The last two weeks have been trying, but at the same time enjoyable. Two weeks ago, I flew to Pittsburgh, PA to visit my parents and my dad's side of the family. I always enjoy seeing my grandma and other family members, but this time everyone seemed so distant to me. Everyone seemed cranky to me, and my grandma and I didn't have lunch alone together like I have done with her everytime I go to Pittsburgh to visit since my parents moved there in 2006. I honestly believe it had to do with the fact that last time I was in Pittsburgh, I hadn't fully accepted who I was and who I was becoming. This time, however, I have become fairly comfortable with my sexuality and just couldn't be who I truly am. I know my grandma, uncle, aunt and cousin would not support my lifestyle and could possibly disown me. It hurts to think of the ramifications of my lifestyle and that I had to censor who I am.
My dad took me to a University of Pittsburgh Panthers basketball game against Siena College at the Peterson Event Center in Pittsburgh. I had an enjoyable time with him. The game was my first basketball game ever, and Pittsburgh was ranked third in the nation at the time of the game. Pitt ended up winning the game 79-66. Since I am in the hunt for a university to get my masters degree, and sports is the third most important aspect in my choice, being able to go to the game was a good opportunity to get a glimpse at the sports and student life at the University of Pittsburgh.
A few nights later, my aunt and cousin took me to a broadcast of the Jerome Bettis talk show on ESPN radio at the Jerome Bettis 36 Restaurant. The food was good, but the set up for the radio show is a poor concept in my opinion. The broadcast was in a small room with a window separating the radio show and the restaurant. We couldn't hear what they were saying, and we waited a couple hours after we ate for my aunt to get his autograph. Jerome only signed a couple autographs before having a "flight to catch." My aunt didn't get one. After we went to the Jerome Bettis Restaurant, my aunt took us around Pittsburgh. We looked at the Nativity Scene in downtown Pittsburgh, that was so beautiful and peaceful. I could have spent hours there if it wasn't for the fact that it was bitter cold out. After that, we went to a shopping mall in the heart of Pittsburgh, where I bought a few souveniors of my trip. We finished our trip to Pittsburgh off with going to the outside ice rink in the city and the Santas from around the world display with gingerbread houses all around inside the joining buildings.
My last night in Pittsburgh, my parents had my grandma, cousin, aunt and uncle over for an early Christmas dinner and to watch the Steelers get destroyed by the Tennessee Titans on TV. My grandma exchanged gifts with my parents and I. She gave me a steam iron, because I guess earlier in the year I had told her I didn't have an iron, $50 cash and a chocolate orange, which is one of my favorite chocolates. Later that night I got the opportunity to go to the candy factory down the street from my parents that makes some of the best chocolate in the country in my opinion. I bought some chocolate covered pretzels for myself (which I am eating as I type this) and some random chocolates for some of my friends.
This past Monday, my parents and I flew to St. Louis to spend the next week at my sister's house. Although I haven't enjoyed myself much here, it hasn't been that bad of a trip. My mom and sister enjoy drama and so they fight a lot. I don't like being around young kids and toddlers all that much and my sister has a 6-year-old and a 3-year-old. They are two spoiled brats with major attitude problems. I think I shock my nieces when I correct them for their poor behavior and demand they show respect when asking for things. Don't get me wrong, I love my nieces to death, but I would much rather see them for a few hours rather than having to live with them for a week! I am very independent and just hate dependence, which obviously children require. I'm not sure whether or not I will have children, although I lean more towards not having children more and more lately, particularly when I am here. My escape is the 20 minutes in the shower I have everyday.
I was able to spend some time with my best friend Jody while I was in St. Charles, which was nice. I went over to her house and watched RV with her and her step-dad. I came out to Jody when she came down to Springfield a few months ago for my birthday.
Christmas Eve, my parents, my sister, my brother-in-law and I all got to act like Santa Claus and wrap the presents for my nieces. We had a bit of drama when I asked if Makenzie, my three year old niece had received a Click Start computer yet, because I had bought her a game for Christmas. My mom told me she didn't have a Click Start computer at all. I was fumed because a month ago, my mom told me that's what they had gotten for her. It was the only present I had to give to her. After a while, my dad cleared it up saying they had bought her the computer and I would be able to give her the gift I bought her.
On Christmas Day, we of course had to wake up early to open presents, because Kylee and Makenzie thought the presents were from Santa Claus which made the surprise of opening the presents that much more magical. After the girls opened their presents, I opened my presents. My parents spoiled me, which always makes me feel guilty. This year, I felt extra guilty as I felt ungrateful. They bought me things that do not fit my style. They bought me a vacuum, which I didn't like at first because it didn't have two features I had asked for, but decided I would give it a whirl, vacuum bags, $100, 2 pairs of jeans and a pair of slippers. The slippers didn't quite work well at keeping my feet warm when I tried them on Christmas day, but I am hoping once I get them home they will work fine for me, because I really am tired of always wearing my shoes. I'd much rather be comfortable walking around the house in slippers. After we opened presents, we had big brunch which has been tradition in the family since I was a small child.
My parents and I went to my grandpa's house on my mom's side of the family for Christmas dinner. My sister went to her aunt's house. Her and my grandfather do not get along and haven't talked to each other in years. My grandpa and step-grandma always have my step-grandma's side of the family over, but they have adopted me as their own family. I don't particularly like my step-uncle as he is very opinionated and very racist along with foul mouthed. We had a large feast that is always delicious. Afterwards, we opened exchanged gifts. My grandparents gave me $150 cash.
I think for being a 25 year old, I did fairly well this Christmas, even though I still think I am unworthy of being spoiled.
Tonight, my parents had bought tickets to a horse and carriage ride through Tillis Park. It was one of those drive-thru Christmas displays. I was a bit afraid as it has been bitterly cold most of the week. Tonight it was probably in the 50's and it was misting rain, but not too much for it to be uncomfortable. The lights were great, and the family was great. The kids weren't bickering or crying, my sister didn't have an attitude, and everyone was getting along well. The display was beautiful and riding through in a horse and carriage gave it a great touch. As we were riding through the park, the song Jingle Bells started playing on the speakers throughout the park. My sister had taught my nieces the song, "Jingle Bells, Uncle Zach smells." Of course, Kylee, the 6-year-old had to sing this at the top of her lungs. My mom said, "don't worry, when you have kids, you'll be able to teach them songs about your sister. I was so tempted to respond with, "only if I can teach my cats and dogs how to talk," but I didn't. Although my parents practically know I more than likely will never have children, I didn't want to say that and peak their "interest" about my sexuality. I think they already suspect I could be gay, but I am not ready to tell them.
Tomorrow, my sister is cooking a ham for dinner. Afterwards, I am going out to Denny's, the old high school hangout with a couple of my friends and then over to my friend Nicole's new apartment.
After nearly two weeks of being away from home, on Sunday I finally get to go home and sleep in my own bed! I have missed my two cats and can't wait to see them again and be able to be myself again. When I am home I don't have to pretend to be someone I am not, or censor myself. I got the question, "do you have a girlfriend?" three times while in Pittsburgh and St. Louis. It is always hard to answer that question. I usually don't look the person in the eyes and simply say, "no." I have been counting down the days to be back in Springfield since Tuesday when my family really started getting on my nerves and I was ready to get away from my nieces. Its been a decent trip, but I am ready to get back to the usual and prepare to return to classes on January 5.
New Year's is just around the corner and I am looking forward to it more than I have in the past. My friend Launa is in town from South Carolina and I am sure we will be having a night on the town before going to an after party afterwards.
Anyways, this post has gotten much longer than anticipated. I will make a post wrapping up 2008 in a few days. I'm sure that too will become a novel. But, then again, when are my posts not novels?
Friday, December 26, 2008
Tuesday, December 23, 2008
Prop 8 Supporters Look to Nullify Legal Gay Marriages
Several months ago, the California Supreme Court ruled it unconstitutional to ban gay marriage through the way it was previously banned. This paved the way for gay Californians to get married. On November 4, by a simple majority, Californians voted to ban gay marriage through a Constitutional amendment. Although I believe this measure to also be unconstitutional, that is not the purpose of this blog entry.
Kenneth Starr, the lawyer responsible for the impeachment proceedings against President Bill Clinton in the late 1990's has stepped in and is attempting to force the courts to annul the nearly 18,000 marriages that occurred while the practice was legal in the state of California. A man that claims due to the California Constitution states California only recognizes marriages between a man and a woman, the people that were legally married during the months gay marriage was recognized that those too must be annulled.
Mr. Starr and the people on the Yes on 8 campaign fail to realize that a law or amendment cannot be applied retroactively, unless it states so in the amendment. In this case, it does not. In most cases a law cannot be applied retroactively, because it was not a crime when it was originally committed. This should hold true for these marriages as well. These people legally went to the courthouses to get their marriage licenses and they legally got married. The state is still required to recognize those marriages. If we allowed laws to be retroactively applied, we would head down a slippery slope that could end in disaster. If we were to ban something that is now legal and then say anyone who committed that crime while it was legal was subject to fines and/or jail time, where would that take us? It is unfair and even supporters of Prop 8 should see this. If this specific issue was to be brought to a vote by the people of California, I am sure a majority would not vote for this, although that is an assumption and not based off of anything scientific.
The issue that really got to me about Kenneth Starr was the fact that he said it is the job of the Supreme Court to uphold the will of the people. I would assume as a lawyer Mr. Starr would have taken a course in Constitutional law as well as had plenty of experience since he has worked alongside members of the Supreme Court in the past. I've got news that may come as a shock to Mr. Kenneth Starr. The job of the Supreme Court, whether it be a state supreme court, or the U.S. Supreme Court is to interpret the Constitution and make sure all laws are in line with that Constitution, not to make sure the will of the people is upheld. If the job of the high court was to make sure the will of the people was upheld, where would we be today? What would have happened to Brown v. Board of Education, or freedom of speech cases? Where would we be with interracial relationships or sodomy? We vote for the governors, presidents and Congressmen and women that we feel will best vote for our wants and needs. For those that are pro-life would want to vote for politicians that are more conservative, while pro-choicers would want to vote for the opposite. A conservative will interpret the Constitution more conservatively, where a liberal will obviously interpret it more liberally. I think Kenneth Starr needs to go back to law school so he can learn what the role of the Supreme Court is, because it is clear he is ignorant on this subject.
I believe the Supreme Court of California will overturn the unconstitutional amendment that currently plagues it, and I look forward to the day when gays across America can enjoy civil unions and/or gay marriages in the future.
Kenneth Starr, the lawyer responsible for the impeachment proceedings against President Bill Clinton in the late 1990's has stepped in and is attempting to force the courts to annul the nearly 18,000 marriages that occurred while the practice was legal in the state of California. A man that claims due to the California Constitution states California only recognizes marriages between a man and a woman, the people that were legally married during the months gay marriage was recognized that those too must be annulled.
Mr. Starr and the people on the Yes on 8 campaign fail to realize that a law or amendment cannot be applied retroactively, unless it states so in the amendment. In this case, it does not. In most cases a law cannot be applied retroactively, because it was not a crime when it was originally committed. This should hold true for these marriages as well. These people legally went to the courthouses to get their marriage licenses and they legally got married. The state is still required to recognize those marriages. If we allowed laws to be retroactively applied, we would head down a slippery slope that could end in disaster. If we were to ban something that is now legal and then say anyone who committed that crime while it was legal was subject to fines and/or jail time, where would that take us? It is unfair and even supporters of Prop 8 should see this. If this specific issue was to be brought to a vote by the people of California, I am sure a majority would not vote for this, although that is an assumption and not based off of anything scientific.
The issue that really got to me about Kenneth Starr was the fact that he said it is the job of the Supreme Court to uphold the will of the people. I would assume as a lawyer Mr. Starr would have taken a course in Constitutional law as well as had plenty of experience since he has worked alongside members of the Supreme Court in the past. I've got news that may come as a shock to Mr. Kenneth Starr. The job of the Supreme Court, whether it be a state supreme court, or the U.S. Supreme Court is to interpret the Constitution and make sure all laws are in line with that Constitution, not to make sure the will of the people is upheld. If the job of the high court was to make sure the will of the people was upheld, where would we be today? What would have happened to Brown v. Board of Education, or freedom of speech cases? Where would we be with interracial relationships or sodomy? We vote for the governors, presidents and Congressmen and women that we feel will best vote for our wants and needs. For those that are pro-life would want to vote for politicians that are more conservative, while pro-choicers would want to vote for the opposite. A conservative will interpret the Constitution more conservatively, where a liberal will obviously interpret it more liberally. I think Kenneth Starr needs to go back to law school so he can learn what the role of the Supreme Court is, because it is clear he is ignorant on this subject.
I believe the Supreme Court of California will overturn the unconstitutional amendment that currently plagues it, and I look forward to the day when gays across America can enjoy civil unions and/or gay marriages in the future.
Thursday, December 4, 2008
Dangers of Payday Loans
Nearly a year ago, I found myself in desperate need of money. Without really looking into the ramifications of my decision, I took out a payday loan. I thought I would be able to pay it off by my next paycheck and have no difficulty moving on from it. Unfortunately, I was severely mistaken and found myself unable to pay the payday loan and my bills. I had to continuously apply for new payday loans with the same company in order to pay my rent, car payment, electric and other bills. My debt was spiraling out of control. As I had a hard time grasping a hold of my bills, I looked into a debt management program. I signed up for one and the initial fee was going to be $250. I came to the realization that I wasn't going to be able to afford the initial fee and be able to pay for all my other bills at the same time, mainly because of the payday loan fee being automatically withdrawn from my account. Unable to pay all my bills for the pay period, and unable to change the $250 coming out for a debt management program, I found myself needing another source of income for the next two weeks. In accordance with Missouri state law, I was unable to withdraw another payday loan through the company I already had one with.
I ended up using Google to find another payday loan company. Within a few minutes of filling out an application, a company dispersed my application to several of their "partners." A little bit later, my phone rang. It was ACHLoan.com. They had received my application and were approving me for a loan. The lady on the other line "summarized" the loan documents, talking about the interest I would be charged and that I would not be charged any fees. I fell for it hookline and sinker. I went through the documents and agreed to the terms the woman on the phone had told me. I was naive.
A couple months later, I found myself in a deeper hole. I was months late on my electric bill and car payment. The fees of the payday loans had consumed me. I had nearly paid off my ACHLoan.com account, when I saw my principle had not changed and I was now being charged fees. As I went to log into my ACHLoan.com account, the web site had gone away. I Googled the web site in an effort to see if I could find a backdoor into their web site. The first response that popped up was a Rip-Off Report. As I looked through the Rip-Off Reports and message boards, I came to the realization that I had been duped, conned and in the middle of an illegal scam. Ironically, or not, I found out everyone that had dealings with this company had $200 loans and fees of $74, including myself. The company had a rule in their small print that said you can either continously pay a $74 fee every two weeks, or you could pay the full $200, but you couldn't partially pay for the principle. Fortunately for me, the bank is based in Ireland and I am not a subject to Irish law. When it comes to payday loans, payday companies have to abide by the state laws of the borrower.
In Missouri, a payday loan company must be licensed in the state, and there are many restrictions on the amount of interest that can be charged. On all fronts, ACHLoans.com was breaking Missouri law. Luckily for me, I had only forked over $222. Unfortunately for others, they were out hundred and thousands of dollars as a result of this fraudulent company. I figured out my rights, and have figured out I am only morally obligated to pay back the original amount borrowed. I was forced to close my checking account as a result of the grip both payday loan companies had on my account. The first payday loan company was legal, but my APR was set at nearly 700%! Just a few days after closing my account, it was forced back open by this fraudulent company withdrawing another $74 and causing my bank account to go negative over $200 because other transactions that were supposed to be directed to my new account came out as well. Now not only was I responsible for the -$200 in my bank account, but also all my bills and my payday loans. I found myself lost at where to turn. My pride got the best of me, and I wasn't going to confide in my parents. They are always harping about how good I am at supporting myself. My sister is always asking for money and support from my parents, where I have never asked them for a dime beyond for my schooling. I was over $1,600 in debt and had no idea what to do. I was faced with a major decision. I had a savings account with a couple thousand dollars in it that I was saving for retirement. I had no other choice but to pull it out, pay off my legal payday loan and get back to current on all my overdue bills. Although its not the decision I wanted to make, I am an adult and cannot rely on my parents. If they weren't here, where would I have turned? I would have had no other choice than to withdraw the money from the savings account. Now with my savings drained, the bill collectors will stop calling at all hours of the day. Hopefully in time, I will be able to replace that money and get back on track to where I was before this entire fiasco started.
The moral of this story is if you ever intend to take out a payday loan, make sure there is no other alternative. If its a large enough amount, try to pull out a personal loan at your bank or credit union, ask for a payday advance from your company, ask for a loan from a friend, and if you MUST pull out a payday loan, don't take out more than what you can afford on your next paycheck. Payday loans are reasonable, if you can pay them off completely on your next payday. And the most important aspect is to do your research on the payday loan companies you intend to do business with. I have used CashNetUSA for most of my payday loans and renewals. They are reasonable, although their APR is extremely high if you cannot pay them off by your next payday.
A web site has helped me get the information I needed to combat the fraudulent payday loan company, and it has been valuable to see the dangers of payday loans. Be careful out there, as a lot of these companies are fraudulent and will stop at nothing to collect their debts from you. Know your rights and try not to need extra money in the future.
http://www.debtconsolidationcare.com/paydayloan/forum/index.html
I ended up using Google to find another payday loan company. Within a few minutes of filling out an application, a company dispersed my application to several of their "partners." A little bit later, my phone rang. It was ACHLoan.com. They had received my application and were approving me for a loan. The lady on the other line "summarized" the loan documents, talking about the interest I would be charged and that I would not be charged any fees. I fell for it hookline and sinker. I went through the documents and agreed to the terms the woman on the phone had told me. I was naive.
A couple months later, I found myself in a deeper hole. I was months late on my electric bill and car payment. The fees of the payday loans had consumed me. I had nearly paid off my ACHLoan.com account, when I saw my principle had not changed and I was now being charged fees. As I went to log into my ACHLoan.com account, the web site had gone away. I Googled the web site in an effort to see if I could find a backdoor into their web site. The first response that popped up was a Rip-Off Report. As I looked through the Rip-Off Reports and message boards, I came to the realization that I had been duped, conned and in the middle of an illegal scam. Ironically, or not, I found out everyone that had dealings with this company had $200 loans and fees of $74, including myself. The company had a rule in their small print that said you can either continously pay a $74 fee every two weeks, or you could pay the full $200, but you couldn't partially pay for the principle. Fortunately for me, the bank is based in Ireland and I am not a subject to Irish law. When it comes to payday loans, payday companies have to abide by the state laws of the borrower.
In Missouri, a payday loan company must be licensed in the state, and there are many restrictions on the amount of interest that can be charged. On all fronts, ACHLoans.com was breaking Missouri law. Luckily for me, I had only forked over $222. Unfortunately for others, they were out hundred and thousands of dollars as a result of this fraudulent company. I figured out my rights, and have figured out I am only morally obligated to pay back the original amount borrowed. I was forced to close my checking account as a result of the grip both payday loan companies had on my account. The first payday loan company was legal, but my APR was set at nearly 700%! Just a few days after closing my account, it was forced back open by this fraudulent company withdrawing another $74 and causing my bank account to go negative over $200 because other transactions that were supposed to be directed to my new account came out as well. Now not only was I responsible for the -$200 in my bank account, but also all my bills and my payday loans. I found myself lost at where to turn. My pride got the best of me, and I wasn't going to confide in my parents. They are always harping about how good I am at supporting myself. My sister is always asking for money and support from my parents, where I have never asked them for a dime beyond for my schooling. I was over $1,600 in debt and had no idea what to do. I was faced with a major decision. I had a savings account with a couple thousand dollars in it that I was saving for retirement. I had no other choice but to pull it out, pay off my legal payday loan and get back to current on all my overdue bills. Although its not the decision I wanted to make, I am an adult and cannot rely on my parents. If they weren't here, where would I have turned? I would have had no other choice than to withdraw the money from the savings account. Now with my savings drained, the bill collectors will stop calling at all hours of the day. Hopefully in time, I will be able to replace that money and get back on track to where I was before this entire fiasco started.
The moral of this story is if you ever intend to take out a payday loan, make sure there is no other alternative. If its a large enough amount, try to pull out a personal loan at your bank or credit union, ask for a payday advance from your company, ask for a loan from a friend, and if you MUST pull out a payday loan, don't take out more than what you can afford on your next paycheck. Payday loans are reasonable, if you can pay them off completely on your next payday. And the most important aspect is to do your research on the payday loan companies you intend to do business with. I have used CashNetUSA for most of my payday loans and renewals. They are reasonable, although their APR is extremely high if you cannot pay them off by your next payday.
A web site has helped me get the information I needed to combat the fraudulent payday loan company, and it has been valuable to see the dangers of payday loans. Be careful out there, as a lot of these companies are fraudulent and will stop at nothing to collect their debts from you. Know your rights and try not to need extra money in the future.
http://www.debtconsolidationcare.com/paydayloan/forum/index.html
Saturday, November 15, 2008
Gay Marriage and the Elections
Gay rights in America has once again become the forefront of political discussions across the nation. California, Arizona and Florida have become three more states that have decided to define marriage between a man and a woman in their state constitutions. Arkansas has banned anyone that is "single" from being able to adopt children or be a foster parent, primarily to stop homosexuals from adopting or fostering a child. I have attempted to remain silent about this issue. I turn the channel when it comes up on the news, I don't click on a link on a news site that discusses it, and I avoid the discussions when they come up. As it is now nearly two weeks after the elections, I am finding it harder and harder to be silent.
Thirty states in the United States have now banned gay marriage, which is nearly the percent of states that banned interracial marriages in the 50s and 60s.
I first want to touch on Proposition 8, which is the most talked about and most protested gay marriage ban today. 52% of the voters in California; one of the most liberal states in the union, voted to ban gay marriage on election day two weeks ago. I think it is a sad testament to the United States as a whole when a simple majority of people can define the rights and privileges of the minority. As a U.S. Constitutional amendment requires 2/3 of the states to ratify it, I believe this should be the tool used for state constitutional amendments as well. A difference of 500,000 people was able to be the difference in deciding the fate of homosexual Californians. Although it is a majority, it is hardly a majority. It ought to be required that in order to change the amendment or to add a new amendment to any state that 66% of voters must approve the measure. I know most states had a much wider spread and this would not have impacted the votes, but simply majorities should not win out in a matter pf civil rights such as marriage.
I believe a major factor in people voting to ban gay marriage across the United States is a result of ignorance and bigotry on the issue. Most of the people that vote to ban gay marriage fail to understand that a civil marriage, which is the marriage allowed by government and a religious marriage are two different things. A civil marriage gives the two people the legal benefits that opposite sex couples get to enjoy when they are married. A religious marriage is a marriage in which a couple makes a commitment to God. Even atheists tend to have some sort of commitment ceremony when it comes to marriage.
By a homosexual wanting to get married to the person they love, they are not asking for you to approve of their lifestyle, or to lovingly embrace it. It is your prerogative to think the lifestyle is wrong. It is not your prerogative to tell them they cannot get married. Two homosexuals that are married simply want to know that if they were to be in the hospital that their partner is able to visit them. Many hospitals have rules that say no friends can visit, or that only spouses and parents may visit. Its a sad fact when you hear of a story of a couple that has been together for 30 years and one of them is in a car accident. As they lay in the hospital room taking their last breaths, they are not able to say goodbye to their lover; their spouse by common law standards because they are not married. The living partner will struggle with closure not being able to say their final goodbyes to their partner. Something a straight married couple is able to do with ease. If a couple has a civil union, many hospitals require the couple to have paperwork that verifies this. That is not right, nor is it loving and the action should not be condoned whether you are religious, non-religious, gay or straight.
I have a coworker that is a lesbian. She works while her partner stays at home, goes to school and takes care of their two year old child. My coworker paid for her partner to be artificially inseminated. In 2007 their child was born with a cleft pallet and a cleft lip. The child has had to go through dozens of surgeries with dozens more still to go. Because they are having to pay for their daughter's surgeries out of pocket and with the minimal help of Medicaid, because she cannot be put on the insurance plan of my coworker's, they are unable to pay for my coworker to adopt the child so she is both of theirs. If my coworker's partner was to die or unable to take care of their daughter before they are able to go through with the adoption, where will that child end up? I can guarantee they are not going to give custody to my coworker. That child is going to be tied up in litigation and a custody battle so fierce the child is going to be the one endangered as a result of it. She is going to feel no one loves her and wonder why she isn't at home with 'mama.' This isn't just. This isn't something the religious right should be embracing. This is something everyone should be up in arms about and condemn. Their daughter is not a toy to throw around, or a bargaining chip, she is a child and ought to have the right to live with the woman that has raised her along with her biological mother. This is a given right with marriage.
Before my coworker and her partner got together, her partner was married to a man because she believed her homosexuality could just go away if she loved the man. During her marriage, she had two loving children. In the divorce process, it came out that she was in fact a lesbian. Because of her chosen lifestyle, the judge determined her to be unfit to be a parent and gave custody to the father. Some might think that is a good thing, but her husband didn't want a second child. He wanted his wife to have an abortion, but she refused to do so. The children's father is abusive towards them, both psychologically and physically. Both children want to live with their mom and my coworker, but the courts refuse to hear anything to the contrary of the father raising them well. The father plays mind games with everyone involved and has an ego so large its ridiculous. These children are having to live in a hostile environment with an abusive father that is destroying their self-esteem and psychological well-being all because it is believed that mommy is leading an immoral life. They both consider my coworker more of a father than they consider their own dad. If it wasn't for the lovingness of my coworker and her partner, I would truly fear for these children. They seem to grasp their father is wrong and love people for who they are regardless of what they dad says.
During the presidential campaign, I remember hearing Senator McCain spout off that people can enter into legal agreements when he was asked about his stance on gay marriage. He was implying that people can write wills and write power of attorneys. What Senator McCain and many others fail to understand is that contracts such as wills and power of attorneys can be challenged in court, even after the author is dead. I once heard a story about a gay man. He was with his partner for over 10 years. He had his will and made his partner his power of attorney. He had his funeral arrangements and his plot all planned out before his untimely demise. His parents didn't approve of his lifestyle and hadn't been in his life for many years. When he died, his family challenged his contracts in court. His parents won. They moved his body back home and had him buried in their family plot. They won all of his property and his partner of 10 years had nothing. He had no house to call his own. Had they been married, his partner would have had first say in what happened to his body and how his estate would have been divided up. This isn't right and ought to be fixed!
As I mentioned before, my coworker's daughter has to go through countless surgeries. Her biological mother has to rely on Medicaid in order to support some of the surgeries the child has to face as neither of them are able to be on my coworker's employee based insurance plan. Married couples do not have to jump over this obstacle as they are able to be on each other's medical insurance provided through their employer. In essence, the government which is funded by the taxpayers is taking the burden on the system because they cannot put the child under my coworker's employee insurance plan. If she was recognized as the child's mother, or the wife of her partner, our tax dollars would be better spent on other things. My coworker isn't able to take sick time under the Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA) when her child is sick, because her child is not recognized as hers. When her daughter was born and for every other surgery she has had, my coworker has had to use her vacation time, something a straight couple does not have to do. They are free to use sick time to care for their sick spouse or child. When her daughter has medical issues and has to be taken to the emergency room, she has no legal right to be taken back and able to hold her daughter's hand through the process because she is not married in the eyes of the government, nor does she have custody of the child. If she was married, she would not have this issue.
Another perk a married couple is able to enjoy is being able to file their tax returns jointly and being able to have a tax break for being married. Homosexual couples are not able to enjoy this perk because of our govenment's stance on gay marriage. Although this is not an important factor for me, it is an important factor for some. If two people that love each other live in the same house and support each other financially, they should be able to reap the benefits any other married couple enjoys.
Changing gears a little bit, civil marriages and religious marriages are separate as I have explained before. I believe a ban on gay marriage is unconstitutional. Most people vote against same-sex marriage because of their religious beliefs. But the problem people do not realize is that we as a people should not be bound by the religious principles of others. I am a liberal Christian and do not believe homosexuality to be wrong or a sinful lifestyle, this is contrary to the ideals held by mainstream and more conservative sects of Christianity. We are not a Christian nation, we were not founded on Christian principles. The majority of our population may be Christian, but that does not make us a Christian nation. We are not a white nation, as most of our population is white, we are a melting pot of different cultures and different beliefs. Why should I be governed by the beliefs of mainstream Christianity? What if the majority of our people were Muslim, ought they be allowed to govern us through their Islamic principles? I surely hope not.
Contrary to popular belief, our founding fathers did not found this nation on Christian principles. Some of our founding fathers were Christians, but a majority of them were deists. A primary reason our founding fathers wanted to be independent of England was because England had a national church; The Church of England. The Church of England had a lot of influence when it came to the writing of laws. The founding fathers did not want this to be so in the United States. With this comes, the first amendment to the Bill of Rights;
Thirty states in the United States have now banned gay marriage, which is nearly the percent of states that banned interracial marriages in the 50s and 60s.
I first want to touch on Proposition 8, which is the most talked about and most protested gay marriage ban today. 52% of the voters in California; one of the most liberal states in the union, voted to ban gay marriage on election day two weeks ago. I think it is a sad testament to the United States as a whole when a simple majority of people can define the rights and privileges of the minority. As a U.S. Constitutional amendment requires 2/3 of the states to ratify it, I believe this should be the tool used for state constitutional amendments as well. A difference of 500,000 people was able to be the difference in deciding the fate of homosexual Californians. Although it is a majority, it is hardly a majority. It ought to be required that in order to change the amendment or to add a new amendment to any state that 66% of voters must approve the measure. I know most states had a much wider spread and this would not have impacted the votes, but simply majorities should not win out in a matter pf civil rights such as marriage.
I believe a major factor in people voting to ban gay marriage across the United States is a result of ignorance and bigotry on the issue. Most of the people that vote to ban gay marriage fail to understand that a civil marriage, which is the marriage allowed by government and a religious marriage are two different things. A civil marriage gives the two people the legal benefits that opposite sex couples get to enjoy when they are married. A religious marriage is a marriage in which a couple makes a commitment to God. Even atheists tend to have some sort of commitment ceremony when it comes to marriage.
By a homosexual wanting to get married to the person they love, they are not asking for you to approve of their lifestyle, or to lovingly embrace it. It is your prerogative to think the lifestyle is wrong. It is not your prerogative to tell them they cannot get married. Two homosexuals that are married simply want to know that if they were to be in the hospital that their partner is able to visit them. Many hospitals have rules that say no friends can visit, or that only spouses and parents may visit. Its a sad fact when you hear of a story of a couple that has been together for 30 years and one of them is in a car accident. As they lay in the hospital room taking their last breaths, they are not able to say goodbye to their lover; their spouse by common law standards because they are not married. The living partner will struggle with closure not being able to say their final goodbyes to their partner. Something a straight married couple is able to do with ease. If a couple has a civil union, many hospitals require the couple to have paperwork that verifies this. That is not right, nor is it loving and the action should not be condoned whether you are religious, non-religious, gay or straight.
I have a coworker that is a lesbian. She works while her partner stays at home, goes to school and takes care of their two year old child. My coworker paid for her partner to be artificially inseminated. In 2007 their child was born with a cleft pallet and a cleft lip. The child has had to go through dozens of surgeries with dozens more still to go. Because they are having to pay for their daughter's surgeries out of pocket and with the minimal help of Medicaid, because she cannot be put on the insurance plan of my coworker's, they are unable to pay for my coworker to adopt the child so she is both of theirs. If my coworker's partner was to die or unable to take care of their daughter before they are able to go through with the adoption, where will that child end up? I can guarantee they are not going to give custody to my coworker. That child is going to be tied up in litigation and a custody battle so fierce the child is going to be the one endangered as a result of it. She is going to feel no one loves her and wonder why she isn't at home with 'mama.' This isn't just. This isn't something the religious right should be embracing. This is something everyone should be up in arms about and condemn. Their daughter is not a toy to throw around, or a bargaining chip, she is a child and ought to have the right to live with the woman that has raised her along with her biological mother. This is a given right with marriage.
Before my coworker and her partner got together, her partner was married to a man because she believed her homosexuality could just go away if she loved the man. During her marriage, she had two loving children. In the divorce process, it came out that she was in fact a lesbian. Because of her chosen lifestyle, the judge determined her to be unfit to be a parent and gave custody to the father. Some might think that is a good thing, but her husband didn't want a second child. He wanted his wife to have an abortion, but she refused to do so. The children's father is abusive towards them, both psychologically and physically. Both children want to live with their mom and my coworker, but the courts refuse to hear anything to the contrary of the father raising them well. The father plays mind games with everyone involved and has an ego so large its ridiculous. These children are having to live in a hostile environment with an abusive father that is destroying their self-esteem and psychological well-being all because it is believed that mommy is leading an immoral life. They both consider my coworker more of a father than they consider their own dad. If it wasn't for the lovingness of my coworker and her partner, I would truly fear for these children. They seem to grasp their father is wrong and love people for who they are regardless of what they dad says.
During the presidential campaign, I remember hearing Senator McCain spout off that people can enter into legal agreements when he was asked about his stance on gay marriage. He was implying that people can write wills and write power of attorneys. What Senator McCain and many others fail to understand is that contracts such as wills and power of attorneys can be challenged in court, even after the author is dead. I once heard a story about a gay man. He was with his partner for over 10 years. He had his will and made his partner his power of attorney. He had his funeral arrangements and his plot all planned out before his untimely demise. His parents didn't approve of his lifestyle and hadn't been in his life for many years. When he died, his family challenged his contracts in court. His parents won. They moved his body back home and had him buried in their family plot. They won all of his property and his partner of 10 years had nothing. He had no house to call his own. Had they been married, his partner would have had first say in what happened to his body and how his estate would have been divided up. This isn't right and ought to be fixed!
As I mentioned before, my coworker's daughter has to go through countless surgeries. Her biological mother has to rely on Medicaid in order to support some of the surgeries the child has to face as neither of them are able to be on my coworker's employee based insurance plan. Married couples do not have to jump over this obstacle as they are able to be on each other's medical insurance provided through their employer. In essence, the government which is funded by the taxpayers is taking the burden on the system because they cannot put the child under my coworker's employee insurance plan. If she was recognized as the child's mother, or the wife of her partner, our tax dollars would be better spent on other things. My coworker isn't able to take sick time under the Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA) when her child is sick, because her child is not recognized as hers. When her daughter was born and for every other surgery she has had, my coworker has had to use her vacation time, something a straight couple does not have to do. They are free to use sick time to care for their sick spouse or child. When her daughter has medical issues and has to be taken to the emergency room, she has no legal right to be taken back and able to hold her daughter's hand through the process because she is not married in the eyes of the government, nor does she have custody of the child. If she was married, she would not have this issue.
Another perk a married couple is able to enjoy is being able to file their tax returns jointly and being able to have a tax break for being married. Homosexual couples are not able to enjoy this perk because of our govenment's stance on gay marriage. Although this is not an important factor for me, it is an important factor for some. If two people that love each other live in the same house and support each other financially, they should be able to reap the benefits any other married couple enjoys.
Changing gears a little bit, civil marriages and religious marriages are separate as I have explained before. I believe a ban on gay marriage is unconstitutional. Most people vote against same-sex marriage because of their religious beliefs. But the problem people do not realize is that we as a people should not be bound by the religious principles of others. I am a liberal Christian and do not believe homosexuality to be wrong or a sinful lifestyle, this is contrary to the ideals held by mainstream and more conservative sects of Christianity. We are not a Christian nation, we were not founded on Christian principles. The majority of our population may be Christian, but that does not make us a Christian nation. We are not a white nation, as most of our population is white, we are a melting pot of different cultures and different beliefs. Why should I be governed by the beliefs of mainstream Christianity? What if the majority of our people were Muslim, ought they be allowed to govern us through their Islamic principles? I surely hope not.
Contrary to popular belief, our founding fathers did not found this nation on Christian principles. Some of our founding fathers were Christians, but a majority of them were deists. A primary reason our founding fathers wanted to be independent of England was because England had a national church; The Church of England. The Church of England had a lot of influence when it came to the writing of laws. The founding fathers did not want this to be so in the United States. With this comes, the first amendment to the Bill of Rights;
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people to peacibly assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Simply put, our founding fathers did not want the government to say Christianity, or Judaism or any of the other religions out there is the national religion. They didn't want a law disallowing people from being able to exercise the religion of their choice. Therefore, it is wrong for us to force our Christian views or any other religious views on to other people or to allow them to define the law of the land. If your religion believes homosexual marriage to be wrong, then that is fine. Allow your religion to believe that, but don't allow your government to force those views upon me, or any other human being on this Earth.
Some of the words of our founding fathers are the strongest when it comes to advocating for gay marriage. In the second paragraph of the Declaration of Independence, our founding fathers said
Some of the words of our founding fathers are the strongest when it comes to advocating for gay marriage. In the second paragraph of the Declaration of Independence, our founding fathers said
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness"
All men are created equal... if a straight man and woman can marry the person they love, is it not equally right that a gay man and a gay woman be able to marry the person they love?
...that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness... is it not liberty and in the pursuit of happiness for a loving gay couple to be allowed marriage?
To disallow same-sex marriage on the government level is to go against what our founding fathers stood for, fought for and died for. It truly is a sad day in America when people can't set aside their differences and just allow people that are not hurting you or your family to take the vows of marriage and be able to stand up to the government and say, "we love each other."
An article that has been circulating around the internet for a few years summarizes gay marriage and the hypocracy of those against it quite well:
12 Reasons Why Homosexual Marriage is Bad
1. Homosexuality is not natural, much like eyeglasses, polyester, and birth control are not natural.
2. Heterosexual marriages are valid because they produce children. Infertile couples and old people can't get married either, because they can't have children.
3. Obviously gay parents will raise gay children. Because only straight parents raise straight children.
4. Straight marriage will be less meaningful, since Britney Spears 55-hour-marriage-just-for-fun was meaningful, and the 60% divorce rate is so meaningful as well.
5. Heterosexual marriage has been around for a long time, and it hasn't changed: women are property, blacks can't marry whites (or blacks cant marry blacks in some instances), divorce and adultery is illegal.
6. Gay marriage should be decided by the people, not the courts, because the majority-elected legislatures, not courts, have historically protected minorities.
7. Gay marriage is not supported by religion. Because in a theocracy like ours, the values of one religion are are always imposed on on the entire country. That's why we have one religion in America.
8. Gay marriage will encourage other people to be gay, just like hanging around tall people will encourage people to become taller.
9. Legalizing gay marriage will open the door to a lot of crazy things. Because a dog has legal standing to sign a marriage license.
10. Children can never succeed without both male and female role models at home. Thats why single parents are forbidden from raising children, and no single parent child has ever been successful at anything.
11. Gay marriage will change the foundation of our society. Heterosexual marriage has been around for a long time, and we could never adapt to new social norms, such as cars and longer lifespans.
12. Civil unions, providing most of the same benefits as marriage with a different name are better, because a "separate but equal" institution is always constitutional. Separate schools for African-Americans worked just as well as separate marriages will for gays and lesbians.
A final note I want to say before closing this up with my closing argument, many religious people are against gay marriage, because they think their church will be obliged by law to marry same sex couples in order to reap their governmental benefits. This is a fallacy the religious nuts on the right are trying to spoon feed you. Religious institutions have the right to refuse a marriage ceremony to anyone. For example, Catholics refuse to allow non-Catholics to be married in their churches, same as Jews and their synogogues. You must be Jewish to get married in a synogogue. This won't open the door to all churches being required to perform marriage ceremonies for everyone.
Look, I more than likely didn't change the mind of a person that believes marriage is between a man and a woman. Which I want to make clear, if thats what you believe religiously, that is fine, but don't impose that religious ideal on to me. We have a right to disagree about issues, that is the great thing about the United States of America. But I will say this, you can refuse me marriage, you can refuse every homosexual in this world marriage, but that is not going to end homosexuality, it is not going to end the gay rights movement and it is not going to silence us. Your bigotry and your hatred towards the gay community is only going to make us louder and stronger because we are not going to lay down and allow you to dictate who I can and cannot marry. I'm sorry to burst your bubble, but we don't choose to be gay just as much as you don't choose to be straight. I WANT to live a lifestyle that is frowned upon, I WANT to lose friends as a result of my sexuality. I WANT to be able to be punched in my face and beaten to death with no protection from the law, I WANT to be discriminated against because of my sexuality, I WANT to be denied civil rights that every American is given because I WANT to be gay. So, you can sit at your desk and advocate to stop the gays from getting married, but I can guarantee you one thing; homosexuals are going to continue to live their lifestyle, they are going to continue to love their partners, live with their partners and have families with their partners regardless of what the future holds for the American people. Although homosexuals would like to have the legal rights to a marriage, we don't require it. We can have our commitment ceremonies, we can exchange vows, exchange rings and vow our love to each other for the entire world to see and there's not a damn thing you can do about it. Homosexuality is not going to go away, and we're definitely not going to go away silently. We will fight until the end.
...that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness... is it not liberty and in the pursuit of happiness for a loving gay couple to be allowed marriage?
To disallow same-sex marriage on the government level is to go against what our founding fathers stood for, fought for and died for. It truly is a sad day in America when people can't set aside their differences and just allow people that are not hurting you or your family to take the vows of marriage and be able to stand up to the government and say, "we love each other."
An article that has been circulating around the internet for a few years summarizes gay marriage and the hypocracy of those against it quite well:
12 Reasons Why Homosexual Marriage is Bad
1. Homosexuality is not natural, much like eyeglasses, polyester, and birth control are not natural.
2. Heterosexual marriages are valid because they produce children. Infertile couples and old people can't get married either, because they can't have children.
3. Obviously gay parents will raise gay children. Because only straight parents raise straight children.
4. Straight marriage will be less meaningful, since Britney Spears 55-hour-marriage-just-for-fun was meaningful, and the 60% divorce rate is so meaningful as well.
5. Heterosexual marriage has been around for a long time, and it hasn't changed: women are property, blacks can't marry whites (or blacks cant marry blacks in some instances), divorce and adultery is illegal.
6. Gay marriage should be decided by the people, not the courts, because the majority-elected legislatures, not courts, have historically protected minorities.
7. Gay marriage is not supported by religion. Because in a theocracy like ours, the values of one religion are are always imposed on on the entire country. That's why we have one religion in America.
8. Gay marriage will encourage other people to be gay, just like hanging around tall people will encourage people to become taller.
9. Legalizing gay marriage will open the door to a lot of crazy things. Because a dog has legal standing to sign a marriage license.
10. Children can never succeed without both male and female role models at home. Thats why single parents are forbidden from raising children, and no single parent child has ever been successful at anything.
11. Gay marriage will change the foundation of our society. Heterosexual marriage has been around for a long time, and we could never adapt to new social norms, such as cars and longer lifespans.
12. Civil unions, providing most of the same benefits as marriage with a different name are better, because a "separate but equal" institution is always constitutional. Separate schools for African-Americans worked just as well as separate marriages will for gays and lesbians.
A final note I want to say before closing this up with my closing argument, many religious people are against gay marriage, because they think their church will be obliged by law to marry same sex couples in order to reap their governmental benefits. This is a fallacy the religious nuts on the right are trying to spoon feed you. Religious institutions have the right to refuse a marriage ceremony to anyone. For example, Catholics refuse to allow non-Catholics to be married in their churches, same as Jews and their synogogues. You must be Jewish to get married in a synogogue. This won't open the door to all churches being required to perform marriage ceremonies for everyone.
Look, I more than likely didn't change the mind of a person that believes marriage is between a man and a woman. Which I want to make clear, if thats what you believe religiously, that is fine, but don't impose that religious ideal on to me. We have a right to disagree about issues, that is the great thing about the United States of America. But I will say this, you can refuse me marriage, you can refuse every homosexual in this world marriage, but that is not going to end homosexuality, it is not going to end the gay rights movement and it is not going to silence us. Your bigotry and your hatred towards the gay community is only going to make us louder and stronger because we are not going to lay down and allow you to dictate who I can and cannot marry. I'm sorry to burst your bubble, but we don't choose to be gay just as much as you don't choose to be straight. I WANT to live a lifestyle that is frowned upon, I WANT to lose friends as a result of my sexuality. I WANT to be able to be punched in my face and beaten to death with no protection from the law, I WANT to be discriminated against because of my sexuality, I WANT to be denied civil rights that every American is given because I WANT to be gay. So, you can sit at your desk and advocate to stop the gays from getting married, but I can guarantee you one thing; homosexuals are going to continue to live their lifestyle, they are going to continue to love their partners, live with their partners and have families with their partners regardless of what the future holds for the American people. Although homosexuals would like to have the legal rights to a marriage, we don't require it. We can have our commitment ceremonies, we can exchange vows, exchange rings and vow our love to each other for the entire world to see and there's not a damn thing you can do about it. Homosexuality is not going to go away, and we're definitely not going to go away silently. We will fight until the end.
Thursday, October 30, 2008
Message from a Non-Voter
The conventions are over, the debates are through, and the final stretch is on. In just under a week, Americans throughout the United States will be taking to the polls to vote on the person to take the place of the departing president; George W. Bush. I've followed the candidates since their first announcements of their intentions to run for president. I saw the successes and the failures. I pulled my support behind Republican candidate, Former Senator Fred Thompson. After his epic failure at campaigning, I began supporting Senator John McCain. My only problem was I was supporting the John McCain that ran against then governor George W. Bush in 2000. Since that time, John McCain has become a sock puppet for the neo-cons of the Republican party that has lost the traditional foundations of the Republican party and turned to the "moral police," larger government, out of control spending, wars that never should have started and setting aside the Constitution to fit the agendas of what the neo-cons believe the Bible says. After my revelation of Senator McCain's shift to the right, I began looking at my other options.
I briefly became a supporter of the Libertarian candidate, Bob Barr, as I have seen myself becoming more Libertarian as time goes on. I found myself having difficulty supporting Former Representative Barr for president, as he was only a Republican in Libertarian shoes. He too held many of the beliefs the neo-cons themselves had. He was also caught flip flopping over gay marriage just two days before he accepted the nomination for president earlier this year.
After Senator Obama's choice in a running mate was announced as Delaware Senator, Joe Biden, I was becoming enthusiastic of the Democratic ticket. I enjoy Joe Biden's snarkiness, and his sense of humor. I failed to look at his policies. During the Democratic National Convention, I became even more energized by Senator Obama. Senator Obama blew it out of the park with his acceptance speech. I set aside my differences with Senator Obama on taxes, health care and foreign policy to support Obama/Biden. They preached change, and I bought into it. I figured the change would be a stark contrast to the failed administration of the George W. Bush years. I failed to see the larger picture.
As time has gone on, the presidential candidates have defined their plans if the American people give them the opportunity to occupy the Oval Office. Although I like the idea of having more money in my pocket under the President Barack Obama administration, I do not believe in his Peter Pan plan of taking from the rich and giving to the less fortunate. Democrats want us to believe that Obama's plan is not a theory straight out of Karl Marx's playbook, but redistribution of wealth is an ideal held by socialism. We take more money from the rich who already pay a majority of the taxes in the United States to put more money into the pockets of those that don't make as much and to those that already don't pay taxes. Senator Obama himself has called this redistributing the wealth. He mentioned the Constitution ought to have an amendment that defines wealth redistribution while he was a state senator in Illinois in 2001. He recently reiterated his point when he was talking to the now infamous, Joe the Plumber. While explaining his tax plan to Joe the Plumber, Senator Obama said we needed to spread the wealth around. A socialistic principle!
Health care has become a major problem the American people, including myself have had to face. We need health care reform, but neither Senator Obama nor Senator McCain seem to have the answer to the problem. Senator Obama wants to inject the federal government into our health care. Although Senator Obama makes good points, such as creating more competition in the health industry, bringing costs down and allowing the importation of prescription drugs from countries such as Canada, he fails to understand the cost and negative impacts of creating a quasi-universal health care type system. I believe in the expansion of S-CHIP, Medicaide and Medicare, but Obama's plan is too extreme for me. Universal health care may look great on paper, but when implemented has many snags that can cost lives and cost extra money. Hawaii attempted a universal health care system for children of their state similar to Obama's plans, but had to scrap the plan several months after its implementation due to costs and abuses in the system. If we look at other countries that have universal health care, the citizens' tax rates are much higher than ours, their quality of health care is less, there are long lines to have surgeries done, even emergency or urgent surgeries and doctors' lines are ever increasing. Government makes everything complicated and to create another beaurocracy that can impact my health and well-being is not something I want to gamble on.
Senator McCain's health care plan would tax our health benefits for the first time in history. He also wants to give a $5,000 tax credit to us in order to purchase health care. $5,000 is not a reasonable amount for people to receive the necessary health care in this growing world. Although it is a step in the right direction, it definitely does not answer a lot of the problems we are facing in the health care system. It fails to address competition and bringing the cost of health care back down to a reasonable rate.
The first decision any presidential candidate has after wrapping up the nomination of their respective parties is to choose a vice presidential candidate. As Senator Obama chose a good running mate in Senator Joe Biden, Senator McCain failed miserably at his choice in Alaskan Governor Sarah Palin. Senator Obama has been attacked for his weakness in foreign policy experience. He picked up on this weakness and calmed the nerves of some of the uncertain people by choosing an experienced foreign policy expert. Senator McCain's weakness has been known to be in the economy. Former Governor Mitt Romney would have rounded out the Republican ticket quite well with his extensive experience with economic issues. Unfortunately for McCain, he chose an inexperienced governor with no foreign policy experience and unable to grasp the needs of the American people. Through interviews, Governor Palin has shown her inability to grasp a concept and form it into words that a person can understand. Never leaving the United States beyond vacations to Mexico, and giving the Saturday Night Live writers vacations by writing the material used in skits on the show during interviews, speeches and debates that show her inability to fulfill the office of vice president, let alone the possibility of presidency was a major blow to the Republican ticket, and the prime reason I cannot vote for Senator McCain and Governor Sarah Palin for president and vice president.
A final point I want to make on my inability to vote for Senator Obama is his affiliations with questionable people. While a community organizer in Chicago, Senator Obama bought a house, but not without the help of slumlord and federally convicted felon Tony Rezko. What type of relationship did these two have? Barack Obama called Trinity United Church of Christ his church for 20 years. A church known for its black liberation theology and controversial pastor Rev. Jeremiah Wright, I have to wonder what impact this has on Obama's ideals of the world, of racism and of America. I know if I belonged to a church that says, "God Damn America," after the worst tragedy in American history, and calling America a terrorist network, I would immediately disavow my membership in the congregation and not attempt to cover it up as Senator Obama has done during the election. Another questionable figure is unrepentant domestic terrorist and founder of the terrorist organization Weather Underground which was responsible for bombing buildings in the 1960s and 70s. Senator Obama once again has not been clear about what his relationship with Ayers was and still is. My intent of bringing up Bill Ayers is not an attempt to connect Obama with the actions of Ayers in the 60s and 70s, but to bring to light that Senator Obama has dealings with a former terrorist and believer in communism. Under no circumstances would I ever consider being friends with a former Al-Qaeda member. The final person I want to know more about is Senator Obama's connections with former PLO member; another terrorist organization, Rashid Khalidi. The LA Times is hiding something here, and it is to benefit the election of Senator Obama. I want to know the full extent of the relationships Senator Obama has had with these people before I could consider voting for him. A person can call this mudslinging from the right, but it is completely fair game to bring up the associations a man wanting to hold the highest office in the United States has and demand answers. If it comes out that his relationships were nothing, than so be it, but I want to know before I punch the Barack Obama box on Tuesday.
A final reason I do not support Senator Obama for the presidency of the United States is because he is known as the most liberal person in the senate and voted with his party 98% of the time, which hardly screams bipartisan to me.
I could go on for several more hours, I am sure, about things I cannot support in regards to Senator McCain and Senator Obama, but I will end it there as my purpose of writing this is to explain a bit more my choice to not vote for a presidential candidate.
Now, I explained why I cannot support Former Representative Bob Barr for president, I will briefly explain the final person I would consider voting for; the Constitutional Party candidate, Chuck Baldwin. Simply put, it is extremely difficult to find anything Chuck Baldwin stands for. Nearly half the things he stands for are not shown anywhere and it is hard to see if that is where he truly stands on the issues that are known.
All other candidates are too far to the left for me.
Many people have told me to write in a candidate if none of the other candidates fit what I want in a president, but writing someone in is not as simple in Missouri as writing someone in. They have to be filed as a write-in candidate, and if they are not, the vote does not count. So, in other words, I am wasting my time and practically NOT voting if I just write someone in.
People claim voting is our right, which I agree with, it is a right. They tell me to vote a third party candidate to "protest" the two main candidates, but as I have outlined here, I do not support any third party candidate and I am not going to vote for someone simply to vote. I prefer to be an informed voter than to go into something simply to vote. It's the candidates' jobs to persuade me to vote for them. If none of them do it, then what is the purpose of me voting for them? I think it speaks much more volumes to the campaigns if you "stay at home" the day of the election than to vote for a third party candidate. If Missouri had 1,000,000 voters and only 750,000 voters vote, it might make the Democratic and Republican parties look at why the 250,000 voters did not show up. They will be less concerned with looking at why people voted for the third party candidates and more concerned with why people stayed home. To me, not voting for president is much more of a protest than voting for a third party candidate. I am letting my voice be heard through my non-vote.
Not voting simply to not vote is much different than not voting because you can't support any of the candidates running. This isn't about me looking for someone to vote for that I agree with 100%, because I know it will never happen, unless of course I run for president. It's about agreeing with a candidate on the most important of issues, and this time around, none of the candidates and I agree on the most important issues.
I will have every right just as much as a voter to complain if something goes wrong during the next presidency as I didn't vote for that candidate because I don't support them and I let my voice be heard by not voting. And for those that say I don't have a right to complain, I guess when the candidate you vote for is elected and something goes wrong, or something happens you don't agree with, you have no right to complain either. And I can guarantee if you try to silence me because I didn't vote, I will hold you to that exact standard if your candidate makes it into office. Hopefully in 2012 I will have enough confidence in the incumbent to vote for them, or there will be a candidate on the other side that I believe will make a good president.
I briefly became a supporter of the Libertarian candidate, Bob Barr, as I have seen myself becoming more Libertarian as time goes on. I found myself having difficulty supporting Former Representative Barr for president, as he was only a Republican in Libertarian shoes. He too held many of the beliefs the neo-cons themselves had. He was also caught flip flopping over gay marriage just two days before he accepted the nomination for president earlier this year.
After Senator Obama's choice in a running mate was announced as Delaware Senator, Joe Biden, I was becoming enthusiastic of the Democratic ticket. I enjoy Joe Biden's snarkiness, and his sense of humor. I failed to look at his policies. During the Democratic National Convention, I became even more energized by Senator Obama. Senator Obama blew it out of the park with his acceptance speech. I set aside my differences with Senator Obama on taxes, health care and foreign policy to support Obama/Biden. They preached change, and I bought into it. I figured the change would be a stark contrast to the failed administration of the George W. Bush years. I failed to see the larger picture.
As time has gone on, the presidential candidates have defined their plans if the American people give them the opportunity to occupy the Oval Office. Although I like the idea of having more money in my pocket under the President Barack Obama administration, I do not believe in his Peter Pan plan of taking from the rich and giving to the less fortunate. Democrats want us to believe that Obama's plan is not a theory straight out of Karl Marx's playbook, but redistribution of wealth is an ideal held by socialism. We take more money from the rich who already pay a majority of the taxes in the United States to put more money into the pockets of those that don't make as much and to those that already don't pay taxes. Senator Obama himself has called this redistributing the wealth. He mentioned the Constitution ought to have an amendment that defines wealth redistribution while he was a state senator in Illinois in 2001. He recently reiterated his point when he was talking to the now infamous, Joe the Plumber. While explaining his tax plan to Joe the Plumber, Senator Obama said we needed to spread the wealth around. A socialistic principle!
Health care has become a major problem the American people, including myself have had to face. We need health care reform, but neither Senator Obama nor Senator McCain seem to have the answer to the problem. Senator Obama wants to inject the federal government into our health care. Although Senator Obama makes good points, such as creating more competition in the health industry, bringing costs down and allowing the importation of prescription drugs from countries such as Canada, he fails to understand the cost and negative impacts of creating a quasi-universal health care type system. I believe in the expansion of S-CHIP, Medicaide and Medicare, but Obama's plan is too extreme for me. Universal health care may look great on paper, but when implemented has many snags that can cost lives and cost extra money. Hawaii attempted a universal health care system for children of their state similar to Obama's plans, but had to scrap the plan several months after its implementation due to costs and abuses in the system. If we look at other countries that have universal health care, the citizens' tax rates are much higher than ours, their quality of health care is less, there are long lines to have surgeries done, even emergency or urgent surgeries and doctors' lines are ever increasing. Government makes everything complicated and to create another beaurocracy that can impact my health and well-being is not something I want to gamble on.
Senator McCain's health care plan would tax our health benefits for the first time in history. He also wants to give a $5,000 tax credit to us in order to purchase health care. $5,000 is not a reasonable amount for people to receive the necessary health care in this growing world. Although it is a step in the right direction, it definitely does not answer a lot of the problems we are facing in the health care system. It fails to address competition and bringing the cost of health care back down to a reasonable rate.
The first decision any presidential candidate has after wrapping up the nomination of their respective parties is to choose a vice presidential candidate. As Senator Obama chose a good running mate in Senator Joe Biden, Senator McCain failed miserably at his choice in Alaskan Governor Sarah Palin. Senator Obama has been attacked for his weakness in foreign policy experience. He picked up on this weakness and calmed the nerves of some of the uncertain people by choosing an experienced foreign policy expert. Senator McCain's weakness has been known to be in the economy. Former Governor Mitt Romney would have rounded out the Republican ticket quite well with his extensive experience with economic issues. Unfortunately for McCain, he chose an inexperienced governor with no foreign policy experience and unable to grasp the needs of the American people. Through interviews, Governor Palin has shown her inability to grasp a concept and form it into words that a person can understand. Never leaving the United States beyond vacations to Mexico, and giving the Saturday Night Live writers vacations by writing the material used in skits on the show during interviews, speeches and debates that show her inability to fulfill the office of vice president, let alone the possibility of presidency was a major blow to the Republican ticket, and the prime reason I cannot vote for Senator McCain and Governor Sarah Palin for president and vice president.
A final point I want to make on my inability to vote for Senator Obama is his affiliations with questionable people. While a community organizer in Chicago, Senator Obama bought a house, but not without the help of slumlord and federally convicted felon Tony Rezko. What type of relationship did these two have? Barack Obama called Trinity United Church of Christ his church for 20 years. A church known for its black liberation theology and controversial pastor Rev. Jeremiah Wright, I have to wonder what impact this has on Obama's ideals of the world, of racism and of America. I know if I belonged to a church that says, "God Damn America," after the worst tragedy in American history, and calling America a terrorist network, I would immediately disavow my membership in the congregation and not attempt to cover it up as Senator Obama has done during the election. Another questionable figure is unrepentant domestic terrorist and founder of the terrorist organization Weather Underground which was responsible for bombing buildings in the 1960s and 70s. Senator Obama once again has not been clear about what his relationship with Ayers was and still is. My intent of bringing up Bill Ayers is not an attempt to connect Obama with the actions of Ayers in the 60s and 70s, but to bring to light that Senator Obama has dealings with a former terrorist and believer in communism. Under no circumstances would I ever consider being friends with a former Al-Qaeda member. The final person I want to know more about is Senator Obama's connections with former PLO member; another terrorist organization, Rashid Khalidi. The LA Times is hiding something here, and it is to benefit the election of Senator Obama. I want to know the full extent of the relationships Senator Obama has had with these people before I could consider voting for him. A person can call this mudslinging from the right, but it is completely fair game to bring up the associations a man wanting to hold the highest office in the United States has and demand answers. If it comes out that his relationships were nothing, than so be it, but I want to know before I punch the Barack Obama box on Tuesday.
A final reason I do not support Senator Obama for the presidency of the United States is because he is known as the most liberal person in the senate and voted with his party 98% of the time, which hardly screams bipartisan to me.
I could go on for several more hours, I am sure, about things I cannot support in regards to Senator McCain and Senator Obama, but I will end it there as my purpose of writing this is to explain a bit more my choice to not vote for a presidential candidate.
Now, I explained why I cannot support Former Representative Bob Barr for president, I will briefly explain the final person I would consider voting for; the Constitutional Party candidate, Chuck Baldwin. Simply put, it is extremely difficult to find anything Chuck Baldwin stands for. Nearly half the things he stands for are not shown anywhere and it is hard to see if that is where he truly stands on the issues that are known.
All other candidates are too far to the left for me.
Many people have told me to write in a candidate if none of the other candidates fit what I want in a president, but writing someone in is not as simple in Missouri as writing someone in. They have to be filed as a write-in candidate, and if they are not, the vote does not count. So, in other words, I am wasting my time and practically NOT voting if I just write someone in.
People claim voting is our right, which I agree with, it is a right. They tell me to vote a third party candidate to "protest" the two main candidates, but as I have outlined here, I do not support any third party candidate and I am not going to vote for someone simply to vote. I prefer to be an informed voter than to go into something simply to vote. It's the candidates' jobs to persuade me to vote for them. If none of them do it, then what is the purpose of me voting for them? I think it speaks much more volumes to the campaigns if you "stay at home" the day of the election than to vote for a third party candidate. If Missouri had 1,000,000 voters and only 750,000 voters vote, it might make the Democratic and Republican parties look at why the 250,000 voters did not show up. They will be less concerned with looking at why people voted for the third party candidates and more concerned with why people stayed home. To me, not voting for president is much more of a protest than voting for a third party candidate. I am letting my voice be heard through my non-vote.
Not voting simply to not vote is much different than not voting because you can't support any of the candidates running. This isn't about me looking for someone to vote for that I agree with 100%, because I know it will never happen, unless of course I run for president. It's about agreeing with a candidate on the most important of issues, and this time around, none of the candidates and I agree on the most important issues.
I will have every right just as much as a voter to complain if something goes wrong during the next presidency as I didn't vote for that candidate because I don't support them and I let my voice be heard by not voting. And for those that say I don't have a right to complain, I guess when the candidate you vote for is elected and something goes wrong, or something happens you don't agree with, you have no right to complain either. And I can guarantee if you try to silence me because I didn't vote, I will hold you to that exact standard if your candidate makes it into office. Hopefully in 2012 I will have enough confidence in the incumbent to vote for them, or there will be a candidate on the other side that I believe will make a good president.
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
In Remembrance: September 11, 2001
"Tuesday, September 11, 2001 began as a nice crisp summer day. People were preparing for yet another hard day at work. They rushed to get to their offices on time to begin the work week, for another day. Others rushed to get to the important meetings they were running late for. Men and women alike boarded planes, trains and busses to travel a far distance for meetings or conventions that were going on in other states, while other people were leaving town to see their loved ones' wedding ceremonies, or just to get away from the pressures of their daily lives for a few days.
It stated as a normal day in New York City, as people walked a few blocks to their jobs, and other people were lucky enough to get a ride in a taxi, bus or use the subway system. In Washington, D.C., it looked like it would be a nice day to enjoy a picnic on the Mall near the Washington Monument.
Even President Bush had some great plans for the day. Raising awareness and encourage young students to read. He was planning to read to a classroom full of children. He soon learned along with every American, today was not a normal day. Today would be a day that will not soon be forgotten..." - An excerpt of a high school project book I did for my American Government class.
Today is a black day in American history. A day I wish we could skip over so the emotions of that day do not come flooding back. Today marks the seven year anniversary of the worst terrorist attack on American soil. As I reflect on that fateful day, September 11, 2001, I think of the moment I found out...
I was a senior in high school. September 11, 2001 was already an unusual day for my school district. We had a half day for teacher enrichment programs. In my first class, we had a guest speaker that was a JAG in the United States military. The first of the attacks happened during my first hour class. My second hour class was a law class and so we listened to the JAG speak again during that class. By this time, I am still unaware of the attacks occurring. I first heard the news during my fourth hour Geometry class when we were preparing to take the first part of a test. A girl walked in the room and asked if we could turn the radio on. At the time, it seemed strange that she would ask such a question. We had never had the radio on during class before, and why would we do it on a test day? Surprisingly, our teacher turned the radio on and passed out the tests. I couldn't hear the actual words, but I could hear a man speaking somberly on the radio. I leaned over to the girl sitting next to me and asked her what was going on. She was very surprised I had not yet heard the news. She told me the World Trade Center was on fire and the top floors had collapsed. Moments later, our principal came over the intercom and said there was a national tragedy. She handed it over to a history teacher that could hardly hold back the tears. He stated the World Trade Center had been attacked and the Pentagon had a plane crash into it.
During my fifth hour class, we listened to the radio and discussed what was going on in. As we all sat around talking, I jotted down a quick note to myself so I could remember my emotions for the future.
"I am sitting in my 5th hour class. It's a half day, so I am in here early. The time is about 9:45AM. The details are very sketchy, so I'm not really sure what is going on. Two hijacked planes crashed into the World Trade Center collapsing the top two floors, or something like that. Another plane has crashed into the Pentagon. That's all I know right now. I am so scared, I don't know what is going on. Are these mad terrorists trying to overthrow our government? Are they trying to kill us?
It's about 20 minutes later now, I'm in my 6th hour class and we are now listening to the radio. All flights throughout the U.S. have been grounded, although tere are some planes that are unaccounted for. I also have figured out that both Trade Centers have collapsed, trapping up to 50,000 people. I just want to go home."
My 7th hour class was my final class of the day, and it gave me the chance to see the first glimpses of the World Trade Center, the Pentagon and the field in Shanksville, PA where the fourth plane crashed. Chills poured throughout my body as there was smoke billowing from the New York City skyline. I can still picture that moment in time as though it just happened. Quickly, images turned to the Middle East, showing people running through the streets celebrating the tragedy of the American people. My teacher grabbed a desk next to mine and simply announced to the class, "Bomb those bastards!" a quote that continues to ring in my mind when I think back to that day.
In an attempt to forget about the events of the day, a group of friends went over the my friend Jody's house to watch a movie. As our minds wandered to what was going on, we all slowly migrated to another room to watch the news feeds. President Bush was about to speak, and made one of the most infamous quotes of the entire ordeal; "America was attacked by a faceless coward..." A sentiment would begin brewing across America, and President Bush would receive the highest approval rating of any president during a time when we needed a strong leader, soaring above 80%.
As revenge and anger began setting into the America people's minds the next day, I wrote another journal entry for my Senior Project Book which echoed the sentiment of the majority of people:
"I wish I was just dreaming. Experts expect up to 50,000 people could be trapped inside the rubble. Osama bin Laden has been named as the prime suspect in the attacks on the World Trade Center, the Pentagon and in Pennsylvania. For another day, all flights throughout the U.S. have been cancelled, the stock market has been shutdown and all baseball games have been cancelled. The search and rescue mission is well underway. Dear God, I hope they find a lot of people alive in the rubble. 266 people are presumed dead in the four planes that crashed. We must hunt down and KILL Osama bin Laden."
Seven years later, the hunt for Osama bin Laden continues. The war in Afghanistan has continued since it began in October of 2001. Al-Qaeda has been broken up, and hard for them to organize into the huge organization it was before. The Taliban, the former government of Afghanistan has continued to fight for control over Afghanistan, but for the most part has been unsuccessful. The United States military and government along with other international organizations and governments have thwarted attacks on American soil and abroad.
Although Americans have gone back to the ways things had been before 9/11/01, we will never forget the victims or the unity we all had during those times. Tragedies are always bad things, but the resolve of the American people is and always will be strong. We triumph the most during tragedies as we embrace and unify to overcome the obstacles thrown at us.
As we mark the seventh anniversary of September 11, 2001, we are less than 60 days away from a presidential election that will change the last 8 years of America. We are in heated contest between the first black man and the oldest man running for a first term along with a female running mate. President Bush will be leaving the White House, and a new administration will be taking its place. Today is a day when we should put politics aside, put our differences aside and show we are still a unified front. Honor the victims and honor the dead. We will never forget September 11, 2001. God bless America.
It stated as a normal day in New York City, as people walked a few blocks to their jobs, and other people were lucky enough to get a ride in a taxi, bus or use the subway system. In Washington, D.C., it looked like it would be a nice day to enjoy a picnic on the Mall near the Washington Monument.
Even President Bush had some great plans for the day. Raising awareness and encourage young students to read. He was planning to read to a classroom full of children. He soon learned along with every American, today was not a normal day. Today would be a day that will not soon be forgotten..." - An excerpt of a high school project book I did for my American Government class.
Today is a black day in American history. A day I wish we could skip over so the emotions of that day do not come flooding back. Today marks the seven year anniversary of the worst terrorist attack on American soil. As I reflect on that fateful day, September 11, 2001, I think of the moment I found out...
I was a senior in high school. September 11, 2001 was already an unusual day for my school district. We had a half day for teacher enrichment programs. In my first class, we had a guest speaker that was a JAG in the United States military. The first of the attacks happened during my first hour class. My second hour class was a law class and so we listened to the JAG speak again during that class. By this time, I am still unaware of the attacks occurring. I first heard the news during my fourth hour Geometry class when we were preparing to take the first part of a test. A girl walked in the room and asked if we could turn the radio on. At the time, it seemed strange that she would ask such a question. We had never had the radio on during class before, and why would we do it on a test day? Surprisingly, our teacher turned the radio on and passed out the tests. I couldn't hear the actual words, but I could hear a man speaking somberly on the radio. I leaned over to the girl sitting next to me and asked her what was going on. She was very surprised I had not yet heard the news. She told me the World Trade Center was on fire and the top floors had collapsed. Moments later, our principal came over the intercom and said there was a national tragedy. She handed it over to a history teacher that could hardly hold back the tears. He stated the World Trade Center had been attacked and the Pentagon had a plane crash into it.
During my fifth hour class, we listened to the radio and discussed what was going on in. As we all sat around talking, I jotted down a quick note to myself so I could remember my emotions for the future.
"I am sitting in my 5th hour class. It's a half day, so I am in here early. The time is about 9:45AM. The details are very sketchy, so I'm not really sure what is going on. Two hijacked planes crashed into the World Trade Center collapsing the top two floors, or something like that. Another plane has crashed into the Pentagon. That's all I know right now. I am so scared, I don't know what is going on. Are these mad terrorists trying to overthrow our government? Are they trying to kill us?
It's about 20 minutes later now, I'm in my 6th hour class and we are now listening to the radio. All flights throughout the U.S. have been grounded, although tere are some planes that are unaccounted for. I also have figured out that both Trade Centers have collapsed, trapping up to 50,000 people. I just want to go home."
My 7th hour class was my final class of the day, and it gave me the chance to see the first glimpses of the World Trade Center, the Pentagon and the field in Shanksville, PA where the fourth plane crashed. Chills poured throughout my body as there was smoke billowing from the New York City skyline. I can still picture that moment in time as though it just happened. Quickly, images turned to the Middle East, showing people running through the streets celebrating the tragedy of the American people. My teacher grabbed a desk next to mine and simply announced to the class, "Bomb those bastards!" a quote that continues to ring in my mind when I think back to that day.
In an attempt to forget about the events of the day, a group of friends went over the my friend Jody's house to watch a movie. As our minds wandered to what was going on, we all slowly migrated to another room to watch the news feeds. President Bush was about to speak, and made one of the most infamous quotes of the entire ordeal; "America was attacked by a faceless coward..." A sentiment would begin brewing across America, and President Bush would receive the highest approval rating of any president during a time when we needed a strong leader, soaring above 80%.
As revenge and anger began setting into the America people's minds the next day, I wrote another journal entry for my Senior Project Book which echoed the sentiment of the majority of people:
"I wish I was just dreaming. Experts expect up to 50,000 people could be trapped inside the rubble. Osama bin Laden has been named as the prime suspect in the attacks on the World Trade Center, the Pentagon and in Pennsylvania. For another day, all flights throughout the U.S. have been cancelled, the stock market has been shutdown and all baseball games have been cancelled. The search and rescue mission is well underway. Dear God, I hope they find a lot of people alive in the rubble. 266 people are presumed dead in the four planes that crashed. We must hunt down and KILL Osama bin Laden."
Seven years later, the hunt for Osama bin Laden continues. The war in Afghanistan has continued since it began in October of 2001. Al-Qaeda has been broken up, and hard for them to organize into the huge organization it was before. The Taliban, the former government of Afghanistan has continued to fight for control over Afghanistan, but for the most part has been unsuccessful. The United States military and government along with other international organizations and governments have thwarted attacks on American soil and abroad.
Although Americans have gone back to the ways things had been before 9/11/01, we will never forget the victims or the unity we all had during those times. Tragedies are always bad things, but the resolve of the American people is and always will be strong. We triumph the most during tragedies as we embrace and unify to overcome the obstacles thrown at us.
As we mark the seventh anniversary of September 11, 2001, we are less than 60 days away from a presidential election that will change the last 8 years of America. We are in heated contest between the first black man and the oldest man running for a first term along with a female running mate. President Bush will be leaving the White House, and a new administration will be taking its place. Today is a day when we should put politics aside, put our differences aside and show we are still a unified front. Honor the victims and honor the dead. We will never forget September 11, 2001. God bless America.
Tuesday, September 9, 2008
None of the Above
The presidential election season is in full swing now. The nominating processes for both the Democrats and Republicans are now behind us. As the candidates vie for the undecided voters and attempt to sway voters away from the opposing candidates attack ads, promises of change, and emotions growing high, I can't seem to find any ability to support either of the main tickets of the Republican party or the Democrat party.
I originally was a supporter of John McCain, a candidate I align most of my values with, but denounced that support months ago when I realized his anti-gay rights attitude. I briefly became a supporter of Barack Obama after he chose a man I admired since I originally heard him during the democrat presidential primary elections, Joe Biden for his vice presidential candidate. My only purpose for supporting Barack Obama would have bee because of his support for gay rights and the idea he was not President Bush. I quickly remembered Senator Obama wants to create a larger federal government, which is something I cannot support. Barack Obama believes in raising taxes on the wealthy, creating socialized medicine, creating other government entities that will only intrude into the lives of the American people. As a person with significant credit card debt, I was interested in Obama's plan to put regulations on the credit card industries to not be able to retroactively apply an increase in annual percentage rates, not be able to change the due dates of the bills without due notice, and not be able to charge extreme late fees. After realization that its the banks' money and it was my own fault for raising my debt so high, I knew I couldn't support Obama's plan.
I have started to seriously consider not exercising my vote for president. Although I believe voting is an important privilege we are all given and ought to exercise, I believe we should have the ability to vote for none of the above. Some states recognize a none of the above vote, but a vast majority do not. Because I cannot vote none of the above, I see no point in voting for me to vote for president. Many people tell me, "oh vote for the lesser of two evils!" Well, that's what I did in 2004 with my vote, but I cannot bring myself to vote for the lesser of two evils when I have fundamental differences with both candidates. What if I vote for one candidate that I felt was the lesser of the two evils and they become president and they end up being one of the worst presidents? Can I support the fact that I had the choice not to give them my vote in the first place, but I did simply because they were the lesser of two evils? I don't think so. I've looked into third party candidates, but I cannot vote for any of them as some are flip floppers on the issues that matter to me, such as the Libertarian candidate, Bob Barr. Most of the third party candidates are either liberal, or their ideas are too extreme for my liking. I know they do not have a possibility of winning, but how can I support a third party candidate that I have fundamental differences with if I cannot support a Democrat or Republican for the same reasons.
My friends and coworkers that I have told I am not voting for president have told me that if I do not vote I cannot complain about the next president. I categorically refuse to accept that idea. Firstly, I believe it is different for a person to stay home and not vote simply because they do not want to and a person not voting for someone because they do not support the candidates. In the first instance, the person is just being lazy and taking advantage of being an American. In the other instance, which is my instance, the person is saying none of the candidates are good enough to be the next president of the United States.
Secondly, the last I checked the United States has a Constitutional Amendment that does not hinder our right to freedom of speech. Now, I want to make it clear, I too share frustration in people that don't go out and vote because they don't want to vote. But I am not voting for president because I don't agree with either of the top two candidates. I have the right to free speech. For someone to say I don't have the right to complain about the president because I didn't vote "against" them, then that is hindering my Constitutional right to free speech. Now, I know the first amendment is only talking about the government not being able to pass a law to infringe on our to freedom of speech, but if a person believes we have to vote, then they should also hold the principle that we have the right to speak our minds.
Now, I have gotten completely off course from what I was originally going to post about, but I think I may just leave it at that and post about my original intent some other time.
I originally was a supporter of John McCain, a candidate I align most of my values with, but denounced that support months ago when I realized his anti-gay rights attitude. I briefly became a supporter of Barack Obama after he chose a man I admired since I originally heard him during the democrat presidential primary elections, Joe Biden for his vice presidential candidate. My only purpose for supporting Barack Obama would have bee because of his support for gay rights and the idea he was not President Bush. I quickly remembered Senator Obama wants to create a larger federal government, which is something I cannot support. Barack Obama believes in raising taxes on the wealthy, creating socialized medicine, creating other government entities that will only intrude into the lives of the American people. As a person with significant credit card debt, I was interested in Obama's plan to put regulations on the credit card industries to not be able to retroactively apply an increase in annual percentage rates, not be able to change the due dates of the bills without due notice, and not be able to charge extreme late fees. After realization that its the banks' money and it was my own fault for raising my debt so high, I knew I couldn't support Obama's plan.
I have started to seriously consider not exercising my vote for president. Although I believe voting is an important privilege we are all given and ought to exercise, I believe we should have the ability to vote for none of the above. Some states recognize a none of the above vote, but a vast majority do not. Because I cannot vote none of the above, I see no point in voting for me to vote for president. Many people tell me, "oh vote for the lesser of two evils!" Well, that's what I did in 2004 with my vote, but I cannot bring myself to vote for the lesser of two evils when I have fundamental differences with both candidates. What if I vote for one candidate that I felt was the lesser of the two evils and they become president and they end up being one of the worst presidents? Can I support the fact that I had the choice not to give them my vote in the first place, but I did simply because they were the lesser of two evils? I don't think so. I've looked into third party candidates, but I cannot vote for any of them as some are flip floppers on the issues that matter to me, such as the Libertarian candidate, Bob Barr. Most of the third party candidates are either liberal, or their ideas are too extreme for my liking. I know they do not have a possibility of winning, but how can I support a third party candidate that I have fundamental differences with if I cannot support a Democrat or Republican for the same reasons.
My friends and coworkers that I have told I am not voting for president have told me that if I do not vote I cannot complain about the next president. I categorically refuse to accept that idea. Firstly, I believe it is different for a person to stay home and not vote simply because they do not want to and a person not voting for someone because they do not support the candidates. In the first instance, the person is just being lazy and taking advantage of being an American. In the other instance, which is my instance, the person is saying none of the candidates are good enough to be the next president of the United States.
Secondly, the last I checked the United States has a Constitutional Amendment that does not hinder our right to freedom of speech. Now, I want to make it clear, I too share frustration in people that don't go out and vote because they don't want to vote. But I am not voting for president because I don't agree with either of the top two candidates. I have the right to free speech. For someone to say I don't have the right to complain about the president because I didn't vote "against" them, then that is hindering my Constitutional right to free speech. Now, I know the first amendment is only talking about the government not being able to pass a law to infringe on our to freedom of speech, but if a person believes we have to vote, then they should also hold the principle that we have the right to speak our minds.
Now, I have gotten completely off course from what I was originally going to post about, but I think I may just leave it at that and post about my original intent some other time.
Sunday, August 17, 2008
A Message from the Closet...
Well, what has been going on with me? Quite a bit, actually. I have been meaning to update this a few times, but honestly, I forget to, or get too tired to.
I got back from vacation last night. I spent the last week and a half in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania visiting my parents and extended family. It was a nice trip and fairly relaxing. Saturday, my parents, grandma, cousin, aunt and I went to the Washington County Fair where we saw a lot of farm animals as agriculture is a very important aspect of Washington County, where my family lives and so they have auctions and shows for the animals. During a concert at the fair, they were giving out door prizes. I ended up winning a prize but gave it to my dad because it was a $5 gift card to a local grocery store. Considering I don't live there, it would be slightly hard for me to use it. In return, my dad gave me a $25 gift card to Best Buy because he said he wouldn't use it. He also bought me a pair of sunglasses, but I seem to have already lost them.
On Thursday, I took my grandma and cousin out to lunch at Red Robin. Afterwards, my grandma took my cousin and I around Washington to show me a shopping center that was recently built, but has found itself abandoned because the construction company built monstorous walls around the buildings which caused the buildings flooring to crack and start to collapse. The walls were literally three to four stories high which weakened the ground. She also took us to Kohls, where she bought me six new shirts for fall and winter... its always great to be spoiled by grandma :).
After lunch, we headed back to my grandma's house, where my parents, aunt and uncle came over for dinner. Shortly after dinner, I was in the living room by myself when my mom came in. She sat next to me and said, "do you have a girlfriend?" I replied, "no." She continued to inquire and said, "have you ever had a girlfriend?" I responded with, "no." She stared at me for a minute and then said, "Well, I'm pretty convinced that you are never going to have any kids." She continued to stare at me, while I told her I was still undecided about kids. She kept looking at me as though she was waiting for me to tell her something. I'm pretty sure she was fishing around to see if I would mention my sexuality. I think my parents would be fairly supportive of me as they both are close friends with a gay man... I'm just not ready for that part of my life where I tell them. I'm not 100% sure of what I am yet, so I would like to sort all of that out before I talk to them about it. In time, I am sure I will.. unless I end up with a woman.
Oh well, there are some other things I could write about, but I think thats enough for now.
I got back from vacation last night. I spent the last week and a half in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania visiting my parents and extended family. It was a nice trip and fairly relaxing. Saturday, my parents, grandma, cousin, aunt and I went to the Washington County Fair where we saw a lot of farm animals as agriculture is a very important aspect of Washington County, where my family lives and so they have auctions and shows for the animals. During a concert at the fair, they were giving out door prizes. I ended up winning a prize but gave it to my dad because it was a $5 gift card to a local grocery store. Considering I don't live there, it would be slightly hard for me to use it. In return, my dad gave me a $25 gift card to Best Buy because he said he wouldn't use it. He also bought me a pair of sunglasses, but I seem to have already lost them.
On Thursday, I took my grandma and cousin out to lunch at Red Robin. Afterwards, my grandma took my cousin and I around Washington to show me a shopping center that was recently built, but has found itself abandoned because the construction company built monstorous walls around the buildings which caused the buildings flooring to crack and start to collapse. The walls were literally three to four stories high which weakened the ground. She also took us to Kohls, where she bought me six new shirts for fall and winter... its always great to be spoiled by grandma :).
After lunch, we headed back to my grandma's house, where my parents, aunt and uncle came over for dinner. Shortly after dinner, I was in the living room by myself when my mom came in. She sat next to me and said, "do you have a girlfriend?" I replied, "no." She continued to inquire and said, "have you ever had a girlfriend?" I responded with, "no." She stared at me for a minute and then said, "Well, I'm pretty convinced that you are never going to have any kids." She continued to stare at me, while I told her I was still undecided about kids. She kept looking at me as though she was waiting for me to tell her something. I'm pretty sure she was fishing around to see if I would mention my sexuality. I think my parents would be fairly supportive of me as they both are close friends with a gay man... I'm just not ready for that part of my life where I tell them. I'm not 100% sure of what I am yet, so I would like to sort all of that out before I talk to them about it. In time, I am sure I will.. unless I end up with a woman.
Oh well, there are some other things I could write about, but I think thats enough for now.
Friday, July 25, 2008
The Dilemma of the 2008 Presidential Election
The republican presidential candidate, John McCain has been my candidate of choice for the 2008 presidential election ever since the former republican senator from Tennessee turned actor, Fred Thompson dropped out of the race earlier this year. I supported John McCain so much so that I bought a mug, buttons and a bumper sticker from his store, I made contributions to his campaign and I waited in line for four hours at my university just to get a glimpse of him and listen to him speak about his goals and plans for the United States if he became president. I surely had the feeling he was the right candidate to bring the United States back to where it needed to be and would clean up the messes of our current president... even though many say he is similar to President Bush.
As I was researching the best candidate for president, I couldn't help but think Barack Obama's plans for America were not my ideals and what I felt were best for America. His plan for universal health care, for withdrawing troops from Iraq, raising taxes among other things were not right for America, in my opinion.
Since John McCain and Barack Obama clinched their respective nominations, my views have slightly changed. They haven't changed in regards to universal healthcare, or withdrawing our troops from Iraq, but have shifted to something that has become an important issue with me; gay rights. With eight years of President George W. Bush, we have seen many gay rights brought to the forefront of the political arena. He made it known he wanted to taint the American Constitution with a ban on gay marriage. Now, as a homosexual myself, I don't necessarily want gay marriage, but I do strongly support the right to civil unions. The word marriage is more spiritual to me than it is political. President Bush and his cronies attempted multiple times to get the Constitution to define marriage between a man and a woman throughout his tenure as president. Ironically, a major platform of the Republican party is to leave it up to the states. Something I strongly support. Even though President Bush's attempts to taint our Constitution has not been successful, he has helped ban gay marriage in multiple states. Although multiple states have banned gay marriage, others have adopted either a civil union system or allowed gay marriage entirely. I am getting a bit of course as to my original intent of starting this blog, but I think you are getting an idea of where I am going with this.
A valuable tool in understanding where candidates stand on the issues is ontheissues.org. It provides quotes and voting records on each candidate running for office so you can see for yourself what they may or may not do for you. As I become more comfortable in my own skin as a homosexual, I couldn't help but see where each candidate stands on gay rights.
I assumed John McCain would be against gay marriage, but I was slightly surprised when I saw he didn't support adding sexuality to hate crimes or discrimination laws. According to the Human Rights Campaign, an organization dedicated to the rights of gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgender, John McCain scores a measily 33% on gay rights, which indicates a mixed record.
On the other hand, Barack Obama supports civil unions, he supports adding sexual orientation to anti-discrimination and anti-hate crime laws. He rates much higher on the Human Rights Campaign's scale. Obama received 89%, which indicates a pro-gay rights stance.
Months ago, I never thought the issue would be an important one for me, but as I read about the discrimination homosexuals face in this country, I can't help but realize the urgent need to move forward in the gay rights movement and not fall backwards. If Obama is elected president, I could see us moving forward in the movement, or staying where we are at. With McCain in office, I believe we will fall backwards in the movement.
I am now at a crossroad. Do I support John McCain for the policies I do support him for and just pray we do not fall backward and continue to allow homophobia to flourish or do I ignore the major policies of Obama and know we may go forward in the gay rights movement?
I've comtemplated voting for a third party candidate, but I don't find any candidates worthy of my vote in that arena either. I tend to align with the libertarian party, and thought they may have a strong candidate worth taking a look at, such as Ron Paul, only to find a former Republican turned libertarian, Bob Barr getting their nomination. During his tenure as a representative for Georgia, Bob Barr attempted to ban gay adoptions in DC, a surprising act by a libertarian. He also supported the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) which was the federal constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. As he was about to accept the nomination for the libertarian party, he was told he could no longer support the DOMA. Two days before he accepted the nomination, Bob Barr let it be known that he still supported DOMA.... only to denounce it during the libertarian presidential convention. I can't support this man either. I looked at the Green Party, a party that has nominated a black woman by the name of Cynthia McKinney to run for their party. Her ideas are so far liberal I could never in my right mind vote for her. She believes in slave reparations, which would have been good if it was 150 years ago when slavery ended. No one alive today had anything to do with slavery, and not all African-Americans were slaves back then just as not all white people were slave owners back then... there would be no way to regulate who got reparations and who had to pay. She also wants to create so many different socialist programs that we would virtually become a socialist nation, something that goes against what this country was founded on.
An issue with voting for a third party also becomes challenging because we basically have a two party system in America. The democrats and the Republicans are virtually the only two parties that truly have a chance of being elected. I have to think about which of those two candidates my vote for the third party candidate would help. For instance, if I voted for Bob Barr, I would be helping Barack Obama get elected as Barr will be getting the votes normally reserved for John McCain.
As you can see, I am facing a dilemma when it comes to the 2008 presidential election and I am so unaware of where to turn. I hope by November 4, 2008 when I enter the voters booth that I will have clarity on which candidate to vote for.
As I was researching the best candidate for president, I couldn't help but think Barack Obama's plans for America were not my ideals and what I felt were best for America. His plan for universal health care, for withdrawing troops from Iraq, raising taxes among other things were not right for America, in my opinion.
Since John McCain and Barack Obama clinched their respective nominations, my views have slightly changed. They haven't changed in regards to universal healthcare, or withdrawing our troops from Iraq, but have shifted to something that has become an important issue with me; gay rights. With eight years of President George W. Bush, we have seen many gay rights brought to the forefront of the political arena. He made it known he wanted to taint the American Constitution with a ban on gay marriage. Now, as a homosexual myself, I don't necessarily want gay marriage, but I do strongly support the right to civil unions. The word marriage is more spiritual to me than it is political. President Bush and his cronies attempted multiple times to get the Constitution to define marriage between a man and a woman throughout his tenure as president. Ironically, a major platform of the Republican party is to leave it up to the states. Something I strongly support. Even though President Bush's attempts to taint our Constitution has not been successful, he has helped ban gay marriage in multiple states. Although multiple states have banned gay marriage, others have adopted either a civil union system or allowed gay marriage entirely. I am getting a bit of course as to my original intent of starting this blog, but I think you are getting an idea of where I am going with this.
A valuable tool in understanding where candidates stand on the issues is ontheissues.org. It provides quotes and voting records on each candidate running for office so you can see for yourself what they may or may not do for you. As I become more comfortable in my own skin as a homosexual, I couldn't help but see where each candidate stands on gay rights.
I assumed John McCain would be against gay marriage, but I was slightly surprised when I saw he didn't support adding sexuality to hate crimes or discrimination laws. According to the Human Rights Campaign, an organization dedicated to the rights of gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgender, John McCain scores a measily 33% on gay rights, which indicates a mixed record.
On the other hand, Barack Obama supports civil unions, he supports adding sexual orientation to anti-discrimination and anti-hate crime laws. He rates much higher on the Human Rights Campaign's scale. Obama received 89%, which indicates a pro-gay rights stance.
Months ago, I never thought the issue would be an important one for me, but as I read about the discrimination homosexuals face in this country, I can't help but realize the urgent need to move forward in the gay rights movement and not fall backwards. If Obama is elected president, I could see us moving forward in the movement, or staying where we are at. With McCain in office, I believe we will fall backwards in the movement.
I am now at a crossroad. Do I support John McCain for the policies I do support him for and just pray we do not fall backward and continue to allow homophobia to flourish or do I ignore the major policies of Obama and know we may go forward in the gay rights movement?
I've comtemplated voting for a third party candidate, but I don't find any candidates worthy of my vote in that arena either. I tend to align with the libertarian party, and thought they may have a strong candidate worth taking a look at, such as Ron Paul, only to find a former Republican turned libertarian, Bob Barr getting their nomination. During his tenure as a representative for Georgia, Bob Barr attempted to ban gay adoptions in DC, a surprising act by a libertarian. He also supported the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) which was the federal constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. As he was about to accept the nomination for the libertarian party, he was told he could no longer support the DOMA. Two days before he accepted the nomination, Bob Barr let it be known that he still supported DOMA.... only to denounce it during the libertarian presidential convention. I can't support this man either. I looked at the Green Party, a party that has nominated a black woman by the name of Cynthia McKinney to run for their party. Her ideas are so far liberal I could never in my right mind vote for her. She believes in slave reparations, which would have been good if it was 150 years ago when slavery ended. No one alive today had anything to do with slavery, and not all African-Americans were slaves back then just as not all white people were slave owners back then... there would be no way to regulate who got reparations and who had to pay. She also wants to create so many different socialist programs that we would virtually become a socialist nation, something that goes against what this country was founded on.
An issue with voting for a third party also becomes challenging because we basically have a two party system in America. The democrats and the Republicans are virtually the only two parties that truly have a chance of being elected. I have to think about which of those two candidates my vote for the third party candidate would help. For instance, if I voted for Bob Barr, I would be helping Barack Obama get elected as Barr will be getting the votes normally reserved for John McCain.
As you can see, I am facing a dilemma when it comes to the 2008 presidential election and I am so unaware of where to turn. I hope by November 4, 2008 when I enter the voters booth that I will have clarity on which candidate to vote for.
Friday, July 18, 2008
Ramblings...
A couple weeks ago, I dropped and broke my laptop. As I continue my quest to get out of debt, I had to load another chunk of change into the debt side as I need a computer for summer school. I of course embellished a bit and sprung for a laptop and a desktop. You might ask why I got both, but I need a computer I can take to school and I love the transportability of a laptop. I also like being able to sit at my desk and just work.. its a bit annoying to have to always plug and unplug everything into my laptop, so I sprung for a desktop as well.
I have realized I am becoming more comfortable with myself and my sexuality. As the days pass, I am coming out to more and more people. I consider myself to be lucky considering everyone has been supportive of me so far. I just wish I could come out to everyone so I can truly be myself around everyone as I have found myself nearly slipping, but I have found it difficult because I am unsure of how some will respond. One of my friends invited me to "girl's night" at her apartment because she stated I was "gay enough." I was able to be myself, talk about guys and there was even a guy there trying to hook me up with one of his friends that I had met a few night before.
One of the methods of coming out to a person is to poke around with them to see how they might respond.. to get a feel on their view of homosexuality. I was preparing to come out to one of my closest friends that still doesn't know, simply because of her religious beliefs. As she started talking about her views, she said it was OK to be gay, but they should be celibate because if they were it was just wrong. I would love to tell her, just so I can be true to who I am when I am around her, but its just so hard to do it when you are afraid of losing that person as a friend... then again, if they are a true friend they will stick by you, regardless of who you are.
I went to Martha's Vineyard, a gay bar in Springfield with a friend about a week ago. My friend took me on guy's night in hopes of me finding a guy. The bar was fairly dead, but I did dance with a few guys. I was asked out several times by different people, but none of them were really my type. The one that I found to be nice, we traded numbers. Quickly, I realized most of the guys at Martha's are looking for one's thing, and the thing they are looking for is sex. Now, obviously, I'm not anti-sex, but I am not one for booty calls, I actually like to get to know a person and date them before I just jump in bed with them. Oh well, I guess it might be too much to ask for to find someone more interested in getting to know me than how to get into my pants. There was another guy I met there that night, which is the one his friend was trying to hook me up with. I'm actually interested in getting to know him, but unsure of how to get ahold of him as we didn't exchange numbers at all. Oh well, if it's meant to be I guess I will get a hold fo him somehow.
I've been struggling in my faith a lot lately. I hit rock bottom and actually called an atheist friend on why God doesn't exist. Although it was bad that I talked to him in an attempt to stop believing, it was good in that shortly after talking with him, I started my upswing and can already feel my faith strengthening even more. As I study the Bible, I am realizing more and more that God is love and the Bible may not say what the mainstream of Christianity believes. I have ordered several books on the matter and hope to be able to study it to concrete my belief in what the Bible truly says. I am sure I will write about them as I read them.
Anyways, this has just become a huge rambling, so I think I will end it at that.
I have realized I am becoming more comfortable with myself and my sexuality. As the days pass, I am coming out to more and more people. I consider myself to be lucky considering everyone has been supportive of me so far. I just wish I could come out to everyone so I can truly be myself around everyone as I have found myself nearly slipping, but I have found it difficult because I am unsure of how some will respond. One of my friends invited me to "girl's night" at her apartment because she stated I was "gay enough." I was able to be myself, talk about guys and there was even a guy there trying to hook me up with one of his friends that I had met a few night before.
One of the methods of coming out to a person is to poke around with them to see how they might respond.. to get a feel on their view of homosexuality. I was preparing to come out to one of my closest friends that still doesn't know, simply because of her religious beliefs. As she started talking about her views, she said it was OK to be gay, but they should be celibate because if they were it was just wrong. I would love to tell her, just so I can be true to who I am when I am around her, but its just so hard to do it when you are afraid of losing that person as a friend... then again, if they are a true friend they will stick by you, regardless of who you are.
I went to Martha's Vineyard, a gay bar in Springfield with a friend about a week ago. My friend took me on guy's night in hopes of me finding a guy. The bar was fairly dead, but I did dance with a few guys. I was asked out several times by different people, but none of them were really my type. The one that I found to be nice, we traded numbers. Quickly, I realized most of the guys at Martha's are looking for one's thing, and the thing they are looking for is sex. Now, obviously, I'm not anti-sex, but I am not one for booty calls, I actually like to get to know a person and date them before I just jump in bed with them. Oh well, I guess it might be too much to ask for to find someone more interested in getting to know me than how to get into my pants. There was another guy I met there that night, which is the one his friend was trying to hook me up with. I'm actually interested in getting to know him, but unsure of how to get ahold of him as we didn't exchange numbers at all. Oh well, if it's meant to be I guess I will get a hold fo him somehow.
I've been struggling in my faith a lot lately. I hit rock bottom and actually called an atheist friend on why God doesn't exist. Although it was bad that I talked to him in an attempt to stop believing, it was good in that shortly after talking with him, I started my upswing and can already feel my faith strengthening even more. As I study the Bible, I am realizing more and more that God is love and the Bible may not say what the mainstream of Christianity believes. I have ordered several books on the matter and hope to be able to study it to concrete my belief in what the Bible truly says. I am sure I will write about them as I read them.
Anyways, this has just become a huge rambling, so I think I will end it at that.
Saturday, June 21, 2008
John McCain and Mother Nature
John McCain came to Missouri State on a campaign stop this past Wednesday. Being a McCain supporter, I of course had to attend. I stood in line for about four hours before being allowed in the auditorium. Some protesters came into the PSU before we were allowed in the auditorium calling John McCain a corporate whore. It didn't take much for people to start yelling back at them.
Senator McCain spoke around 2:15PM, and ended his speech about an hour and a half later. He spoke on energy and becoming less dependent on foreign oil. What he said made sense and it just cemented my choice in voting for McCain for president. There was a protester that got into the speech. Senator McCain attempted to make a dialogue with the guy but the man only wanted to yell about what he believed about McCain. Funny thing is, I guess this guy didn't have much of a life because he sat in line for longer than I did to guarantee himself a spot in the audience. He was only in the audience for about 10 minutes before getting kicked out and arrested. I was on the news during the noon broadcast and again at the 10:00PM broadcast. It was a fun time, and I would wait another four hours to see Senator McCain speak again. I hope he is the candidate for president as I believe he is the better candidate and Barack Obama will be bad for our economy and for the future of the United States. I should say though that I do not think he will make a horrible president, but I don't believe he is right for the office yet.
On Thursday, I was woken up by the sound of high winds and hail hitting my windows. As I was going to go back to sleep, the tornado sirens began blaring. I turned the TV on to see a massive storm just over the area I live in. As the storm passed my apartment, it gained strength and became an EF-1 tornado. Just a mile down the road from my apartment, it destroyed a few homes, knocked over some trees and ripped off roofs from buildings. Several businesses had their roofs colapse or blown away. Surprisingly there were no injuries. A coworker of mine had his garage destroyed in the tornado. It's crazy to think I was once again spared from a tornado damaging any of my things. This makes about eight tornadoes that I have been in during my lifetime.
One thing I do have to say about the tornado is I heard about a woman that was on highway 65, that runs through the east side of Springfield. When she heard a tornado was headed towards her, she got off the highway and sought shelter. She went to an Alltel store, but to her surprise the doors were locked and they would not allow her in because they were under a tornado warning. The tornado wasn't on them yet, so they could have easily opened the door and allowed her in. Instead the employees and customers already in the store stared at her. Luckily a Quiznos in the shopping center allowed the woman in. Had the store not stepped up and done the right and moral thing, this woman may have died during the tornado.
Springfield is nearing record rainfall amounts for the entire year already and we still have six months to go before the end of 2008. Today, we had torrential rains that caused flash flooding throughout the entire city. When my coworkers and I got off work, we headed out the staff entrance to get to our cars, only to see a raging river seperating us from our cars. As we looked around for a path to our cars, water to our knees rushed around the entire parking lot. We headed back inside in hopes of going out another door to the staff parking lot. As we walked out the other door we could see the waters were higher than over at the other door and the only way out was to either wait until the waters subsided, or find a path through the water without getting wet. Brian grabbed a crate that was sitting in the water and propped it near a County vehicle that was next to the curb. He climbed onto the trunk of the vehicle and jumped his way to the dry ground on the other side of the raging river. Sammie went next, but she didn't get enough air behind her and landed butt first in the water. I got to the edge of the trunk and hunkered down. They all told me I couldn't jump like that and expect to clear the water. I stood up and hoped I wouldn't slip and fall as I attempted to jump. I successfully got to the other side without landing in the water. Every road I took home was experiencing flash flooding. Some water was higher than others. I got home without any serious problems. They are calling for heavier rain tomorrow, so hopefully we won't have to take any more adventures on getting to our cars or home.
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
You Don't Exist
Well, I was going to go to sleep, because I have an early start with going to lunch with a friend, but the issue is still drilling at me in my head. At work, after the residents went to bed, I was sitting in the Dayroom, with two of my coworkers, Alissa, who is a lesbian and in a committed relationship with a woman and Dave, who is assumed to be a straight male. We are all in our mid-2o's. Alissa started talking about her girlfriend's sister and how she is a bisexual. Dave cut her off laughing and said, "There's no such thing as bisexuality. You're either straight or you're gay, there's no bisexuality." Now, Dave doesn't know about my bisexuality, but Alissa does. Alissa continues on by saying that someone who has a choice, referring to a bisexual brings bad names to the homosexual community. After that, and Dave continuing to laugh about bisexuals not existing, I walked away, but not before slamming my fork down on a tray I was taking back to the kitchen. As the experience continued to play back in my mind, I couldn't help but to feel hurt and feel sorry for the ignorance of Dave and Alissa.
I avoided them the rest of the night, hanging out in the classroom reading Supreme Court Justice, Clarence Thomas' memoir. At shift change, I quietly got my things and left. Alissa cornered me in the parking lot and we talked for a few minutes about what she said, and what Dave said. She explained to me that she meant to say her girlfriend's sister is a bisexual by choice. She doesn't necessarily like women, but she is with one for the attention. Alissa couldn't explain that when she originally said it since Dave doesn't know about my sexuality. She mentioned she didn't say it in the best way, but didn't apologize... but the fact she took the time to stop and talk with me shows she cares, and I respect her for that. Alissa also tried to calm my anger towards Dave for his comments, she kept saying, "consider the source." Which is true, but since I have just recently come to grips with my sexuality, I am not used to people attacking my sexuality like that. Dave has his suspicions of my sexuality because I am usually mentioning something news related about homosexuality to Alissa at work.
I also found out he had been making comments about me possibly not being straight to people at work, or at least to Alissa. This makes me slightly uncomfortable as a former "friend" of mine spread around slanderous rumors about me in regards to sexuality to my work that were obviously untrue. Oh well, I guess this is all some things I need to get used to.
I avoided them the rest of the night, hanging out in the classroom reading Supreme Court Justice, Clarence Thomas' memoir. At shift change, I quietly got my things and left. Alissa cornered me in the parking lot and we talked for a few minutes about what she said, and what Dave said. She explained to me that she meant to say her girlfriend's sister is a bisexual by choice. She doesn't necessarily like women, but she is with one for the attention. Alissa couldn't explain that when she originally said it since Dave doesn't know about my sexuality. She mentioned she didn't say it in the best way, but didn't apologize... but the fact she took the time to stop and talk with me shows she cares, and I respect her for that. Alissa also tried to calm my anger towards Dave for his comments, she kept saying, "consider the source." Which is true, but since I have just recently come to grips with my sexuality, I am not used to people attacking my sexuality like that. Dave has his suspicions of my sexuality because I am usually mentioning something news related about homosexuality to Alissa at work.
I also found out he had been making comments about me possibly not being straight to people at work, or at least to Alissa. This makes me slightly uncomfortable as a former "friend" of mine spread around slanderous rumors about me in regards to sexuality to my work that were obviously untrue. Oh well, I guess this is all some things I need to get used to.
Saturday, June 14, 2008
My Life: Almost Home
Several years ago in my first semester a college, I was required to take a course in reading. One of the assignments was to read a book, write a paper and make a presentation about the book you read. I scoured the bookshelves at the local Borders, but nothing seemed to really catch my eye. As I walked past the main aisle, I saw a black book with the pictures of three boys on the front and in red lettering the words, "Devil's Knot:" After a few glances at the book I knew I found the book I wanted to do my presentation on. Little did I know, "Devil's Knot: The True Story of the West Memphis Three," by Mara Leveritt would help change my view of the perfect Criminal Justice System.
To make a long story short, the story is about three teenagers accused of brutally murdering three young boys in the woods of a small Arkansas town. The three were accused of being in a satanic cult that sacrificed the lives of the three young boys. All the boys were bound and one of them was stabbed several times and castrated. The three teenagers were being charged solely based off of circumstantial evidence with no physical evidence linking any of them to the crime, and a faulty confession by a mentally challenged boy named Jesse. All three were found guilty of murder, two were sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole, and the other, Damien Echols, the suspected ring leader of the cult was sentenced to the death penalty. The step father of one of the boys that was murdered, who I believe is the actual murderer moved his family away from West Memphis after the trials. Shortly afterwards, his wife, the mother of the boy killed wound up dead. She was found to have poison in her system and two puncture wounds in the bottom of her feet.
As I read the story, I didn't want to put the book down, but as the story went on, I had to walk away from it several times to control the anger I was feeling towards the Criminal Justice System. Evidence had been lost, the defense would not provide much of a defense, and the boys were being accused of this crime for the simple fact that they were the outcasts of the town. Instead of looking for the real killer(s), they took the time to frame these innocent teenage boys.
Now, fast forward to 2008. Over the last six years I have stayed in touch with the court case. As I went to the wm3.org web site, I saw that Damien had written a memoir entitled, "My Life: Almost Home, Volume 1". After months of searching, I finally found the book at the local Barnes and Noble. I recently finished the book, and after reading it continue to believe the wrong man is on death row for the crimes. Although the book doesn't shed much light on the crime, or where exactly Damien and the three boys were at the time of the murders, I still believe him and the other two to be innocent. It just so happens that many of the investigators working the case were under investigation themselves by the FBI for the poor work they did on other cases, and many of them were forced to resign or removed from their positions. I have read the books and seen the movies of this case and it moves me to tears every time.
It saddens me to see the lives of these three teenagers thrown away because of a corrupt system. Innocent people, including the hundred of people in jail and prison around the country right now are sitting in jail because of poor work done by the Criminal Justice System. The Criminal Justice System is there to protect us, not to kill us, or to imprison the wrong people! I truly hope that in the future the system is fixed and we see less and less innocent people being locked away for the crimes they did not commit and the real perpetrators thrown behind bars.
It is one of my life goals to see to it that the holes within our Criminal Justice System are fixed. That the people that need treatment instead of incarceration see it. That the people that are going to be reentered into society have the tools and necessary equipment get them and can live good upstanding lives. The system needs an overhaul and I plan to help do that. I hope others will do the same, especially those in power that can do something about it now.
To find out more about these innocent men, please go to www.wm3.org.
To make a long story short, the story is about three teenagers accused of brutally murdering three young boys in the woods of a small Arkansas town. The three were accused of being in a satanic cult that sacrificed the lives of the three young boys. All the boys were bound and one of them was stabbed several times and castrated. The three teenagers were being charged solely based off of circumstantial evidence with no physical evidence linking any of them to the crime, and a faulty confession by a mentally challenged boy named Jesse. All three were found guilty of murder, two were sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole, and the other, Damien Echols, the suspected ring leader of the cult was sentenced to the death penalty. The step father of one of the boys that was murdered, who I believe is the actual murderer moved his family away from West Memphis after the trials. Shortly afterwards, his wife, the mother of the boy killed wound up dead. She was found to have poison in her system and two puncture wounds in the bottom of her feet.
As I read the story, I didn't want to put the book down, but as the story went on, I had to walk away from it several times to control the anger I was feeling towards the Criminal Justice System. Evidence had been lost, the defense would not provide much of a defense, and the boys were being accused of this crime for the simple fact that they were the outcasts of the town. Instead of looking for the real killer(s), they took the time to frame these innocent teenage boys.
Now, fast forward to 2008. Over the last six years I have stayed in touch with the court case. As I went to the wm3.org web site, I saw that Damien had written a memoir entitled, "My Life: Almost Home, Volume 1". After months of searching, I finally found the book at the local Barnes and Noble. I recently finished the book, and after reading it continue to believe the wrong man is on death row for the crimes. Although the book doesn't shed much light on the crime, or where exactly Damien and the three boys were at the time of the murders, I still believe him and the other two to be innocent. It just so happens that many of the investigators working the case were under investigation themselves by the FBI for the poor work they did on other cases, and many of them were forced to resign or removed from their positions. I have read the books and seen the movies of this case and it moves me to tears every time.
It saddens me to see the lives of these three teenagers thrown away because of a corrupt system. Innocent people, including the hundred of people in jail and prison around the country right now are sitting in jail because of poor work done by the Criminal Justice System. The Criminal Justice System is there to protect us, not to kill us, or to imprison the wrong people! I truly hope that in the future the system is fixed and we see less and less innocent people being locked away for the crimes they did not commit and the real perpetrators thrown behind bars.
It is one of my life goals to see to it that the holes within our Criminal Justice System are fixed. That the people that need treatment instead of incarceration see it. That the people that are going to be reentered into society have the tools and necessary equipment get them and can live good upstanding lives. The system needs an overhaul and I plan to help do that. I hope others will do the same, especially those in power that can do something about it now.
To find out more about these innocent men, please go to www.wm3.org.
Friday, June 6, 2008
Switching Blogs
So, I recently opened a Xanga account to blog events and things on my mind, when a friend of mine reminded me about blogger. I decided to switch over here... I made a few posts over at Xanga, and if you're interested in reading what I have said so far, you can head on over to http://www.xanga.com/bichristian.
Well, I went back to work today. I've had the last five days off, and they were definitely eventful. On Monday, I went back to my hometown of St. Charles for my niece's preschool graduation. My dad flew in from Pittsburgh to attend and take my niece back to Pittsburgh with him for a couple weeks. It was a nice short trip for me. On top of seeing some of my family, I also got to see a few friends. On Monday, I went over to one of my closest friends' houses. It was her birthday, so her family took us out to dinner, which was nice and unexpected.
Tuesday, I picked my dad up from the airport. Neither of my nieces knew we were going to be in town, so when they came home, we both surprised them. Tuesday evening we headed to Kylee's preschool graduation, which was very cute. It's amazing how fast they grow up. It seems just a couple years ago she was born. After the graduation we went out to dinner to the Pasta House. As always, the salad was good, but my main entree was quite gross. I got the Shrimp Fettuccine, and it had a weird taste to it. I didn't eat much of it.
After dinner, I met up with my friends, Nicole and Mandy. Time slipped through my hands and I hadn't seen Nicole in over two years. It was nice catching up with the both of them. We went to Applebee's for a light snack. We stayed there for a few hours before parting ways. They say they are going to come visit me sometime in July, I guess we will see if they really mean it or not. The last time they came down was when I had my job interview for my current job, which was nearly three years ago.
During my trip to St. Charles, I realized that my iPod Touch was stolen during a party I went to a few days before. I came home on Wednesday and ransacked by apartment. When I didn't find it, I knew someone had taken it. Most of my music is on my computer, so I went to Best Buy and bought an iPod Nano. It's not as great as my iPod Touch, but it will have to do, since I didn't want to spend $300 for a new Touch. I can get the exact same quality of iPod for half the price. Hopefully someone didn't take the Touch and I will have it once again, but I'm not holding my breath.
Anyways, I think thats enough ranting for now. God bless.
Well, I went back to work today. I've had the last five days off, and they were definitely eventful. On Monday, I went back to my hometown of St. Charles for my niece's preschool graduation. My dad flew in from Pittsburgh to attend and take my niece back to Pittsburgh with him for a couple weeks. It was a nice short trip for me. On top of seeing some of my family, I also got to see a few friends. On Monday, I went over to one of my closest friends' houses. It was her birthday, so her family took us out to dinner, which was nice and unexpected.
Tuesday, I picked my dad up from the airport. Neither of my nieces knew we were going to be in town, so when they came home, we both surprised them. Tuesday evening we headed to Kylee's preschool graduation, which was very cute. It's amazing how fast they grow up. It seems just a couple years ago she was born. After the graduation we went out to dinner to the Pasta House. As always, the salad was good, but my main entree was quite gross. I got the Shrimp Fettuccine, and it had a weird taste to it. I didn't eat much of it.
After dinner, I met up with my friends, Nicole and Mandy. Time slipped through my hands and I hadn't seen Nicole in over two years. It was nice catching up with the both of them. We went to Applebee's for a light snack. We stayed there for a few hours before parting ways. They say they are going to come visit me sometime in July, I guess we will see if they really mean it or not. The last time they came down was when I had my job interview for my current job, which was nearly three years ago.
During my trip to St. Charles, I realized that my iPod Touch was stolen during a party I went to a few days before. I came home on Wednesday and ransacked by apartment. When I didn't find it, I knew someone had taken it. Most of my music is on my computer, so I went to Best Buy and bought an iPod Nano. It's not as great as my iPod Touch, but it will have to do, since I didn't want to spend $300 for a new Touch. I can get the exact same quality of iPod for half the price. Hopefully someone didn't take the Touch and I will have it once again, but I'm not holding my breath.
Anyways, I think thats enough ranting for now. God bless.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
