![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
And from the depths, we emerge again.
Nov. 8th, 2004 12:28 amYeah, so yesterday was a buncha, buncha fun. I went to see younger sister play in band - and then was going to head off to a party afterwards. Simple, right? Wrong. Proving once again the need for creative chaos in one's life, the football game started an hour later than I had thought, we arrived near the end of the first quarter because of construction (a perpetual horror here in the Mitten State), and then the game went into four overtime periods before the matter was settled. Eastern Michigan 61, Central Michigan 58. And so I went to said party anyway and stayed awake until early in the morning. Then I came back to the house, got ready for my meeting.
The meeting was not nice to me. I found out that my higher-ranking officers do not trust me very much with the important project that they've given me. Hopefully, I'll meet with The Boss soon (as soon as the e-mail servers begin working again - creative chaos preventing me from being too orderly) and get the matter straightened out and get my project approved to go forward. They fear controversy, I want to ensure that the project has an impact. Slight impasse.
This also means, of course, two days' worth of having a look at selected writings and articles or D.R.T. They still come highly recommended.
The humorous always leads. Thus, humor itself must be out front. What follows? The Five Seasons, of course. From there, disc(ordian?) races. And, proof the earth is square. And to further the conservative agenda, condoms being put to good use.
But lest we fall too far to the right, and take all things that are said for granted, R.A. Wilson requests a moment of your time, right where you are sitting now.
If the blog culture is to be believed, there's large potential in these days for very strange, possibly even strong (numerically-speaking) action of some sort. Knowing that the blog culture has certain leanings of its own, of course, the apparent solidarity may be nothing more than a very loud, but very small, segment. Even so, if there is indeed social movement in the wind, all things must start small. I will, of course, attempt to keep my ear to the ground as best I can, but where I am will likely amplify any rumblings beyond what they really are.
It may start here, in the queer culture. A massive outing could energize something. Or, as the comments make mention, the appointment of another Supreme Court judge might tip the balance one way or another on certain rights, and that could bring about energy, as could the appearance of a federal amendment doing what eleven states decided was acceptable. I do not know, if as simply the most visible of the targets, they will become the de facto leaders of any movement.
Or, perhaps, there will be carnival demonstrations, much like the idea behind the last entry Daily article.
Finally, a thought to why the constitutional measures passed on Nov. 2 are not valid: Amendment XIV, Section 1, United States Constitution states: "No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." As citizens of their respective states, people are entitled to enter into contracts regardless of their sexual orientation. Marriage, in the eyes of the state, is a contract requiring a license to be issued to be valid. Certain legal benefits and legal bindings apply to the married. Interpreted in this manner, Amendment XIV of the Constitution prohibits any state from abridging the rights of homosexuals that it extends to other citizens. The actions, then, of the eleven states that passed constitutional amendments on Nov. 2 are unconstitutional and should be struck down. (Normally, this requires a court challenge. I am sure there will be such.)
Are there holes in my interpretation? I think I am idealizing the viewpoint of the state somewhat, removing religious argument from it when making my own argument, but I think the claim still stands. Are there already challenges being issued under this type of interpretation?
The meeting was not nice to me. I found out that my higher-ranking officers do not trust me very much with the important project that they've given me. Hopefully, I'll meet with The Boss soon (as soon as the e-mail servers begin working again - creative chaos preventing me from being too orderly) and get the matter straightened out and get my project approved to go forward. They fear controversy, I want to ensure that the project has an impact. Slight impasse.
This also means, of course, two days' worth of having a look at selected writings and articles or D.R.T. They still come highly recommended.
The humorous always leads. Thus, humor itself must be out front. What follows? The Five Seasons, of course. From there, disc(ordian?) races. And, proof the earth is square. And to further the conservative agenda, condoms being put to good use.
But lest we fall too far to the right, and take all things that are said for granted, R.A. Wilson requests a moment of your time, right where you are sitting now.
If the blog culture is to be believed, there's large potential in these days for very strange, possibly even strong (numerically-speaking) action of some sort. Knowing that the blog culture has certain leanings of its own, of course, the apparent solidarity may be nothing more than a very loud, but very small, segment. Even so, if there is indeed social movement in the wind, all things must start small. I will, of course, attempt to keep my ear to the ground as best I can, but where I am will likely amplify any rumblings beyond what they really are.
It may start here, in the queer culture. A massive outing could energize something. Or, as the comments make mention, the appointment of another Supreme Court judge might tip the balance one way or another on certain rights, and that could bring about energy, as could the appearance of a federal amendment doing what eleven states decided was acceptable. I do not know, if as simply the most visible of the targets, they will become the de facto leaders of any movement.
Or, perhaps, there will be carnival demonstrations, much like the idea behind the last entry Daily article.
Finally, a thought to why the constitutional measures passed on Nov. 2 are not valid: Amendment XIV, Section 1, United States Constitution states: "No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." As citizens of their respective states, people are entitled to enter into contracts regardless of their sexual orientation. Marriage, in the eyes of the state, is a contract requiring a license to be issued to be valid. Certain legal benefits and legal bindings apply to the married. Interpreted in this manner, Amendment XIV of the Constitution prohibits any state from abridging the rights of homosexuals that it extends to other citizens. The actions, then, of the eleven states that passed constitutional amendments on Nov. 2 are unconstitutional and should be struck down. (Normally, this requires a court challenge. I am sure there will be such.)
Are there holes in my interpretation? I think I am idealizing the viewpoint of the state somewhat, removing religious argument from it when making my own argument, but I think the claim still stands. Are there already challenges being issued under this type of interpretation?
