'Touched'
[NAFDA] Spike-centric discussion. Lusty, lewd (only occasionally crude), risqué (and frisqué), bawdy (Oh, lawdy!), flirty ('cuz we're purty), raunchy talk inside. Caveat lector.
your current home state is one of the few in the country doing right by its citizens in this regard.
Honestly? That's the biggest "con" of moving to CA. It even beats out the fact that the state is pretty much financially kaput.
Man, I'm barely rational about the whole issue today. The systematic validation of insane prejudice is really grinding me down, almost to 2004 post-Election Day levels.
The systematic validation of insane prejudice is really grinding me down, almost to 2004 post-Election Day levels.
The main thing that makes me feel better is, in the long run we'll win. The generation in their 50s and 60s is far more homophobic than the generation in their 20s. The side of prejudice is on the wrong side of history....
The generation in their 50s and 60s is far more homophobic than the generation in their 20s.
Yeah, another friend of mine pointed this out as well, but I'm not ready for cold comfort yet. Later today, tomorrow, next week, maybe.
Matthew 5:32
32 But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, causes her to become an adulteress, and anyone who marries the divorced woman commits adultery.
Where are the marriage defenders on this? That's not even some narrative there, that's straight-up new testament words of Jesus. I'm sure they wouldn't want to be cherry picking the Bible to just reinforce they own prejudices.
Where are the marriage defenders on this?
See, Gud, you have to remember when the Bible was written. Those words were written in times much different than ours, and don't apply today.
But just this verse! Everything else in the Bible is literally true!
Oh, and the thing about mixing fabrics. You can ignore that verse too.
Where are the marriage defenders on this?
I don't know where all of them are, but one guy with a snarky bent has already put a proposition to ban divorce on the 2010 CA ballot, pointing out exactly that--if these people claim they want to protect marriage from being irreversibly damaged and devalued, well, here's the single thing that damages and devalues it most. If you oppose gay marriage but also oppose banning divorce, you're a hypocrite. Put up or shut up.
The generation in their 50s and 60s is far more homophobic than the generation in their 20s.
Not very encouraging to those of us pushing 50 and wanting to be sure of the legal protections. If I end up unable to make decisions for myself, I'd rather the decisions be made by the man I've lived with for close to 20 years and not the biological family I haven't seen in close to 15 years.
I got a jury summons and Maryland doesn't specifically recognize breastfeeding as a reason to ask for an exemption or postponement.
Take the munchkin with you and just start feeding during voir dire. When you hear the gasps, just say "this won't be a problem during the trial, will it?"
Vortex wins.
You could also bring your pump and a bunch of bottles to jury duty, plug the pump into the nearest outlet (preferably one located somewhere highly visible and central in the waiting room), and politely inquire where the nearest refrigerator is as you'll need someplace to put all your expressed milk, as you'll need access to it every three hours, thanks so much.
Take the munchkin with you and just start feeding during voir dire. When you hear the gasps, just say "this won't be a problem during the trial, will it?"
I was totally going to suggest this! Pack her down to the courthouse--they'll let you go home with an extension.