Massachusetts has Big Balls

Thanks, a many thanks to the activist, citizens, and general supporters who helped law makers defeat a challenge by social conservatives in Massachusetts to ban same-sex marriage. Massachusetts is the only state to legalize same-sex unions. I for one would love to see the rest of America hop on the bandwagon and follow in their footsteps. I can dream; right? If you can't tell from most of my blogs, I am liberal; in fact very liberal. But, I hate labels- I prefer to think of myself as a reasonable, fair-minded person, who can see both sides of controversial issues. Consequently, the liberal perspectives seem to always be the most intelligent. Okay, on to this gay marriage issue.

Social conservatives basically want the monopoly on who can get married. Well that's great; the last time I checked, we have a government in this country. And, "we the people" means a collective group of people who give their consent to be governed by elected officials. These Representatives make decisions which meet the best interest of those people. It's called a representative democracy. Likewise social conservatives might agree with this sentiment-feeling a vote on gay marriage should be left up to the citizens of each state. One problem, marriage in this country is not just a religious union, it is also a legally binding one. In deed, it was our founding father's major concern and hope the religion and politics, church and state need not mix. I agree; it is the basis for this argument. Since the government plays a role in marriages, although our current ideas of marriage stem from religious or Christian beliefs, does not mean the government should follow suit with a particular sect of Christianity's beliefs about marriage. If you believe marriage is between a man and a woman, great, in fact more power to you. I believe Christina Aguilera's has one of best voices of all time, but I am not petitioning the government to make law my beliefs. OK, maybe that's is a false analogy, but I think you get my point.

If the government is going to play a part in marriages-making them legally binding contracts, then they do not need to specify in terms of gender [only opposites sexes] who can participate. If two consenting adults want to express their love in a marriage ceremony, then it is unconstitutional to try and deny them the right to do so. Well, what about the polygamist; Big love style, could they make the same argument? Possibly, but there is not a big movement in this country to legalize polygamy. As a feminist, I believe polygamist's practices tend to exploit and diminish the roles of women, therefore I can't really make a case for it, but it is an interesting question to raise. Once again CHEERS TO MASSACHUSETTS and JEERS to all who want to impose and legalize their faith on our entire nation.

Visit this address

http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSN1447670620070614?feedType=RSS

The Secret....No such thing

I guess you would have been living under a rock for the past few months; I'll say two, if you haven't heard about "The Secret." This self-help book that with Oprah's endorsement has become a hot seller in Books stores across the nation. Author Rhonda Byrne has given the American public this very awesome thing; she has shed some light on "the secret" because "we" the very uninformed American public did not realize that positive thinking could garner such great results in our daily lives. Okay, maybe I am oversimplify things, slightly. I have not read the book, but I have read many articles about it and to be quite honest; what's the big deal? I think a little common sense should tell us all that a positive attitude, actually truly believing in that thing (whatever) it may be in your life can effect some serious change. Well maybe not, maybe a more unsuspecting public will need someone to point out how positive vibes can create, no, even influence positive changes in your life. Still, not a new concept by any means. For example, I will refer to the Bible to make this point. Even if the Bible, the teachings in, it is not your thing; I am not advocating that it should be, but the Bible is filled with stories about "faith" which correlates to maintaining positive energy. So the saying goes "seek and ye shall find," I am compelled to think that maybe these same sentiments are echoed in Bryne's book, too. Again, I ask where's the secret; what's the big deal? I think the bigger secret is Bryne's motives. At the end of the day, and I can't believe I am using that phrase, but it works well here; an author wants to, no needs to make a profit. Byrne knows her audience. She knows their likes, dislikes, fears, anxieties, trials and tribulations. Now, how do you exploit information about your intended audience? You write a book that claims to answer all the problems they (the audience) seem to face. You give them light at the end of a long tunnel.

That is what the secret is my friends; it's not that she is introducing some new way of thinking about life; she is simply doing what advertisers have done for years, repackaging, reinventing-what's old is now new. Of course, I am not trying to short change or belittle the positive experiences anyone has had from reading this book. I am a firm believer that someone can bring you into new knowledge and understanding with a new interpretation or perspective on a topic. Nonetheless, I am a skeptic; I have to question "the Secret" because I really believe that we have heard it all before.

Dissenting Voices and Progressive Thinkers

Al Gore’s eloquently written and in-depth analysis of the American ethos, the Bush Administration’s policies, and the War in Iraq are all critically chronicled in his new book The Assault on Reason. I must admit; before I read this book, I had no idea Gore was such a scholar. He has been a champion of environmental issues for years, but I never equated his lust for a safer environment, one that I share, too, with his informative and well-reason political insight evidenced in his latest book. Of course, I know that most political writing has a very clear purpose and scope. Gore asks his reader to believe as he does in the detrimental state of our nation’s most fundamental characteristics. But, he asks that you not only believe his analysis, but that you are moved to action. I have only read the first two chapters, “The Politics of Fear” and “Blinding the Faith” both speak volumes to the how “reason” is slowly losing its place in American government. Once I finish the book, I will blog away and offer my complete response