the unity and wellbeing of the spouses.

The promoters of same-sex “marriage” propose something entirely different. They propose the union between two men or two women. This denies the self-evident biological, physiological, and psychological differences between men and women which find their complementarity in marriage. It also denies the specific primary purpose of marriage: the perpetuation of the human race and the raising of children.

Two entirely different things cannot be considered the same thing.

Marriage has not always been a covenant between one man and one woman. In fact the institution of marriage as we know it is a modern conception. Prior to the modern era you didn’t marry for love, you married because your family chose your betrothed.

And lets not even get into the applied Roman concept. Had to do with “If it’s under my roof, it’s mine”.

2. It Violates Natural Law
Marriage is not just any relationship between human beings. It is a relationship rooted in human nature and thus governed by natural law.

Natural law’s most elementary precept is that “good is to be done and pursued, and evil is to be avoided.” By his natural reason, man can perceive what is morally good or bad for him. Thus, he can know the end or purpose of each of his acts and how it is morally wrong to transform the means that help him accomplish an act into the act’s purpose.

Any situation which institutionalizes the circumvention of the purpose of the sexual act violates natural law and the objective norm of morality.

Being rooted in human nature, natural law is universal and immutable. It applies to the entire human race, equally. It commands and forbids consistently, everywhere and always. Saint Paul taught in the Epistle to the Romans that the natural law is inscribed on the heart of every man. (Rom. 2:14-15)

We’re not circumventing anything. We just want full equality. And of course they bring up my favorite Biblical author, old Saul of Tarsus. He was not only the worlds first documented homophobe, but a fairly big misogynist for his time.

And if we want to talk natural order, I do wish they’d explain homosexual behavior in the animal kingdom. And I need remind them, we humans are animals too.

And while I’m on the subject, my sexual orientation is immutable too.

3. It Always Denies a Child Either a Father or a Mother
It is in the child’s best interests that he be raised under the influence of his natural father and mother. This rule is confirmed by the evident difficulties faced by the many children who are orphans or are raised by a single parent, a relative, or a foster parent.

The unfortunate situation of these children will be the norm for all children of a same-sex “marriage.” A child of a same-sex “marriage” will always be deprived of either his natural mother or father. He will necessarily be raised by one party who has no blood relationship with him. He will always be deprived of either a mother or a father role model.

Same-sex “marriage” ignores a child’s best interests.

This one is raised by foes of marriage equality on an ad infinitum basis. It’s best summarized by the rhetorical question, “What about the children?”. Talk to most in the psychology field and they’ll tell you that the sex of the parent(s) doesn’t matter. It’s all about consistency, and being there. All the better if a child has two parents regardless of the sexual configuration of the union.

All these arguments are out of the same playbook used by the National Organization for Marriage.

4. It Validates and Promotes the Homosexual Lifestyle
In the name of the “family,” same-sex “marriage” serves to validate not only such unions but the whole homosexual lifestyle in all its bisexual and transgender variants.

Civil laws are structuring principles of man’s life in society. As such, they play a very important and sometimes decisive role in influencing patterns of thought and behavior. They externally shape the life of society, but also profoundly modify everyone’s perception and evaluation of forms of behavior.

Legal recognition of same-sex “marriage” would necessarily obscure certain basic moral values, devalue traditional marriage, and weaken public morality.

This is where it starts getting silly and exposes them for their general bigotry. I’d like to mention, I’m exposed to displays of heterosexuality nearly every day.

I’d love to know how it obscures morality. It doesn’t, this is just a straw man they love to prop up. As far as weakening public morality, I think there are other things that do that beyond who I love. You might want to look at corruption in government, there’s a big one to consider. Serious loss of morality there.

5. It Turns a Moral Wrong into a Civil Right
Homosexual activists argue that same-sex “marriage” is a civil rights issue similar to the struggle for racial equality in the 1960s.

This is false.

First of all, sexual behavior and race are essentially different realities. A man and a woman wanting to marry may be different in their characteristics: one may be black, the other white; one rich, the other poor; or one tall, the other short. None of these differences are insurmountable obstacles to marriage. The two individuals are still man and woman, and thus the requirements of nature are respected.

Same-sex “marriage” opposes nature. Two individuals of the same sex, regardless of their race, wealth, stature, erudition or fame, will never be able to marry because of an insurmountable biological impossibility.

Secondly, inherited and unchangeable racial traits cannot be compared with non-genetic and changeable behavior. There is simply no analogy between the interracial marriage of a man and a woman and the “marriage” between two individuals of the same sex.
Taking a Principled not a Personal Stand

In writing this statement, we have no intention to defame or disparage anyone. We are not moved by personal hatred against any individual. In intellectually opposing individuals or organizations promoting the homosexual agenda, our only intent is the defense of traditional marriage, the family, and the precious remnants of Christian civilization.

As practicing Catholics, we are filled with compassion and pray for those who struggle against unrelenting and violent temptation to homosexual sin. We pray for those who fall into homosexual sin out of human weakness, that God may assist them with His grace.

We are conscious of the enormous difference between these individuals who struggle with their weakness and strive to overcome it and others who transform their sin into a reason for pride and try to impose their lifestyle on society as a whole, in flagrant opposition to traditional Christian morality and natural law. However, we pray for these too.

We pray also for the judges, legislators and government officials who in one way or another take steps that favor homosexuality and same-sex “marriage.” We do not judge their intentions, interior dispositions, or personal motivations.

We reject and condemn any violence. We simply exercise our liberty as children of God (Rom. 8:21) and our constitutional rights to free speech and the candid, unapologetic and unashamed public display of our Catholic faith. We oppose arguments with arguments. To the arguments in favor of homosexuality and same-sex “marriage” we respond with arguments based on right reason, natural law and Divine Revelation.

In a polemical statement like this, it is possible that one or another formulation may be perceived as excessive or ironic. Such is not our intention.

The standard “The parts don’t fit” argument is invoked here and to paraphrase moralist John Corvino, “Yes, they do.”

And has nothing to do with the sexual practices, but everything to do with my civil rights. Again, straw man argument being brought up to deny basic civil rights.

6. It Does Not Create a Family but a Naturally Sterile Union

Traditional marriage is usually so fecund that those who would frustrate its end must do violence to nature to prevent the birth of children by using contraception. It naturally tends to create families.

On the contrary, same-sex “marriage” is intrinsically sterile. If the “spouses” want a child, they must circumvent nature by costly and artificial means or employ surrogates. The natural tendency of such a union is not to create families.
Therefore, we cannot call a same-sex union marriage and give it the benefits of true marriage.

Intrinsically sterile huh? So explain how I know of a few couples where the child is biologically linked to one partner or the other. I recall a marriage equality hearing where the NOM gentleman next to me started going off about how a lesbian couple got their child. I turned, looked at him and said “Did it ever occur to you that one of them was the biological mom?” at which point he started spouting that I was being intolerant. It was then I laid into him, and he wasn’t sitting next to me much longer.

7. It Defeats the State’s Purpose of Benefiting Marriage
One of the main reasons why the State bestows numerous benefits on marriage is that by its very nature and design, marriage provides the normal conditions for a stable, affectionate, and moral atmosphere that is beneficial to the upbringing of children—all fruit of the mutual affection of the parents. This aids in perpetuating the nation and strengthening society, an evident interest of the State.

Homosexual “marriage” does not provide such conditions. Its primary purpose, objectively speaking, is the personal gratification of two individuals whose union is sterile by nature. It is not entitled, therefore, to the protection the State extends to true marriage.

So too is regular marriage the personal gratification. I really think they need to lay off the false logic here. As I pointed out earlier, not all homosexual couples have kids but some do, and it is not ‘sterile’ at all.

Should we also not forget, there are literally thousands of unwanted children out there that find a safe, stable home with homosexual parents.

8. It Imposes Its Acceptance on All Society
By legalizing same-sex “marriage,” the State becomes its official and active promoter. The State calls on public officials to officiate at the new civil ceremony, orders public schools to teach its acceptability to children, and punishes any state employee who expresses disapproval.

In the private sphere, objecting parents will see their children exposed more than ever to this new “morality,” businesses offering wedding services will be forced to provide them for same-sex unions, and rental property owners will have to agree to accept same-sex couples as tenants.

In every situation where marriage affects society, the State will expect Christians and all people of good will to betray their consciences by condoning, through silence or act, an attack on the natural order and Christian morality.

Here we go with a variation of “What about the children?”. And this one smacks of bigotry, as if the acceptance of all society isn’t what a truly equal and inclusive society should be.

9. It Is the Cutting Edge of the Sexual Revolution
In the 1960s, society was pressured to accept all kinds of immoral sexual relationships between men and women. Today we are seeing a new sexual revolution where society is being asked to accept sodomy and same-sex “marriage.”

If homosexual “marriage” is universally accepted as the present step in sexual “freedom,” what logical arguments can be used to stop the next steps of incest, pedophilia, bestiality, and other forms of unnatural behavior? Indeed, radical elements of certain “avant garde” subcultures are already advocating such aberrations.

The railroading of same-sex “marriage” on the American people makes increasingly clear what homosexual activist Paul Varnell wrote in the Chicago Free Press:

The gay movement, whether we acknowledge it or not, is not a civil rights movement, not even a sexual liberation movement, but a moral revolution aimed at changing people’s view of homosexuality.

And here we go with the truly psychotic association of homosexuality with bestiality and pedophilia. Need I bring up the fact that most child molesters identify as straight, or how we’re not going to start screwing the pooch next. No, all we want are our rights under the Constitution of the United States and in my case, under the Rhode Island Constitution.

The gay movement is a civil rights issue. Granted, you need to change peoples minds and counter the negative bullshit circulated by the TFC assholes and the churches. And TFC is nothing but a church sponsored group, sort of like NOM though we’ll never truly know because the folks at NOM have been resistant to releasing their financial info.

Are we almost done yet? Here comes the tenth idiotic reason and it tips their hand to their real motivation. God:

10. It Offends God
This is the most important reason. Whenever one violates the natural moral order established by God, one sins and offends God. Same-sex “marriage” does just this. Accordingly, anyone who professes to love God must be opposed to it.

Marriage is not the creature of any State. Rather, it was established by God in Paradise for our first parents, Adam and Eve. As we read in the Book of Genesis: “God created man in His image; in the Divine image he created him; male and female He created them. God blessed them, saying: ‘Be fertile and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it.’” (Gen. 1:28-29)

The same was taught by Our Savior Jesus Christ: “From the beginning of the creation, God made them male and female. For this cause a man shall leave his father and mother; and shall cleave to his wife.” (Mark 10:6-7).

Genesis also teaches how God punished Sodom and Gomorrah for the sin of homosexuality: “The Lord rained down sulphurous fire upon Sodom and Gomorrah. He overthrew those cities and the whole Plain, together with the inhabitants of the cities and the produce of the soil.” (Gen. 19:24-25)

Tell me, who are these idiots to think they know the mind of God? Not that I think any such creature exists but still, it’s man putting words in their God’s mouth.

Do they not know that early Christians didn’t encourage marriage. If you were to devote your life to following Christ it wouldn’t be good for you to be married. It took the protestant reformation to move the early Catholics in the way of adopting a marriage scheme.

So did their God change his mind?

40 Years ago today

And in honor, hulu.com has an Apollo collection up.

I remember it well. I was five years old but I remember seeing Aldrin’s ascent from the LEM and even then I knew it was a momentous occasion. I knew we had the engineering might, the technology might, and the gumption to launch men to other celestial bodies.

The last Apollo flight to the moon was Apollo 17 in 1972, then Apollo/Soyuz in 1975. By this point I was 11 years old and very pissed that they canceled the main interplanetary manned program. By 1980 at least we should have been able to reach Mars. And by now, we’d be toward the outer part of our Solar System.

But no, NASA wanted a reusable craft. Enter the Space Shuttle. 1981 was the year that Columbia made its maiden flight to earth orbit. I remember they broadcast it over the school PA system when the shuttle came back in for a landing.

They promised the shuttle would be faster/cheaper/better but what is the shuttle but a low earth orbit craft, and even that requires two massive solid rocket boosters, as well as a gigantic fuel tank strapped to its belly. It isn’t faster, and certainly not cheaper nor was it better than Apollo.

I’m happy to see that we may be returning to the moon. And I definitely want to see us exploring Mars in the not so distant future.

I also want to see more done with advanced propulsion. They’ve pretty much worked out the theoretical basis of warp drive. Lets work on energy sources next.

Another day on the beach

Today we spent a bit more time, got there earlier too. Here are some photos of the day:

A little clamming in the marsh. The sky in this photo looks almost surreal. I have to say, I caught it at just the right moment. It’s interesting, I’ve lived in RI for all but a few months of my life and as a kid I’d been to the ocean plenty of times. But it’s so different as an adult.

Clamming

The water is a beautiful blue/green. RI has such great natural resources yet we squander it.

Water

Here we see the sailboat off in the distance. To the right is the lighthouse.

Sailboat

I did some brief videos, first the traffic on RI Route 4 which leads into South County (Actually Kent and Washington Counties) then onward to Route 1, and into Galilee. It’s moving but very, very slowly.

The sailboat coming in. I love that I can upload raw MP4 video to YouTube.

Here’s a few more boats straggling in, and you get an idea of what the water looks like.

And here we see the Block Island Ferry boat Carol Ann making her way out towards open ocean.

All in all very interesting. I was relating something though. I remember our trip to NC two years ago. I was totally awed by the night sky there. It’s like you can reach out and literally touch the stars. But Keyron was disinterested because he had seen it for a good chunk of his life and it was common to him.

That’s kind of how I am with the beaches around RI and southeast MA. As a kid my family and I regularly stayed in beach houses in Narragansett, and at my great grandfathers place on Prudence Island. So water is kind of ho-hum to me. I much prefer the woods and places like the White Mountains in New Hampshire.

And if I really believed in any of the astrology stuff, I’m a fire sign. Hawaii here we come! Volcanos and ocean!

A late afternoon romp on the beach

So yesterday myself, Keyron and our friend Deb went down to Salty Brine Beach in Narragansett, RI.

Getting there:

The beach:
Beach

Keyron tested the water a bit. Said it wasn’t bad. I guess it is towards the end of July then.

Another Open Letter to President Obama

Well Mr. President, your remarks before the NAACP sounded great. But when are you going to stop hiding behind the civil unions front, or the lets let the legislature decide on DOMA or DADT and actually do something that gives we gay people the full measure of civil rights.

Because until that time you won’t get another red hot fucking dime from me. I had great hopes in 2008, and you made all the right noises but you’re failing miserably as President.

TMI #195 – (So lame it doesn’t deserve translation)

1. Have you ever attended a group masturbation party? Same-sex or mixed?

Never have. Not that type of guy.

2. When masturbating, as you reach orgasm, do you continue to stimulate yourself without interruption, or do you stop and apply pressure until your spasms subside? Or?

Yeah, just keep going. Feels even better.

3. Have you ever video’ed yourself while masturbating (solo)? Where are they now?

Never have. I’m just not an exhibitionist at all.

4. Have you ever look at porn online? Have you ever posted at porn online?

Hasn’t everyone at least looked? Put it this way, some of the blogs I hit sometimes have some rather prurient photos. It’s a hazard of using RSS feeds from blogs. Never posted anything though.

5. Do you send/receive dirty email jokes and pictures?

Jokes yeah, most of the pix I send are either editorial cartoons or space images. And the word receive is spelled this way, not the messed up way.

Bonus: Have you ever told someone they were good in bed when they weren’t?

No, why lie about it? If they’re good then tell em’ so. If they were so so just keep your trap shut.

New Music This Week

I’m absolutely positively loving the fact that neo-soul is coming on strong.

New artists I’ve discovered this week:

Algebra Blessett – very nice! Smooth as ice too, damn!
Anthony David – my favorite track is “Spittin’ Game”
Conya Doss, this time a British import but neo-soul is neo-soul baby!
Chrisette Michele
Kindred the Family Soul – very nice.

I’m so glad we’re seeing a return to real music.

Just between these four artists it comprises 11 tracks.

Even got some new Jill Scott and a new track from Anthony Hamilton called “I’m Cool”

My iTunes library is now up to 1,628 items, or about 5.2 days of continuous play. My iPod Touch only had about 4.5GB left on it. I should have gotten myself the 32GB unit like I got for Keyron.

Religulous

I just started watching Bill Maher’s Religulous on Megavideo. I’m an hour and twelve minutes into an hour and forty-four minute video. I hate Megavideo for enforcing a 72 minute limit.

So far Bill has made fun of all sorts of Christians. He pretty much covers all the bases.

A few highlights. One is U.S. Senator Mark Pryor of Arkansas. He gleefully admits that there is no IQ test to be in congress. Maher goes on to make Pryor look like the religious fool that he is and you can tell Pryor isn’t too pleased about it.

It’s also funny watching the Mormons chase Maher and crew off temple property, or watch the PR flak at Jesus Land in Florida get her panties in a bunch because Maher is there.

Then there’s the Jew who thinks Israel shouldn’t exist. It’s some seriously delusional stuff!

I can’t wait to see the rest of it.

Then of course he interviews Ken Ham of Answers in Genesis (And a big booster of the Creation Museum!). During the process he shows the adorable (And a fine ass too!) Kirk Cameron who says, and I quote “…circumnavigate intelligence…”. In other words bypass the thinking part of the process.

The movie is just too much fun to watch.