Sniff and post?

My TiVo has decided I might want to watch Hawaii Five-O and Quincy ME. Definitely on the "been nice" list. Roomba, OTOH, is an attention-whore, because when it runs when I'm not here it finds its home just fine, but when I'm here it runs out away from dock and whines till I put it back.

Okay. I've just taken heavy meds. This pain has to be beat back, or maybe I could just be unconscious. I don't get no ER until I come back from Jamaica in over a week.

I don't think rebranding "marriage" as a "civil union" really changes anything. It is still a contract regulated by the State and that the State has a vested interest in. The State will still have to define who can and can't "unionize", and the same people who oppose "gay marriage" (god I hate that term) will now oppose gay civil unions.

France has had civil marriages for years--still doesn't mean they will allow "The Gays" into the club.

But it will take a leg out of some of the arguments. God didn't have as much to say about civil unions.

It is not a "rebranding". It's getting the government completely out of the religion business. If you take the word "marriage" completely out of it, and put "marriage" into the powers of the church, then the problems are solved, as there are churches for everyone who wants one, but the governmnent is supposed to offer equality for all.

What it does is extract the part of the union that the government should be involved in; the part where it's a legal contract.

If you take the word "marriage" completely out of it, and put "marriage" into the powers of the church, then the problems are solved, as there are churches for everyone who wants one, but the governmnent is supposed to offer equality for all.

I think this is one of those things that is true in theory, but in practice people are still going to get all worked up about it. From the State's point of view, marriage isn't about religion per se.

Happy Birthday Strega!

I'd like to have the same rights as straight people, full stop, however unlikely I am to actually exercise them. But part of me does like the idea of pushing for technically equivalent civil unions earlier, and then watching fundies' blood pressure skyrocket when we go ahead and refer to it as marriage anyway regardless of what the actual license says.

The problem with that is that you end up with today's hodge-podge of things described as civil unions that vary wildly in what they actually mean and protect, and at the same time create the impression that the issue is resolved.

Yeah, Kat, it's a chicken/egg thing. Do I have the ability to ignore cacophony (and yet pull out a kid for not practicing the right thing from across the room) because of my job or do I have my job because I have the skill? After seven years, it's hard to tell.

I love "Smooth," I can't help it.

Maybe it's cause you like "Rockford," ita. Which I like better than those other shows, myself, but I would watch them if there was some sort of procedural emergency or something.