Amy Phetamine

Amercian In Me - The Advengers (via BVMHardcorePunkTV)

Thu, 20 Nov 2008 14:39:51 -0500

Amercian In Me - The Advengers (via BVMHardcorePunkTV)

Marriage for Nobody. Civil Unions for Everybody.

Thu, 13 Nov 2008 00:00:00 -0500

Government, both state and federal, should abandon the marriage vs. civil union battle completely, strip the label of “marriage” from the law books, and replace it with “civil unions” for anyone: gay, straight, or brother and sister.

No, there’s no great demand for brothers and sisters to “marry”, but a government-regulated agreement about material and financial custody is a non-romantic practice, anyway. It’s a tool; nothing more. The “sacred” (loaded word alert) institution of marriage doesn’t belong in an IRS tax book.

What if the U.S. government declared Christianity the only “religion”, while classifying other faiths as “spiritual organizations”, granting non-Christian groups the same rights and privileges, but minus the preferred label of “religion”. Imagine the outrage!

Yet, this is the same double standard being practiced when granting “civil unions” to gay couples, while reserving traditional marriage for everyone else. In a civil union, a gay couple may enjoy the same legal protections and tax benefits as a straight couple, but without the symbolic legitimacy.

Of course, when it comes to declarations of eternal love, symbolism is everything to us. Rings, ceremony, public vows; the material and third party ratification of romantic unions is, for better or worse, deeply important to human beings. So much so, we’re willing to indulge the absurd notion that our electorate possesses the astonishing power to define our union simply by labeling our union.

We’ve agreed, as a society, to allow two adults to enter into “civil contracts” conjoining their tax, custody and other obligations. There’s certainly value in ensuring that adopted children can count on staying with a surviving, familiar parent in the event of a partner’s death. But no government can define what sort of romantic contract two people can enter into together. The moment we impose a civil due process regarding child, material, or financial custody, we’re no longer talking about their romantic contract. It’s simply a contract, full stop.

The concept of “marriage” should be left where it belongs: in the hearts and minds of individual people, churches and families. If the California courts rule (following the recent successful passage of Proposition 8) that all existing civil unions are null and void, what is the “romantic” impact? How is the love between two people affected? The answer is: it shouldn’t be. Who is the California Supreme Court (or the California voting public, for that matter) to tell me what to feel, or what I can promise to my lover and life partner? If 54% of a voting population decide strawberries taste like crab grass, how does this affect my cup of Yoplait?

Gay rights advocates would argue, rightly, that as a disenfranchised minority it’s meaningful to have societal recognition of their romantic union. Fair enough. Yes, it’s nominally true that “everyone has the right to get married”. At least, anyone has the right to have a priest, justice of the peace, or Cap’n Crunch stand in front of them, their friends and family, etc., and declare them “married”. They also have the right to be declared “turnip!”

I don’t mean to diminish the value or “sanctity” (another loaded word) of marriage. The opposite, in fact. The only people who have the ability to define what marriage really means are married people. And “married people” are all different, with varying convictions about how best to honor their promises to one another.

If we as a culture are still sold on having a legal mechanism by which to combine the material, parental and tax obligations of two adults, then fine. Whether we should re-examine this practice entirely is another discussion. But enforced, exclusive access by heterosexual couples to that mechanism, even if the exclusion occurs solely by means of mere labeling, is segregation. It’s “white” water fountains and “black” water fountains all over again.

This should all be common sense, but unfortunately the “legal widget” of state-sanctioned marriage was created (I’m assuming) to support a ritual sharing the same kind of quasi-religious identity as Christmas trees. The sometimes-religious, sometimes-secular practice of getting married has been historically popular enough to demand a legal support structure. Especially when the dominant norm was for a male spouse to pay the bills while a female spouse had no autonomous income source, the security of a reliable due process for materially conjoined people was, and still is, nice to have. Not just on Tax Day, but on Divorce Day.

Fast-forward to now, and the traditional (often religious) view of marriage is suddenly at odds with a burgeoning social evolution; the recognition that true, intimate feelings of love between two people are rare and precious, and not to be muddied by inconsequential details like gender. Or race. As Americans, we enjoy a First Amendment right to debate the question of “what marriage means” until the end of time. But as for the legal distinction, it’s time we applied a new precept, similar to the one we employ when it comes to religion: the separation of church and state.

To adopt the same precept as it applies to marriage, the correct course is not to legally recognize gay marriage, but to acknowledge that “marriage” is an inherently non-legal institution, just like spiritual faith, and re-classify the legal infrastructure we depend on (material custody, etc.) as precisely what it is: a plain old, boring, black and white contract… available to any two adults, whoever they are. Again: anything less is segregation, in the ugliest sense of the word.

Modern Girls and Old Fashioned Men - The Strokes & Regina...

Mon, 10 Nov 2008 03:07:30 -0500

Modern Girls and Old Fashioned Men - The Strokes & Regina Spektor (via carmenmariah)

Building a better mousetrap, one raindrop at a time (via...

Mon, 10 Nov 2008 01:42:00 -0500

Building a better mousetrap, one raindrop at a time (via Bloomacious)

Nightlight by Ron Diorio

Sun, 09 Nov 2008 15:28:00 -0500

Nightlight by Ron Diorio

What was their secret? Gin.

Sat, 08 Nov 2008 16:09:00 -0500

You know what I miss? I miss 1960. Not the part about my face turning overnight into the world’s most productive zit farm. What I miss is the way the grown-ups acted about the Kennedy-Nixon race. Like the McCain-Obama race, that was a big historic deal that aroused strong feelings in the voters. This included my parents and their friends, who were fairly evenly divided, and very passionate. They’d have these major honking arguments at their cocktail parties. But unlike today, when people wear out their upper lips sneering at those who disagree with them, the 1960s grown-ups of my memory, whoever they voted for, continued to respect each other and remain good friends.

What was their secret? Gin. On any given Saturday night they consumed enough martinis to fuel an assault helicopter. But also they were capable of understanding a concept that we seem to have lost, which is that people who disagree with you politically are not necessarily evil or stupid. My parents and their friends took it for granted that most people were fundamentally decent and wanted the best for the country. So they argued by sincerely (if loudly) trying to persuade each other. They did not argue by calling each other names, which is pointless and childish, and which constitutes I would estimate 97 percent of what passes for political debate today.

What I’m saying is: we, as a nation, need to drink more martinis.

Dave Barry
Miami Herald
4 November 2008

"I know, somehow, that only when it is dark enough, can you see the stars."

Wed, 05 Nov 2008 11:58:45 -0500

“I know, somehow, that only when it is dark enough, can you see the stars.”

- Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

Blocking Racists For Fun and Spite

Wed, 05 Nov 2008 11:28:00 -0500

(reblogging Remiel, who i follow on Twitter, usually for laughs, often for a shared point-of-view.)

“mmmm burned nigger babies….delicious. That’s my favorite kind of baby!” - Konstantine

The “nigger” posts are coming out of the woodwork on Twitter, following Obama’s election. If you’re not quite ready for bed, why not consider spam-blocking some ignorant fucks?

From the Twitter Blog:
“When you block a spam account, we take note—when more people start blocking a spam account, we go to red alert. Blocking also puts that account out of sight and out of mind so you don’t have to see it anymore.”

NOTE: I’ve examined each of the following accounts fairly closely. They’re all “dirty”. But please avoid callously blocking everyone else you might find using the “N-Word”. In my searching and clicking, I found that at least half of those posting were not doing so out of racism or spite.

And just to be clear: Strictly speaking, I do support the right of these people to call Obama a “nigger” if that’s what floats their free speech boat. I consider this a kind of “argumentative prank”. They’re all free to retaliate, if they can.

http://twitter.com/ruudman107

http://twitter.com/Arguecat3

http://twitter.com/sidmowmeef

http://twitter.com/NONIGPRES

http://twitter.com/USAINEXILE

http://twitter.com/MO2V8ED

http://twitter.com/Konstantine

http://twitter.com/airmanrichey

http://twitter.com/Tylizzle24

http://twitter.com/benmarvin

Anatomy of a Gummy Bear via Geekologie.com

Mon, 27 Oct 2008 17:00:44 -0400

Anatomy of a Gummy Bear via Geekologie.com

Mr Rogers - Unnecessary Censorship - Jimmy Kimmel

Fri, 24 Oct 2008 16:09:14 -0400

Mr Rogers - Unnecessary Censorship - Jimmy Kimmel

Coney Island by Dietrich

Fri, 24 Oct 2008 15:56:48 -0400

Coney Island by Dietrich

You Really Got Me - The Kinks

Thu, 23 Oct 2008 18:07:09 -0400

You Really Got Me - The Kinks

Ex Norwegian Home " Ex Norwegian

Thu, 23 Oct 2008 17:30:55 -0400

Ex Norwegian Home " Ex Norwegian: “got that Cotton Mather recorded-in-the-living-room feel” says AreAitch. (band’s official site)

nobody will believe you (via PlanetTampon)

Thu, 23 Oct 2008 17:01:48 -0400

nobody will believe you (via PlanetTampon)

Women’s “Health” via Pundit Kitchen

Wed, 22 Oct 2008 19:42:03 -0400

Women’s “Health” via Pundit Kitchen

WWCD (via Ffffound)

Sat, 18 Oct 2008 01:03:25 -0400

WWCD (via Ffffound)

Daily Typography

Fri, 17 Oct 2008 15:14:00 -0400

Daily Typography: “A daily dose of typography and design”

"Most Americans, it seems, can tolerate hearing of the superiority of the small town, as long as they..."

Fri, 17 Oct 2008 14:27:43 -0400

“Most Americans, it seems, can tolerate hearing of the superiority of the small town, as long as they don’t have to live in one.”

- Steve Chapman

Reminder Wall reminder by Sara McPherson

Fri, 17 Oct 2008 14:01:29 -0400

Reminder Wall reminder by Sara McPherson

"Most truths are so naked that people feel sorry for them and cover them up, at least a little bit."

Tue, 14 Oct 2008 23:42:00 -0400

“Most truths are so naked that people feel sorry for them and cover them up, at least a little bit.”

- Edward R. Murrow