A single Supreme Judicial Court justice chickened out on the suit to force the current anti-same-sex-marriage amendment onto the 2008 ballot if the Constitutional Convention does not vote it up or down on January 2nd, 2007. Justice Judith A. Cowin called for the whole SJC to hear the case on December 20th instead.
The Boston Herald runs the wire story and the Boston Globe has an even shorter version. You can see the plaintiffs and defendants here.
After a half hour of argument this morning, Cowin waited a couple of hours before disappearing behind the shield of the whole court. She voted in the majority in the Goodridge case. It's unclear whether this factored in her unwillingness to rule.
Even though the SJC ruled over a decade ago that it could not compel the legislature to vote on an amendment, that didn't stop the plaintiff's attorney, John Hanify. He argued to Cowin that the SJC had to stop a pattern of parliamentary maneuvering in lieu of passing through amendments. "They’ve done it repeatedly. They’ve done it incessantly. It will persist if the court doesn’t intervene."
That a hard argument to win. Typically, courts rely on precedence.
On the other hand, this gives plaintiff Mitt Romney, nominally acting as private citizen, not governor nor Presidential aspirant, a chance to show off again. Even though, God bless him, he clearly enabled SSM here, he's happy to pretend otherwise.
Tags: massmarrier, Massachusetts, amendment, same sex marriage, ConCon, Supreme Judicial Court, Judith Cowin
Thursday, November 30, 2006
Wednesday, November 29, 2006
Blame Ryan
Yesterday's post on the silliness in Galveston brought an exhortation from Ryan over at Ryan's Take. He noted that there were reeking treasures in the letters to the editor.
What we covered was the original post on the local paper's article on two men having a marriage ceremony is a state that does not recognize their union in any way. Then the publisher got scores of hate mails and phone calls.
If you want to check out a week of the former, try the Galveston County Daily News letters link. Note that after a few days, the archives require a free registration replete with email confirmation. The article ran on November 19th and the letters start on November 22nd.
To whet your hunger for the Gulf Coast political style, some low-lights follow. Remember that these are the ones clean enough to run in the paper:
In many ways, these letters represent self-selecting wheat from chaff. Sadly, of course, they also represent the strong emotion behind the anti-gay/anti-SSM voters. Reality and creeping equality are not likely to sway them soon.
Tags: massmarrier, Texas, Galveston, same sex marriage
What we covered was the original post on the local paper's article on two men having a marriage ceremony is a state that does not recognize their union in any way. Then the publisher got scores of hate mails and phone calls.
If you want to check out a week of the former, try the Galveston County Daily News letters link. Note that after a few days, the archives require a free registration replete with email confirmation. The article ran on November 19th and the letters start on November 22nd.
To whet your hunger for the Gulf Coast political style, some low-lights follow. Remember that these are the ones clean enough to run in the paper:
- I do not approve of your article on the "gay wedding"...It’s not something I want to read from my newspaper. Nor do I want the children I teach to read this example of rebelliousness. First, it is not legitimate or legal. Second, if we choose to be complacent, depravity and wickedness will run amok. We persevere to teach “truth.” Truth is, this is a sin issue. My children’s lesson will be that a person’s sin still separates them from God.
- ... it is gross to even think about two men getting married (or pretending to get married...The story should have been titled "Gay couple pretends to get married, thumbing their noses at the laws of Texas."
- Publishing an article advocating such activities within our community is not excusable, regardless of your political views. Shame on all of you. You owe the community you "serve" a front-page apology. I will never subscribe to your paper.
- Homosexuals will recognize that they have been used to entice readers to scan the article for juicy tidbits to satiate their curiosity. Heterosexuals should be upset, because they have not had equal coverage for their heterosexual weddings. I guess that "news" would not sell as many papers. Catholics should also be appalled that an edifice that was once a working church is being used for all types of ceremony and the coverage put in our county newspaper. What is next, a Satanic Mass in the old St. Joseph’s Church? Would that receive coverage in the Lifestyle section, as well?
- We do not know the individuals portrayed in the story, and our displeasure is not directed toward them. But we do believe the majority of Texas citizens spoke clearly when they voted to ban same-sex marriage. We also believe that that same majority are not interested in viewing photos of two gay men kissing in their community newspaper.
- I am sure these two young men deserve our love and concern. However, their behavior is likely to be hurtful to them. Statistics are not in their favor. Homosexual behavior as a lifestyle is destructive to public welfare also. I think an article like this one should be over in your political section or editorial column, because it seems to me that is what this is about.
- It almost seems like some people like the ones in this article like to flaunt their sexual orientation. Where does someone draw the line on what is acceptable in today’s society? The Daily News seems to condone this type of behavior by printing this story.
- First Corinthians 6:9-10 (New International Version) says: "Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God." In the Bible, God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah for their wicked ways. He can do the same thing again to individuals, cities or, yes, even newspapers. How about devoting three-color pages to anybody’s Christian wedding? Do I dislike gays? No — God tells us to love the person … not the sin.
- I was disgusted with the gay marriage...What is this doing to all the children who read your paper? You seem to think this is perfectly acceptable. I will never ever buy your paper again. You should be ashamed.
- What a way to start a beautiful Sunday morning: Open the paper and see this kind of wedding between two men. It made me sick. Evidently, The Daily News is promoting the gay lifestyle in hopes that Galveston can become another San Francisco. As parents try to teach their children moral values, your paper condones immorality — in fact, glorifies it...I do not hate these men, but I hate the sinful lifestyle they have chosen.
- I have questions about this church being used for all weddings, too, that I will be asking the Archdiocese of Galveston and Houston.
- The obviously gay propaganda has only one purpose: to brainwash your readers into believing that certain sexual practices are an acceptable, alternative lifestyle. The Daily News has leapt feet first into a moral vacuum. Greene failed in his attempt to deny the reality of, and glorify, the homosexual lifestyle. Since The Daily News has expressed its support for the idea of homosexuality, it should no longer be on a Christian reader’s list of acceptable publications. I view the article as a slap in the face of Christianity and an attempt to legitimize a kind of moral degeneracy.
- I am disgusted and appalled at the coverage of a homosexual wedding...Homosexuality is not — I repeat, is not — an alternate lifestyle but is a sin. Let’s call it what it is. Nowhere in the Bible does God call homosexuality an alternative lifestyle, and I do not believe that it should be seen as such. To what depths of carnage will your newspaper go in order to sell newspapers?...Truly, God has wept over this latest flagrant violation of all that He stands for. I know Christians of all denominations have.
In many ways, these letters represent self-selecting wheat from chaff. Sadly, of course, they also represent the strong emotion behind the anti-gay/anti-SSM voters. Reality and creeping equality are not likely to sway them soon.
Tags: massmarrier, Texas, Galveston, same sex marriage
Custody Spitting Back to Vermont
In a delayed return volley, the V states are back in synch. Virginia got around to answering Vermont's August challenge on the custody battle from the lesbian civil-union gone sour. In a victory for comity and common sense, the Court of Appeals in Virginia said, in effect, "Yup, this is your case," to Vermont's Supreme Court.
To simplify to the bare legalities, two women from Virginia moved to Vermont, joined in civil union, and had a daughter together. The biological mom left, with their daughter they were raising as co-moms, and returned to Virginia. She denied the visitation required by Vermont and sued locally for full custody.
In short, it was an all too common spiteful divorce with a child involved. The wrinkles included that Virginia does not recognize civil unions and she was trying to pit one state's laws and sovereignty against another's. Boo.
The more elegant wording from Virginia's court includes:
While a lower Virginia court ruled for the biological mom/resident, the three-judge panel said the federal Parental Kidnapping Prevention Act was more important than that finding. The justices did not comment on the Vermont case, nor did they discuss the differing views of civil unions in the states.
Yet, even this narrow ruling on a fine point of law may have fallout, according to analysis in the Richmond Times-Dispatch. University of Richmond constitutional law expert Carl Tobias said, "It may set off a political firestorm." He may be overly dramatic about it, particularly considering that 27 states have their anti-SSM amendments in place. As the article puts it, "He worried that the case could be used in the national battle over constitutional bans on same-sex marriage. Supporters argue the constitutional bans are essential to rein in so-called activist judges. Virginia voters approved the prohibition this month."
Instead, this could represent a slight chilling in the icicle-length distances anti-SSM state courts have kept from civil union and SSM ones. Perhaps not all judges are cowed by the screaming legislators.
Tags: massmarrier, civil union, child custody, Virginia, Vermont
To simplify to the bare legalities, two women from Virginia moved to Vermont, joined in civil union, and had a daughter together. The biological mom left, with their daughter they were raising as co-moms, and returned to Virginia. She denied the visitation required by Vermont and sued locally for full custody.
In short, it was an all too common spiteful divorce with a child involved. The wrinkles included that Virginia does not recognize civil unions and she was trying to pit one state's laws and sovereignty against another's. Boo.
The more elegant wording from Virginia's court includes:
This case does not place before us the question whether Virginia recognizes the civil union entered into by the parties in Vermont. The only question before us is whether, considering the (Parental Kidnapping Prevention Act), Virginia can deny full faith and credit to the orders of the Vermont court. It cannot.We add that in light of the hard-nosed legislatures in such states as Virginia, this is refreshing.
While a lower Virginia court ruled for the biological mom/resident, the three-judge panel said the federal Parental Kidnapping Prevention Act was more important than that finding. The justices did not comment on the Vermont case, nor did they discuss the differing views of civil unions in the states.
Yet, even this narrow ruling on a fine point of law may have fallout, according to analysis in the Richmond Times-Dispatch. University of Richmond constitutional law expert Carl Tobias said, "It may set off a political firestorm." He may be overly dramatic about it, particularly considering that 27 states have their anti-SSM amendments in place. As the article puts it, "He worried that the case could be used in the national battle over constitutional bans on same-sex marriage. Supporters argue the constitutional bans are essential to rein in so-called activist judges. Virginia voters approved the prohibition this month."
Instead, this could represent a slight chilling in the icicle-length distances anti-SSM state courts have kept from civil union and SSM ones. Perhaps not all judges are cowed by the screaming legislators.
Tags: massmarrier, civil union, child custody, Virginia, Vermont
Tuesday, November 28, 2006
Easily Offended in Galveston
"For me, this has been an eye-opening week. Not all our callers were unreasonable. Many were thoughtful and asked good questions. However, a surprising number were blindly, nastily and profanely hateful."
What unnerved and disappointed Mr. T. likely has played and will play out throughout most of the country. A staff photographer, Chad Greene, wrote a pleasant piece on the nominal marriage ceremony of two men, in a state that won't recognize it as marriage.
Let the reviling and recriminations begin!
Link Note: The original article and the follow-up editorial require a free registration process, with email confirmation for access.
Pix Note: At the moment, Greene serves up nice photos from the ceremony. You'll have to click over; he claims copyright on all of them.
Even in Texas and the 26 other states with laws and amendments specifically forbidding recognition of same-sex marriage, flames roar, fueled by homosexual love and commitment. In this case, the publisher reports "scores of angry phone calls criticizing the decision to publish the story. At last count several dozen readers had canceled their subscriptions."
So, you may well ask if the original article was about the likes of male prostitutes, drug addicts, or even drag queens or transsexuals. Instead, it was rather like the New York Times featured wedding of the week -- how they met, decided to move to Texas, Ernie (the chaplain) proposed in a redwood forest, the wedding eve family barbecue, the Walla Walla UCC minister returning the solemnization favor for Ernie doing her wedding...it short, it was colorful, personal and a bit sweet. It was much like other wedding stories.
The piece ran on the front of the lifestyle section. It brought atavistic responses that seem to belong to the worst of the early civil rights era. As Tillotson writes:
He does not regret publishing the story. It had one personal side effect -- "It created a needed discussion, and answering my phone this week provided new insight into the frightening degree of hatred homosexuals face routinely. I now understand the need for hate crimes laws much better."
Sadly and reasonably, he also concluded that "I am sick at heart and shaken over the malice I’ve experienced this week, wave on wave, pure and hard as diamonds. Normally, we live in a peaceful corner of the world, and it’s rare here to see hate wearing no mask."
For those with the longer view, the future should be brighter, eventually. As we saw here with the now-60%-plus acceptance of SSM and in Maine in the plebiscite rejecting the recall of gay-rights law, enough who hate or fear eventually change to enable permanent tolerance and fairness.
Unquestionably, exposure to such pioneering couples as Ernie and David in Texas is a key factor. When your sibling, coworker or neighbor is openly gay, partnered or married, that can move from them being the other to being someone you know and like...and for whom you want fairness and equality.
Tags: massmarrier, Texas, Galveston, same sex marriage
--Dolph Tillotson, president and publisher, Galveston County The Daily News
What unnerved and disappointed Mr. T. likely has played and will play out throughout most of the country. A staff photographer, Chad Greene, wrote a pleasant piece on the nominal marriage ceremony of two men, in a state that won't recognize it as marriage.
Let the reviling and recriminations begin!
Link Note: The original article and the follow-up editorial require a free registration process, with email confirmation for access.
Pix Note: At the moment, Greene serves up nice photos from the ceremony. You'll have to click over; he claims copyright on all of them.
Even in Texas and the 26 other states with laws and amendments specifically forbidding recognition of same-sex marriage, flames roar, fueled by homosexual love and commitment. In this case, the publisher reports "scores of angry phone calls criticizing the decision to publish the story. At last count several dozen readers had canceled their subscriptions."
So, you may well ask if the original article was about the likes of male prostitutes, drug addicts, or even drag queens or transsexuals. Instead, it was rather like the New York Times featured wedding of the week -- how they met, decided to move to Texas, Ernie (the chaplain) proposed in a redwood forest, the wedding eve family barbecue, the Walla Walla UCC minister returning the solemnization favor for Ernie doing her wedding...it short, it was colorful, personal and a bit sweet. It was much like other wedding stories.
The piece ran on the front of the lifestyle section. It brought atavistic responses that seem to belong to the worst of the early civil rights era. As Tillotson writes:
For me, this has been an eye-opening week...In the case of a few, I saw bigotry and unreasoning hatred that would make the Ku Klux Klan blush. Then they often told me I’d offended all good Christians.Also, some "experts" claimed the ceremony was illegal (not so; Texas doesn't recognize SSM and the guys never tried to get a license). Others tried to get a rise from the publisher by writing that this article proved he was gay (not anyone's business, he responded).
He does not regret publishing the story. It had one personal side effect -- "It created a needed discussion, and answering my phone this week provided new insight into the frightening degree of hatred homosexuals face routinely. I now understand the need for hate crimes laws much better."
Sadly and reasonably, he also concluded that "I am sick at heart and shaken over the malice I’ve experienced this week, wave on wave, pure and hard as diamonds. Normally, we live in a peaceful corner of the world, and it’s rare here to see hate wearing no mask."
For those with the longer view, the future should be brighter, eventually. As we saw here with the now-60%-plus acceptance of SSM and in Maine in the plebiscite rejecting the recall of gay-rights law, enough who hate or fear eventually change to enable permanent tolerance and fairness.
Unquestionably, exposure to such pioneering couples as Ernie and David in Texas is a key factor. When your sibling, coworker or neighbor is openly gay, partnered or married, that can move from them being the other to being someone you know and like...and for whom you want fairness and equality.
Tags: massmarrier, Texas, Galveston, same sex marriage
Sunday, November 26, 2006
Attack of the Process People!!
As a youth, this Baby Boomer saw hundreds of horror and sci-fi movies. The giant mantis, Rodan, mole people, killer shrews, blob...all of which may explain much about me.
Nonetheless, I can't seem to run fast enough to get away from the relentless Process People. Boston is home to a frightening number of them.
In today's Boston Globe, one even admits that he is one of them. Ceaselessly until the Constitutional Convention (ConCon) leaves recess on January 2nd, we shall hear their alternating whines and monotones. Process. Process. Process. You must respect the process.
You're heavier, lighter, taller, shorter, richer, poorer than I. Concepts be damned. What can we measure?
The church was only a few hundred yards from the UUA headquarters. There are several UU churches downtown, including one that seems pretty Episcopal to me and another for Yuppies that subscribes to Martha Stewart Living. Instead, mine was the rabble-rousing, social-activist version.
It was the one that many UUA staff members attended, so many if fact that those at 25 Beacon called the church The UUA Chapel. At the time, over 10% of the members were UUA employees and many of those were also ministers as well as non-profit bureaucrats.
So when you had even one of those at a committee or board meeting, you would hear process spoken in insistence and reverence. Up at the UUA, process is king and queen. One should never shorten a procedure nor skip a step. Channing forbid.
Various psychologists, physicians and sociologists come at Process People (aaaaaargh) from different angles with different descriptions. Some would typify them as Myers-Briggs S (Sensing) types and others could call them left-brained. In either case, they tend to have low tolerance (or no tolerance) for ambiguity. They typically can only begin to understand a whole when they think all the parts are assembled and displayed.
That's a way of thinking. That's a way of feeling. That's a lifestyle.
They do think differently. Simply presenting a larger view will never convert one of them. The tension between Process People and the rest of us emerges whenever there is a conflict.
The balanced-brained and right-brained folk can argue or laugh or sit with wrinkled brows, but Process People can't hear. They will instead remain with their iron underwear on the line and rusting by the moment. There is a right set of procedures and they know what it is. Likely, they can point to a constitutional article or a regulation or a precedent. So there.
In this particular case, an irony is that Governor-Elect Deval Patrick seems balanced in his view of the same-sex marriage debate and the ConCon. He has stated clearly and repeatedly that plebiscites on the civil rights -- particularly existing ones -- of others are uncalled for and impermissible. Had he been governor, this spiteful amendment would not have gotten so far as a ConCon.
Yet, Patrick certainly seems to have the ability to see the big picture and to tolerate even Process People without buckling under to them. He can listen to their advice and opinion, and then take what is worthwhile from them.
We can be sure that he won't suddenly be converted into one of those let-the-people-vote types who would sacrifice the commonweal on a stone altar of procedure.
As scary as the Process People can be when they lumber and attack, they must find life difficult. What they see as necessity often does not occur. They lose in their literal interpretations of complex situations. The battle is finished and the armistice signed while they are still arming themselves. Lackaday.
So, in the matter at hand, the Process People will have to work through their own resolution. If they find that getting free of this odious effort to strip rights from a group of citizens violates their sense of process, they can carry on about it -- sincerely but to no effect.
Fortunately, most of them may well carry a grudge but continue to function. Plus, they get to feel superior, knowing they would have done things differently. So there.
Tags: massmarrier, Massachusetts, amendment, same sex marriage, Process People, ConCon
Nonetheless, I can't seem to run fast enough to get away from the relentless Process People. Boston is home to a frightening number of them.
In today's Boston Globe, one even admits that he is one of them. Ceaselessly until the Constitutional Convention (ConCon) leaves recess on January 2nd, we shall hear their alternating whines and monotones. Process. Process. Process. You must respect the process.
You're heavier, lighter, taller, shorter, richer, poorer than I. Concepts be damned. What can we measure?
Process People in Pews
My judgment of process worshippers focused when I served on the board of a large, troubled downtown UU church, and then chaired the board for two years. The Process People were congregants, volunteers and even staff.The church was only a few hundred yards from the UUA headquarters. There are several UU churches downtown, including one that seems pretty Episcopal to me and another for Yuppies that subscribes to Martha Stewart Living. Instead, mine was the rabble-rousing, social-activist version.
It was the one that many UUA staff members attended, so many if fact that those at 25 Beacon called the church The UUA Chapel. At the time, over 10% of the members were UUA employees and many of those were also ministers as well as non-profit bureaucrats.
So when you had even one of those at a committee or board meeting, you would hear process spoken in insistence and reverence. Up at the UUA, process is king and queen. One should never shorten a procedure nor skip a step. Channing forbid.
How They Think
Instead, in dealing with the Process People, one must either:- Accept the mire and muck of wading through the process with them, even when the destination is in sight and there is a firm footpath beside the process swamp, or
- Get them to chill enough to tell you how wrong you are to abbreviate the process but not cause too much trouble.
Various psychologists, physicians and sociologists come at Process People (aaaaaargh) from different angles with different descriptions. Some would typify them as Myers-Briggs S (Sensing) types and others could call them left-brained. In either case, they tend to have low tolerance (or no tolerance) for ambiguity. They typically can only begin to understand a whole when they think all the parts are assembled and displayed.
That's a way of thinking. That's a way of feeling. That's a lifestyle.
They do think differently. Simply presenting a larger view will never convert one of them. The tension between Process People and the rest of us emerges whenever there is a conflict.
Deval and the Process People
That is important at the moment, particularly during the anti-SSM amendment debate. That Globe column today had Sam Allis calling himself a process liberal. Likewise, over at Blue Mass Group, David made much in numerous posts and comments about how much he respects process above all.The balanced-brained and right-brained folk can argue or laugh or sit with wrinkled brows, but Process People can't hear. They will instead remain with their iron underwear on the line and rusting by the moment. There is a right set of procedures and they know what it is. Likely, they can point to a constitutional article or a regulation or a precedent. So there.
In this particular case, an irony is that Governor-Elect Deval Patrick seems balanced in his view of the same-sex marriage debate and the ConCon. He has stated clearly and repeatedly that plebiscites on the civil rights -- particularly existing ones -- of others are uncalled for and impermissible. Had he been governor, this spiteful amendment would not have gotten so far as a ConCon.
Yet, Patrick certainly seems to have the ability to see the big picture and to tolerate even Process People without buckling under to them. He can listen to their advice and opinion, and then take what is worthwhile from them.
We can be sure that he won't suddenly be converted into one of those let-the-people-vote types who would sacrifice the commonweal on a stone altar of procedure.
As scary as the Process People can be when they lumber and attack, they must find life difficult. What they see as necessity often does not occur. They lose in their literal interpretations of complex situations. The battle is finished and the armistice signed while they are still arming themselves. Lackaday.
So, in the matter at hand, the Process People will have to work through their own resolution. If they find that getting free of this odious effort to strip rights from a group of citizens violates their sense of process, they can carry on about it -- sincerely but to no effect.
Fortunately, most of them may well carry a grudge but continue to function. Plus, they get to feel superior, knowing they would have done things differently. So there.
Tags: massmarrier, Massachusetts, amendment, same sex marriage, Process People, ConCon
Saturday, November 25, 2006
Fotos Para Los Muertos
You can walk on or weep over the grave of e.e. cummings, or rather EDWARD ESTLIN CUMMINGS if you put faith in the inscribed word. His is one of many corpses of the rich and famous feeding the green and brown residents of Forest Hills Cemetery.
Instead of fame by distant contact, consider the fall and winter in one of Boston's most splendid parks. A few photos taken today show a bit of what you can see in staturary, wildlife, art, and iconography.
Click on an image to see a larger view. Even these are compressed and from 100KB to 350KB -- easy even for the cable deprived.
The magnificent beech here is a delight for picnickers and climbers alike in leaf. You enjoy its grandeur only in the fall. It is one of several gigantic guards around Lake Hibiscus.
Not to quibble, but we country folk would call this a pond, as we suspect limnologists would. However, the frogs and waterfowl delight in it regardless.
This garden cemetery has always been a public park to the neighbors and management. The latter has recently brought in rotating art incorporated into the geology and flora. (You can get an art map by the main entrance and follow the dots-for-dummies to the signs.
As you enjoy some of the grand trees, a few can shock -- like those cloaked in mesh. These wraith trees (artist, Leslie Wilcox) take you just a little out of your comfort zone by not letting you passively enjoy autumn nature.
The cemetery is famous for its five Daniel Chester French statues (the Lincoln Memorial guy). It has numerous other classic Victorian pieces, both poignant and pretentious.
Yet its group memorials and monuments to more ordinary folk can be charming, particularly in the fall. Without the heavy foliage, these gems sparkle.
Consider for one the bronze soldier who marks the memorial to fallen Union soldiers in "the rebellion." His expression is at once resigned and resolute. This is not a call for further blood, rather the look of one who has experienced the best and worst humanity serves up while doing his perceived duty.
Nearby Mt. Hope has far more group memorials -- police, Elks and the ilk. Also, St. Michael, across Walk Hill from Forest Hills is more of a tenement-style traditional burial ground with its busts of stern patriarchs and matriarchs mingled with cherubs on infants' plots.
Instead, Fortest Hills' nature as a garden cemetery inspired the families of the corpses, as well as sculptors and headstone carvers, to higher art. While we personally love the older New England iconography elsewhere in town, the individual statements here are grand on their own.
Times could be tough in the early and mid-19th Century. The couple who had buried all three of children, young, could only memorialize them.
Likewise, the poor woman who remained behind both her child and husband ordered a strong statement for her family plot.
The relatively open spaces here aid in the appreciation of granite, marble and sandstone art. Particularly in the fall, the bare deciduous trees detract less from these works.
You might assume that this is almost over-arbored. Yet, as recent as the past two hurricane-class winds, Forest Hills lost over 150 trees, quite a few of them huge and old.
Again, we can't help but wonder, macabrely, whether the permanent residents themselves fertilize the trees. The grass is not golf-course thick and green. Then again, grass does not have the root structure nor the hunger of the woody mammoths.
What you can see at a micro level is the opportunistic and survivalist wee plants. In particular, the mosses and lichens manage to flourish in the smallest crevices. Likely windblown dirt sticks to joints and letters in tombstones enough to give these plants and fungi all they need to live.
One must wonder whether Mary Dow and her kin nearby would have been pleased at the green highlights on their names and dates so many years later.
The full fuzziness of moss provides a garish cuddliness to a cold stone, even in autumn. We can suspect by the next century, every character and integer will have its own verdant accent.
This garden also surprises with moving things. Lake Hibiscus attracts the nearly ubiquitous, noisome Canada geese. It also has much quieter, discreetly excreting families of box turtles that sun in the middle and mallard families that reproduce on the small island and keep a year-round presence. Foo on the DONT FEED THE WATERFOWL admonitions.
The reeds boom six months a year with bullfrogs too. They coexist peacefully with the squirrels' nemesis, the red tailed hawks. Those bushy tail rodents are lunch on the move for them, and they have no compunction keeping them from tearing one apart to the disgust of visiting moms.
However, a regular delight is the great blue heron or two.
The one here was likely looking for a remaining frog in the reeds, when he found himself looking at us between him and the water. He paced a bit, but we managed to waltz around each other so that he could go to his pond and relative safety.
We may post some more, likely of the trees and some of the current sculpture now fully exposed. This coming season is not the best for picnics, expect for perhaps precious student and artist types. However, for all, this is a wonderful season to walk this park -- open dawn to dusk.
Tags: massmarrier, Boston, Forest Hills Cemetery, sculpture
Instead of fame by distant contact, consider the fall and winter in one of Boston's most splendid parks. A few photos taken today show a bit of what you can see in staturary, wildlife, art, and iconography.
Click on an image to see a larger view. Even these are compressed and from 100KB to 350KB -- easy even for the cable deprived.
The magnificent beech here is a delight for picnickers and climbers alike in leaf. You enjoy its grandeur only in the fall. It is one of several gigantic guards around Lake Hibiscus.
Not to quibble, but we country folk would call this a pond, as we suspect limnologists would. However, the frogs and waterfowl delight in it regardless.
This garden cemetery has always been a public park to the neighbors and management. The latter has recently brought in rotating art incorporated into the geology and flora. (You can get an art map by the main entrance and follow the dots-for-dummies to the signs.
As you enjoy some of the grand trees, a few can shock -- like those cloaked in mesh. These wraith trees (artist, Leslie Wilcox) take you just a little out of your comfort zone by not letting you passively enjoy autumn nature.
The cemetery is famous for its five Daniel Chester French statues (the Lincoln Memorial guy). It has numerous other classic Victorian pieces, both poignant and pretentious.
Yet its group memorials and monuments to more ordinary folk can be charming, particularly in the fall. Without the heavy foliage, these gems sparkle.
Consider for one the bronze soldier who marks the memorial to fallen Union soldiers in "the rebellion." His expression is at once resigned and resolute. This is not a call for further blood, rather the look of one who has experienced the best and worst humanity serves up while doing his perceived duty.
Nearby Mt. Hope has far more group memorials -- police, Elks and the ilk. Also, St. Michael, across Walk Hill from Forest Hills is more of a tenement-style traditional burial ground with its busts of stern patriarchs and matriarchs mingled with cherubs on infants' plots.
Instead, Fortest Hills' nature as a garden cemetery inspired the families of the corpses, as well as sculptors and headstone carvers, to higher art. While we personally love the older New England iconography elsewhere in town, the individual statements here are grand on their own.
Times could be tough in the early and mid-19th Century. The couple who had buried all three of children, young, could only memorialize them.
Likewise, the poor woman who remained behind both her child and husband ordered a strong statement for her family plot.
The relatively open spaces here aid in the appreciation of granite, marble and sandstone art. Particularly in the fall, the bare deciduous trees detract less from these works.
You might assume that this is almost over-arbored. Yet, as recent as the past two hurricane-class winds, Forest Hills lost over 150 trees, quite a few of them huge and old.
Again, we can't help but wonder, macabrely, whether the permanent residents themselves fertilize the trees. The grass is not golf-course thick and green. Then again, grass does not have the root structure nor the hunger of the woody mammoths.
What you can see at a micro level is the opportunistic and survivalist wee plants. In particular, the mosses and lichens manage to flourish in the smallest crevices. Likely windblown dirt sticks to joints and letters in tombstones enough to give these plants and fungi all they need to live.
One must wonder whether Mary Dow and her kin nearby would have been pleased at the green highlights on their names and dates so many years later.
The full fuzziness of moss provides a garish cuddliness to a cold stone, even in autumn. We can suspect by the next century, every character and integer will have its own verdant accent.
This garden also surprises with moving things. Lake Hibiscus attracts the nearly ubiquitous, noisome Canada geese. It also has much quieter, discreetly excreting families of box turtles that sun in the middle and mallard families that reproduce on the small island and keep a year-round presence. Foo on the DONT FEED THE WATERFOWL admonitions.
The reeds boom six months a year with bullfrogs too. They coexist peacefully with the squirrels' nemesis, the red tailed hawks. Those bushy tail rodents are lunch on the move for them, and they have no compunction keeping them from tearing one apart to the disgust of visiting moms.
However, a regular delight is the great blue heron or two.
The one here was likely looking for a remaining frog in the reeds, when he found himself looking at us between him and the water. He paced a bit, but we managed to waltz around each other so that he could go to his pond and relative safety.We may post some more, likely of the trees and some of the current sculpture now fully exposed. This coming season is not the best for picnics, expect for perhaps precious student and artist types. However, for all, this is a wonderful season to walk this park -- open dawn to dusk.
Tags: massmarrier, Boston, Forest Hills Cemetery, sculpture
Posturing Anti-SSM Suit
We hope that someone at the Boston Herald or Boston Globe can afford today's New York Times. As usual, neither local rag covers Boston politics the way the Old Gray Lady does. In this case, the article on the gang of 11's anti-SSM suit is the most complete to date.
Personal Kvetch: Can someone bring these papers into this century? For example, in this case, all three obviously have the suit in front of them. None links to it nor quotes it extensively. That is a disservice and insult to we clickers and other readers. We have having to snatch snippets as we can.
According to the NYT:
We see that the kiddies in the Let The People Vote Gallery are eager to use a directive interpretation of vague constitutional wording. In fact, Article XLVIII, which covers the process, kind of implies what the anti-SSM forces says it specifies and even shouts.
The pertinent paragraph in its entirety reads:
GLAD Legal Director Gary Buseck has a colder view of the emotional issue. He sees no chance of success for the suit. "The bottom line is, the legislature acted in accordance with its rules and the Constitution and did the right thing to protect the now-declared constitutional rights of same-sex couples to marry. There's no getting around that."
A related view comes from Lawrence M. Friedman, a specialist on Massachusetts constitutional law at the New England School of Law. He doesn't see an opening for the SJC to require the legislature to act. "It's not at all clear to me how this is something the court can remedy. It doesn't seem likely to me the court will order the legislature to take a vote or subvert constitutional procedures and just put it on the ballot."
The anti-SSM forces and certain ambitious hack politicians have never been about respecting laws and constitutional processes. They want what they want anyway they can get it.
They're not going to get it.
Tags: massmarrier, Massachusetts, amendment, same sex marriage, ConCon
Personal Kvetch: Can someone bring these papers into this century? For example, in this case, all three obviously have the suit in front of them. None links to it nor quotes it extensively. That is a disservice and insult to we clickers and other readers. We have having to snatch snippets as we can.
According to the NYT:
- The suit demands that the SJC order the anti-SSM amendment onto the 2008 general-election ballot, if the ConCon does not vote it up or down.
- The key claim to justify such constitutional meddling is that the lawmakers in joint session have "legal duty to act" on such an initiative.
- Falling back on recessing was an effort "avoid a vote and evade its constitutional duties."
- Senate President, Robert E. Travaglini, according to the suit, "failed to carry out his ministerial duty to require final action" on the initiative.
- As redress, the suit demands, the SJC must "step into the constitutional breach" by ordering the Secretary of State (also sued) to put the amendment on the ballot.
We see that the kiddies in the Let The People Vote Gallery are eager to use a directive interpretation of vague constitutional wording. In fact, Article XLVIII, which covers the process, kind of implies what the anti-SSM forces says it specifies and even shouts.
The pertinent paragraph in its entirety reads:
Section 4. Legislative Action. - Final legislative action in the joint session upon any amendment shall be taken only by call of the yeas and nays, which shall be entered upon the journals of the two houses; and an unfavorable vote at any stage preceding final action shall be verified by call of the yeas and nays, to be entered in like manner. At such joint session a legislative amendment receiving the affirmative votes of a majority of all the members elected, or an initiative amendment receiving the affirmative votes of not less than one-fourth of all the members elected, shall be referred to the next general court.So, the it's-only-common-sense team say this clearly states there must be an up-or-down vote on every such initiative that's gotten its signature. Well, it doesn't really say that. It is very difficult to believe the SJC, particularly this skittish one, would jump in to create law and to institute new powers for itself to order amendments to ballot in new ways.
GLAD Legal Director Gary Buseck has a colder view of the emotional issue. He sees no chance of success for the suit. "The bottom line is, the legislature acted in accordance with its rules and the Constitution and did the right thing to protect the now-declared constitutional rights of same-sex couples to marry. There's no getting around that."
A related view comes from Lawrence M. Friedman, a specialist on Massachusetts constitutional law at the New England School of Law. He doesn't see an opening for the SJC to require the legislature to act. "It's not at all clear to me how this is something the court can remedy. It doesn't seem likely to me the court will order the legislature to take a vote or subvert constitutional procedures and just put it on the ballot."
The anti-SSM forces and certain ambitious hack politicians have never been about respecting laws and constitutional processes. They want what they want anyway they can get it.
They're not going to get it.
Tags: massmarrier, Massachusetts, amendment, same sex marriage, ConCon
Friday, November 24, 2006
Wee Willard Romney Whines
Well, we're waiting for the actual document to see what the devil Gov. W.M. Romney based his demand for court intervention on for the anti-SSM amendment fight. He went again to his reviled activist judges of the Supreme Judicial Court today. He apparently asked them to order the Secretary of State to put the amendment on the 2008 ballot.
Fat chance, little man.
Let's forget for a moment that he's aiming to be POTUS and would eat a slug sandwich every morning if it helped him get to the White House.
Let's first think that he has spent four years lounging or campaigning. He has disdained and refused to work with the heavily Democrat legislature. Now his harvest of laziness and rudderless non-leadership is rotting and stinking on Beacon Street. When he most needed the support of a grateful and loyal peerage of lawmakers, he got what he sowed -- disdain and refusal.
Let's consider that he wants to transfer his inability to work with a Democratic legislature into what -- oh, yes, a national Democratic-controlled legislature. Sure, Mittsky, that'll work.
Finally, this latest effort is only the last dull-witted failure of his own making. Much is made of his asking the court that required marriage equality. Instead, the judicial point is that that the SJC has already ruled on such cases that the governor cannot compel the vote of the legislature of initiative petitions. Go away, sit down and shut up is the almost certain answer this time.
Here is a politician who cannot work the game. He can't get people to do what he and his party need and want. Even lumbering GOP officials will have noticed by now that he can't function.
His posturing has also helped foster the let-the-people-vote literalists. That promises sniping and whining long after this amendment writhes to its deserved demise. Yet here too, even as wee Willard fades into obscurity, those who think they should get to vote on minorities' civil rights will fade away. Their complaints will become fainter as the rest of us leave them.
Bulletin...Bulletin...
The Globe has a timely follow-up on the suit. It still does not link to or quote the action, but it does say that Romney and 10 of his jolly (our word) chums joined the action as citizens. This avoids having AG Tom Reilly represent or advise them.
The article notes that legal experts say this is premature. The ConCon is due back from recess the afternoon of January 2, the last day to consider agenda this time. Until a vote or adjournment, there seems to be no basis for action. Afterward, the ConCon can't meet and then there is a new administration, one with more sense and humanity.
By the bye, the motley suers include some of the most odious anti-gay and anti-SSM forces, like ex-mayor and ex-progressive Ray Flynn and the dreadful right-wing lawyer C.J. Doyle.
Tags: massmarrier, Massachusetts, amendment, same sex marriage, ConCon
Fat chance, little man.
Let's forget for a moment that he's aiming to be POTUS and would eat a slug sandwich every morning if it helped him get to the White House.
Let's first think that he has spent four years lounging or campaigning. He has disdained and refused to work with the heavily Democrat legislature. Now his harvest of laziness and rudderless non-leadership is rotting and stinking on Beacon Street. When he most needed the support of a grateful and loyal peerage of lawmakers, he got what he sowed -- disdain and refusal.
Let's consider that he wants to transfer his inability to work with a Democratic legislature into what -- oh, yes, a national Democratic-controlled legislature. Sure, Mittsky, that'll work.
Finally, this latest effort is only the last dull-witted failure of his own making. Much is made of his asking the court that required marriage equality. Instead, the judicial point is that that the SJC has already ruled on such cases that the governor cannot compel the vote of the legislature of initiative petitions. Go away, sit down and shut up is the almost certain answer this time.
Here is a politician who cannot work the game. He can't get people to do what he and his party need and want. Even lumbering GOP officials will have noticed by now that he can't function.
His posturing has also helped foster the let-the-people-vote literalists. That promises sniping and whining long after this amendment writhes to its deserved demise. Yet here too, even as wee Willard fades into obscurity, those who think they should get to vote on minorities' civil rights will fade away. Their complaints will become fainter as the rest of us leave them.
Bulletin...Bulletin...
The Globe has a timely follow-up on the suit. It still does not link to or quote the action, but it does say that Romney and 10 of his jolly (our word) chums joined the action as citizens. This avoids having AG Tom Reilly represent or advise them.
The article notes that legal experts say this is premature. The ConCon is due back from recess the afternoon of January 2, the last day to consider agenda this time. Until a vote or adjournment, there seems to be no basis for action. Afterward, the ConCon can't meet and then there is a new administration, one with more sense and humanity.
By the bye, the motley suers include some of the most odious anti-gay and anti-SSM forces, like ex-mayor and ex-progressive Ray Flynn and the dreadful right-wing lawyer C.J. Doyle.
Tags: massmarrier, Massachusetts, amendment, same sex marriage, ConCon
SSM: Conscience Wins
Among the quiet fallout from the recess of the Constitutional Convention (ConCon) has been some of the 109 of 200 legislators explaining their reasoning and feelings. They knew when they voted almost certainly to shelve the anti-same-sex marriage amendment that they would rile some voters.
Two state representatives also did their talking in the local papers. They set out the facts and thought process. In effect, they told the let-the-people-vote folks to chill and to look at the big picture.
Rep. Douglas Petersen (D-Eighth Essex) has his say in the Marblehead Reporter. Apparently aware of the outrage among the initiative petition signers, he wrote, "It should be noted that this vision is not an arbitrary one created by legislators 'who think they know better than their constituents'; it is a vision that embraces the spirit of the Massachusetts constitution, which has consistently expanded civil rights - not diminished them to any particular group."
While it may convince few who would conflate a ballot initiative and town meeting, he did note of a few of the many times legislators evaluated proposals against the larger public good. For one, the 1982 ConCon adjourned without a vote on an initiative to alter state budgeting procedures. He cited five of nine ConCons that adjourned without voting on initiatives. "One of the more recent occasions was in 1990, when the Legislature recessed numerous times, only to finally adjourn without taking a vote on a measure to guarantee the right of reproductive choice in our state constitution."
Peterson had to weigh the anti-SSM for all its worth, not just the effort behind promoting it. As he put it, "In the end, I chose what I believe was the more justifiable of the two constitutional obligations presented to me - namely protecting the minority from any attempt to infringe upon their constitutional civil rights."
Likewise, Rep. Jay Kaufman, (D-Fifteenth Middlesex) wrote of his thinking in the Arlington Advocate. He went right at those pushing the most emotional aspects of what we see at hit-and-run democracy:
As Kaufman wrote:
Yet, it appears as their passions fade and they see the earth rotates yet, most do get on with life. It appears further that those who vote for public good over passionate projects seem not to lose their seats or influence.
Other petition signers remain self-righteous and embittered. Perhaps someone will pray for their release from those self-imposed bonds.
Tags: massmarrier, Massachusetts, amendment, same sex marriage, ConCon
Two state representatives also did their talking in the local papers. They set out the facts and thought process. In effect, they told the let-the-people-vote folks to chill and to look at the big picture.
Rep. Douglas Petersen (D-Eighth Essex) has his say in the Marblehead Reporter. Apparently aware of the outrage among the initiative petition signers, he wrote, "It should be noted that this vision is not an arbitrary one created by legislators 'who think they know better than their constituents'; it is a vision that embraces the spirit of the Massachusetts constitution, which has consistently expanded civil rights - not diminished them to any particular group."
While it may convince few who would conflate a ballot initiative and town meeting, he did note of a few of the many times legislators evaluated proposals against the larger public good. For one, the 1982 ConCon adjourned without a vote on an initiative to alter state budgeting procedures. He cited five of nine ConCons that adjourned without voting on initiatives. "One of the more recent occasions was in 1990, when the Legislature recessed numerous times, only to finally adjourn without taking a vote on a measure to guarantee the right of reproductive choice in our state constitution."
Peterson had to weigh the anti-SSM for all its worth, not just the effort behind promoting it. As he put it, "In the end, I chose what I believe was the more justifiable of the two constitutional obligations presented to me - namely protecting the minority from any attempt to infringe upon their constitutional civil rights."
Likewise, Rep. Jay Kaufman, (D-Fifteenth Middlesex) wrote of his thinking in the Arlington Advocate. He went right at those pushing the most emotional aspects of what we see at hit-and-run democracy:
Some argued that it was my duty to simply "let the people vote." I believe this line of reasoning misrepresents my responsibilities in this process. The Constitution obligates legislators to exercise judgment on which proposed Constitutional matters are placed before the electorate for a vote. The two-step legislative review prescribed by the Constitution would be meaningless if John Adam's intent had been for the Constitutional Convention to serve simply as a pass-through agency for voter initiatives.He pressed a major button for us too with the core judgment that some rights must not be up for plebiscite. As our governor elect noted repeatedly in his campaign, such civil rights of a minority are not fit subjects for popular vote.
Keeping the proposed amendment alive would have guaranteed ongoing, often ugly and certainly divisive attacks on a minority in our state. It would have guaranteed more of what we have already seen, a nationally-financed campaign attacking same-sex marriage and our homosexual neighbors and relatives in general. It would have advanced the notion that it is OK to create two distinct classes of citizens, those married after 2004 and those who could no longer marry after 2008 if the amendment was adopted.
As Kaufman wrote:
And it would have perpetuated the idea that putting the rights of a minority to the test of a majority vote by the public made any sense. Almost all of the most important minority rights throughout this country's history have been won, first, in the courts or on the street, and only later written into legislation and embraced by the majority.His angst may well have been shared by many of the 109 who voted conscience over expediency. Kaufman saw it as an awful choice, but that he felt he no option other than voting to recess. He adds:
I did not take this vote lightly. Standing up to a citizen initiative is serious business and should be reserved for serious occasions. Given all that was at stake, I believe this was one such occasion...To do otherwise would be irresponsible and unethical.Citizens who advance ballot initiatives are not a tolerant sort in the main. When their amendment or other initiative ends in defeat by adjournment or recess, they don't forgive or forget easily.
Yet, it appears as their passions fade and they see the earth rotates yet, most do get on with life. It appears further that those who vote for public good over passionate projects seem not to lose their seats or influence.
Other petition signers remain self-righteous and embittered. Perhaps someone will pray for their release from those self-imposed bonds.
Tags: massmarrier, Massachusetts, amendment, same sex marriage, ConCon
Battle of the Pies
No one had to carry a musket or wear a uniform, but on Thanksgiving in the Woodbourne section of Jamaica Plain, the annual battle occurred. That is the Battle of the Pies.Combatants this year included:
- Cherry
- Cherry Strawberry
- Buttermilk
- Sweet Potato
- Pecan
At least one member of each couple is a Southerner, not like Scituate, rather Arkansas and North Carolina among others. Each of us has a family pie favorite -- past made present on demand.
Now, we gather long before sitting at the big table. There are hors d'oeuvres -- lots. We talk and sing and open another bottle of wine. We laugh about our travails (almost dying from a heart attack for one) and brag gently (a month in Taiwan as a guitar celebrity).
The meal includes Southern dishes as well. Oh, and in memory of a departed guest, we always have pasta.
But we are already talking about the pies shelved within sight. An easy way to fill in those awkward occasional pauses is to say something about the pie you brought or the one you intend to try.
When the sauerkraut, turkey, yams and shells are cleared, we can pretend that we really want the coffee. Instead, we are girded for battle. The phrase Battle of the Pies may elicit slapstick visions of clowns and flying plates. Instead, we are all winners here and the only violence is flashing forks.
This year, I took it as a personal challenge when Kay said she was bringing her pecan pie. There can be no Southern feast without one and hers is perfection. Yet, she always brings two -- a buttermilk one as well.
Yankees may not understand, but below D.C., you can't say, "What, no buttermilk pie!" You could not enjoy the pie if you knew someone was coerced into making it.
This year, I made that other pie, my wife press-ganged two teenage girl guests into rolling out the crust for her variations on cherry, and Jasper brought his wonderful sweet potato.
While we filled our plates with slivers -- to taste some of everything -- the only thing resembling conflict was also a teen-driven one. Kay's daughter saying repeatedly, as teens are wont to do for the benefit of we mentally feeble adults, that the "lemon peel" (actually grated zest) in the buttermilk was not chewy and thus the pie was much better than hers. Any insult, no matter how mild, certainly gains in effectiveness by iteration.
As the washed and dried pie plates left with the guests, we concluded another successful battle.
Tags: massmarrier, Boston, Jamaica Plain, Thanksgiving, pie
Wednesday, November 22, 2006
Loud Radio and Breakfast IPA
Turkey Day Eve down on Canal Street started at 5:30 a.m. It wasn't just rats running around. The big mouths from rock radio station WZLX piled into Boston Beer Works to dish out turkey and a lot of lip.
The Karlson and McKenzie Morning Show set a surprisingly pleasant tone with four hours of:
In terms of life's strange events, this is not even in the top 200, but it seemed decadent enough. My chum John and I each tossed back BBW's great IPA -- the tall, 22-ounce, of course, not our usual breakfast beverage.
Virtually none of the almost entirely male, middle-aged crowd had the energy of the guys with the mikes. Kevin Karlson and Pete McKenzie chattered or bellowed non-stop for the whole time. Often they and Heather Ford went from booth to table to curb spreading their cheer and Thanksgiving anticipation. One might be on the headset taking a listener call. The others would be interviewing bird eaters or passersby. Throughout, Revolver played intensely, and loudly. How did those radio guys keep up the chatter when we could barely talk across the tables?
Ostensibly, this was a turkey tasting. I think it ended up with 11 or 12 varieties. Southwestern was in salsa, a lot of varieties of fried came with such stuffings as spinach and jack cheddar or wild rice, BBQ had a cornbread dressing, there was a rosemary bird, and the sweet and sour version had a cheese stuffing.
A bunch of men sitting around with their coffees, then their beers were not shy in tasting either. As the attendants grew from about 20 to maybe 100, home-plate sized platters went from heaping to scraps.
By the bye, WZLX promoted this and BBW sent it to use frugal tipplers who belong to its VIP Club. Pre-Thanksgiving Meat and Greet, eh?
Among the few women there was one bartender and four of the Celtics Dancers. Neither Karlson nor McKenzie is a svelte thing (then neither John nor I am). However the dancers were. Up close, they are surprisingly girl-like -- no hips or bosoms to speak of and very skinny. Boy, could they smile and hold it. At one point, they gathered for a snapshot, surrounding a seated guy in a Celtics' T-shirt; he was closing in on 300 pounds, about the same as the foursome. The smiles almost looked real.
Maybe the hit of the morning was the interaction with Vince from JP Licks. He was dishing out mini-cups of Wild Turkey vanilla ice cream. It is a likely complement to a pecan pie.
We discussed his three JP stores -- the tiny one next to the old Rose Way Books, the little one that is now the Purple Cactus and the big one across the street. He was very pleased that I knew them all, that I enjoyed his coffees, and particularly that we don't let a family birthday go by without a JP Licks ice-cream cake.
Nice guy. Nice ice cream. Nice IPA. Nice morning.
Tags: massmarrier, Boston, beer Works, Thanksgiving, WZLX
The Karlson and McKenzie Morning Show set a surprisingly pleasant tone with four hours of:
- A cavalcade of increasingly imaginative turkey dishes
- Live rock on stage from Revolver
- Coffee and Coke
- In-your-face hosts
- Comic Tony V.
- Boston Celtics Dancers
- JP Licks ice cream served up by its owner, Vince Petryk
In terms of life's strange events, this is not even in the top 200, but it seemed decadent enough. My chum John and I each tossed back BBW's great IPA -- the tall, 22-ounce, of course, not our usual breakfast beverage.
Virtually none of the almost entirely male, middle-aged crowd had the energy of the guys with the mikes. Kevin Karlson and Pete McKenzie chattered or bellowed non-stop for the whole time. Often they and Heather Ford went from booth to table to curb spreading their cheer and Thanksgiving anticipation. One might be on the headset taking a listener call. The others would be interviewing bird eaters or passersby. Throughout, Revolver played intensely, and loudly. How did those radio guys keep up the chatter when we could barely talk across the tables?
Ostensibly, this was a turkey tasting. I think it ended up with 11 or 12 varieties. Southwestern was in salsa, a lot of varieties of fried came with such stuffings as spinach and jack cheddar or wild rice, BBQ had a cornbread dressing, there was a rosemary bird, and the sweet and sour version had a cheese stuffing.
A bunch of men sitting around with their coffees, then their beers were not shy in tasting either. As the attendants grew from about 20 to maybe 100, home-plate sized platters went from heaping to scraps.
By the bye, WZLX promoted this and BBW sent it to use frugal tipplers who belong to its VIP Club. Pre-Thanksgiving Meat and Greet, eh?
Among the few women there was one bartender and four of the Celtics Dancers. Neither Karlson nor McKenzie is a svelte thing (then neither John nor I am). However the dancers were. Up close, they are surprisingly girl-like -- no hips or bosoms to speak of and very skinny. Boy, could they smile and hold it. At one point, they gathered for a snapshot, surrounding a seated guy in a Celtics' T-shirt; he was closing in on 300 pounds, about the same as the foursome. The smiles almost looked real.
Maybe the hit of the morning was the interaction with Vince from JP Licks. He was dishing out mini-cups of Wild Turkey vanilla ice cream. It is a likely complement to a pecan pie.
We discussed his three JP stores -- the tiny one next to the old Rose Way Books, the little one that is now the Purple Cactus and the big one across the street. He was very pleased that I knew them all, that I enjoyed his coffees, and particularly that we don't let a family birthday go by without a JP Licks ice-cream cake.
Nice guy. Nice ice cream. Nice IPA. Nice morning.
Tags: massmarrier, Boston, beer Works, Thanksgiving, WZLX
Tuesday, November 21, 2006
Israeli SSM, After the Fact
In an amazing, surprise victory, Israel's high court ruled that Canadian same-sex marriages are legal there.
Haaretz reports that the six-to-one decision of the High Court of Justice allows five married gay couples from Toronto to register their status in Israel.
The Association for Civil Rights in Israel argued for the couples that they had a right to equality and family life. Also, the lawyers said that the Interior Ministry's refusal to register them was based on "homophobe social perceptions."
The government used the same inane arguments that have worked in many places in this country. Its lawyers even tried the no-framework-to-recognize-them canard.
As if to prove the plaintiffs' arugment:
Over at NYU Law, Leonard Link blog promises follow-up when available.
Tags: massmarrier, Israel, Canada, same sex marriage, Court
Haaretz reports that the six-to-one decision of the High Court of Justice allows five married gay couples from Toronto to register their status in Israel.
The Association for Civil Rights in Israel argued for the couples that they had a right to equality and family life. Also, the lawyers said that the Interior Ministry's refusal to register them was based on "homophobe social perceptions."
The government used the same inane arguments that have worked in many places in this country. Its lawyers even tried the no-framework-to-recognize-them canard.
As if to prove the plaintiffs' arugment:
The minister in charge over religious affairs, Yitzhak Cohen (Shas) said "the High Court has sunken in the gates of defilement and has torn out the last mezuzah from its doors. Marriage can only be held by the faith of Moses and Yisrael [the traditional Jewish marriage vows].Holy haters, Batman!
"The dam that protected the Jewish state has been burst open under the auspices of the High Court, asking for an anti-Jewish deluge clad in black capes," he said.
"We don't have a Jewish state here. We have Sodom and Gomorrah here," said Moshe Gafni, an ultra-Orthodox lawmaker...
Over at NYU Law, Leonard Link blog promises follow-up when available.
Tags: massmarrier, Israel, Canada, same sex marriage, Court
Globe, Glob, Glib
Homing in on Turkey Day, we offer a small prayer for the local media. Please, newspeople, do your damned jobs!The immediate catalyst for this rant was the coverage and related treatment of the O.J. Simpson book/TV deal. Forget for a moment the topic itself and the pseudo-outrage of the self-parodying, profit-oriented MSM. Mull for a moment whether the recent article in the Boston Globe or the one in the Boston Herald served you, the reader.
As an old J-school guy who worked newspapers as reporter and editor, I am likely more in the Perry White or Lou Grant mold than a newsman LITE. It never hurt me to learn to put the Who, What, When, Where, Why and How in every story -- and as close to the top as our short-attention-span reader could find them. Grab 'em and give them a reason to read!
As the Simpson tale illustrated, our local rags shortchange us. They are increasingly like TV rather than the other way around.
Consider, this story has been around for a couple of days. There has been wire-service coverage as well as broadcast. The local papers have had editors and in some case reporters stuffing these into their grinders to roll out the news sausages.
So, what might the typical reader want to know? Some is there -- how much Simpson stood to gain and who was pissed at the prospect, for example.
As in far too many Globe or Herald pieces though, key information is not there, not demanded by passive editors or even the alleged reporters. In this case, does Simpson get to keep his advance or the whole payment for the book, and maybe for the contracted program and interviews?
How could they not ask? Well, it's not that difficult to figure:
- Laziness. As broadcast has taught, it's a lot easier to run a press release or wire story than use them as a springboard to real reporting.
- Fewer Feet. The local papers have smaller staffs than they used to.
- Bad Training. Modern editors don't have adequate school or mentor background. They can't do or teach what they don't know -- unless they are extraordinarily observant.
Unfortunately, this high-profile example has other things wrong with it and is typical of the day-to-day and local reporting and editing. We all get ripped everyday by the local tab and broadsheet.
My family gets to hear regular rants about Globe editing. If the key components of an article appear at all, they are likely to be near the end of the story. That's both bad writing and unforgivably bad editing.
By cracky, kiddies, in the old days, we learned that the typical reader read the first paragraph if the head was interesting enough -- that should be 35 words or less. Few readers will go beyond 100 words unless the story hooks them. The Who, What, When, Where, Why, and How need to be at the reader's convenience, not that of the arrogant reporter or lazy editor.
This seems to be TV news tainting the attitude of newspapers instead of papers inspiring broadcast. Roger Mudd may have been the last broadcast reporter who was not a talking head first. He checked or did the reporting on everything he covered on air.
So, look at the local papers with an eye to how they are serving you. I have sent email or letters to the Globe editors, reporters and lately ombudsman about some. The latter letter specifically cited:
- The recent minimal coverage of a Boston cop who drove into a disabled car on 128 in the early morning, killing the woman inside. The Globe ran the State Police press release, which did not include whether the car was in the breakdown lane or had its blinkers on or whether the cop was tested for alcohol or other drugs. There seems to have been no follow-up. This is not only a matter of public safety, but has all the appearance of one set of cops covering up for another. This demands real reporting.
- Very similarly, the man who died this year on the Orange Line tracks near Green Street was a T-police press-release special. The Globe eventually ran a second item, very short, giving an unlikely name for the man with a maybe town of residence. We don't know what he was doing on the tracks or whether the electricity or train killed him. Come on now, this is local interest of high degree and likewise demanded original reporting.
- In an older death, neonatalogist Dr. Douglas K. Richardson died on his bike when a BFI trash truck passed him and turned right immediately in front of him. He left a wife and three kids. The violation was so egregious that the Norfolk DA prosecuted for vehicular homicide among other things. The sole Globe coverage was the initial report. There was no follow-up on the charges, no naming the driver, no coverage of the large number of BFI and other garbage truck-caused deaths of motorists, cyclists or pedestrians, and no articles about any legal outcome for the driver and company -- criminal or civil.
The monopolies and near monopolies city dailies enjoy and abuse reinforce this. They don't care. They don't have to.
Perhaps they do. The next time you put down the Herald or Globe annoyed because they didn't ask the obvious question, send them an email or letter. Their ad rates depend on their readership -- that's us.
Tags: massmarrier, Boston, Globe, Herald, newspapers, reporting, editing
Monday, November 20, 2006
Mr. Grumpy's Thanksgiving
About 40 years ago, in Plainfield, New Jersey, two older family friends were anticipating a rough Thanksgiving. Evelyn and Rollins Justice (everyone called him "Justice," which seemed to fit such a kind and thoughtful man) had a tough year and a tougher guest.
They ended up fearing a Thanksgiving under the tyranny of his father. Think Abe Simpson and you are in the area. The old man had retired from the railroad in his 40s, sponged off one child and then moved in with his son and daughter-in-law in Plainfield. He was entitled, demanding and often nasty. He wanted what he wanted when he wanted it, from morning biscuits to his rocking chair placement. Justice was old school country from the western mountains of North Carolina. He would never toss the old guy or order him to behave.
Evelyn had volunteer work with the veterans' hospital, she had visited remote sick grandkids, money was tight and Justice had to work. They simply could not prepare a Thanksgiving meal. Evelyn was a fabulous cook with the Southern pride of my-hand-to-your-mouth hospitality. She was sad not to be able to cook and she and Justice dreaded the response from the old man.
They didn't discuss it with him. Rather when Justice got home, they got into their black Rambler and headed out to find someplace that was open and they could afford. The only place seemed to be the drive-in Steer Inn on Route 22.
Evelyn steeled herself as Justice went in and returned to the car with burgers, fries and drinks. Amazingly, the old man had not said a word, much less started a tirade about the first Thanksgiving of his life without a feast presented to him.
Finally, as Evelyn and Justice looked out the windshield and started on their burgers, the old man spoke. He said only, "Hain't got no table."
Tags: massmarrier, Thanksgiving
Anti-Reality Rally in Boston
Oops, Mitt Romney must be slapping his forehead. He forgot to be governor!
In a giggle-producing moment yesterday, he attempted to associate himself with Abraham Lincoln, John Adams and all manner of folk far superior to him in intellect, civic practice, honesty and vision. His mercifully short and astonishingly disingenuous speech before the State House rally promised two actions:
Shame on the man in the magic underwear. He discovered his religion and his worship of the constitution only when they might benefit his political drive. What a fortuitous coincidence.
The Constitutional Convention has used parliamentary moves to avoid other controversial votes, including term limits in 1992. Then, an appeal to the Supreme Judicial Court produced a decision saying that this wasn't the intent of the constitution nor of the derived rules, but that it could not nothing about it.
To their credit this time, the anti-SSM forces apparently finally outnumbered pro-SSM demonstrations (at the rally but not among voter or in the legislature). Even though the largely bused-in folks may be in the minority of public opinion, for two hours yesterday, they had the most feet on the sidewalk.
The bluster seems for naught. We can revel in Romney running to his reviled activist judges at the SJC to force a vote on advancing the anti-SSM amendment. He knows it's not going to work, but in his pique of POTUS envy, he is happy to ignore that in 1992 when the SJC ruled on forcing a vote on term limits at a ConCon --no can do.
Romney's chief spokesman said, apparently straight-faced, "The governor has a constitutional role to play in making sure that the Legislature votes on matters that are brought to them by the people. He is using the bully pulpit of his office to get the Legislature to uphold its constitutional obligation."
You would think that after all the chicanery to advance this amendment so far, that voters would not be so witless and self-deceptive. However, he is playing to Ohio and Iowa and South Carolina. This is a nation that re-elected George the Lesser. They might buy Mitt as a constitutional champion.
Maybe not though...
There is that other problem with the rally's demands. The anti-SSM forces favor a very literal ruling of the commonwealth constitution's Article XLVIII. They like to say it forces the ConCon to vote initiatives up or down. That is moot.
Not only have ConCons not done this numerous times -- those term limits, budget issues, and the previous anti-SSM bid, but there are ways and ways of looking at the article. It does demand consideration and discussion, but not literally an up-or-down vote. More important, the only weapon against recesses or adjournments is the governor's ability to call the ConCon back into session, but not to force a vote.
So, Mitt can and surely will try to let such theatrical displays substitute for his lack of leadership and accomplishment over four years. Hell, he couldn't even engineer returning that symbolic 0.3% of the tax rate back to voters -- a major campaign promise.
Sad it will be though come January 3, 2007, when this monstrous amendment unquestionably dies, the dwindling anti-gay/anti-SSM forces will not get on with their lives and let the rest of us do the same.
Incoming Governor Deval Patrick has a lot of repair and more to develop for us. We could use some pest control for those who want to distract us from the business and hope at hand.
Raybo Babble: As a lamentable sidebar, erstwhile liberal ex-Boston mayor Ray Flynn continued to muddle issues. He is firmly on the side of legislating his religious rituals and beliefs -- and he was an original signer of his amendment drive. At the rally, he said that "he opposes discrimination, but the grandfather of 14 said children are best served 'growing up in a loving environment with a mother and father.'"
Tags: massmarrier, Massachusetts, amendment, same sex marriage, ConCon
In a giggle-producing moment yesterday, he attempted to associate himself with Abraham Lincoln, John Adams and all manner of folk far superior to him in intellect, civic practice, honesty and vision. His mercifully short and astonishingly disingenuous speech before the State House rally promised two actions:
- Tomorrow, I will send these 109 a copy of the Constitution and of their oath of office.
- And this week, we will file an action before the courts, calling upon the judiciary to protect the constitutional rights of our citizens.
Shame on the man in the magic underwear. He discovered his religion and his worship of the constitution only when they might benefit his political drive. What a fortuitous coincidence.
The Constitutional Convention has used parliamentary moves to avoid other controversial votes, including term limits in 1992. Then, an appeal to the Supreme Judicial Court produced a decision saying that this wasn't the intent of the constitution nor of the derived rules, but that it could not nothing about it.
To their credit this time, the anti-SSM forces apparently finally outnumbered pro-SSM demonstrations (at the rally but not among voter or in the legislature). Even though the largely bused-in folks may be in the minority of public opinion, for two hours yesterday, they had the most feet on the sidewalk.
The bluster seems for naught. We can revel in Romney running to his reviled activist judges at the SJC to force a vote on advancing the anti-SSM amendment. He knows it's not going to work, but in his pique of POTUS envy, he is happy to ignore that in 1992 when the SJC ruled on forcing a vote on term limits at a ConCon --no can do.
Romney's chief spokesman said, apparently straight-faced, "The governor has a constitutional role to play in making sure that the Legislature votes on matters that are brought to them by the people. He is using the bully pulpit of his office to get the Legislature to uphold its constitutional obligation."
You would think that after all the chicanery to advance this amendment so far, that voters would not be so witless and self-deceptive. However, he is playing to Ohio and Iowa and South Carolina. This is a nation that re-elected George the Lesser. They might buy Mitt as a constitutional champion.
Maybe not though...
There is that other problem with the rally's demands. The anti-SSM forces favor a very literal ruling of the commonwealth constitution's Article XLVIII. They like to say it forces the ConCon to vote initiatives up or down. That is moot.
Not only have ConCons not done this numerous times -- those term limits, budget issues, and the previous anti-SSM bid, but there are ways and ways of looking at the article. It does demand consideration and discussion, but not literally an up-or-down vote. More important, the only weapon against recesses or adjournments is the governor's ability to call the ConCon back into session, but not to force a vote.
So, Mitt can and surely will try to let such theatrical displays substitute for his lack of leadership and accomplishment over four years. Hell, he couldn't even engineer returning that symbolic 0.3% of the tax rate back to voters -- a major campaign promise.
Sad it will be though come January 3, 2007, when this monstrous amendment unquestionably dies, the dwindling anti-gay/anti-SSM forces will not get on with their lives and let the rest of us do the same.
Incoming Governor Deval Patrick has a lot of repair and more to develop for us. We could use some pest control for those who want to distract us from the business and hope at hand.
Raybo Babble: As a lamentable sidebar, erstwhile liberal ex-Boston mayor Ray Flynn continued to muddle issues. He is firmly on the side of legislating his religious rituals and beliefs -- and he was an original signer of his amendment drive. At the rally, he said that "he opposes discrimination, but the grandfather of 14 said children are best served 'growing up in a loving environment with a mother and father.'"
Tags: massmarrier, Massachusetts, amendment, same sex marriage, ConCon
Sunday, November 19, 2006
Annoying Lesson From Canada
Today, the anti-gay, anti-marriage-equality dwindling band is again busing in oldsters and the literal from nine locations -- Roman Catholic churches, restaurants and strip malls. Their mini-rally to proclaim their theocratic intent shows us the same future that Canada will see.
The anti-marriage-equality forces have no intention of giving up or shutting up. Even those who cry, "Let the people vote!" don't accept defeat, not at the voting booth, not at opinion polls, not in the legislature, and not in the courts.
Here and there, we can expect more of the same. In the marriage version of Whack-A-Mole, the anti folk feign democratic concerns, but simply return from another angle after defeat. They state their position, then blithely ignore it after their losses.
This is the perseverance of the mentally deficient.
Way uptown, in Ottawa, the New York Times reports on the Canadian version. In using religious fundies to get elected, PM Stephen Harper promised to hold a vote on revisiting the law and related structure passed in Canada. He successfully avoided it so far, apparently knowing he'd lose badly.
Even more than here, Canadians are sick of the whining and vitriol of the anti-SSM types. The election votes reflect and the public polls strongly state that SSM is the law of the land and that the Parliament needs to get on with real issues.
Oh no. The Christian right is not about to let the will of the people and the law of the land get in the way of calumny and schadenfreude. They want to punish homosexuals and have no intention of letting reality intervene.
As a hint of what they and we can expect, underlying the SSM strife is the big issue of how powerful, or limited, the fundies are.
Tags: massmarrier, Canada, Stephen Harper, SSM, same-sex marriage
The anti-marriage-equality forces have no intention of giving up or shutting up. Even those who cry, "Let the people vote!" don't accept defeat, not at the voting booth, not at opinion polls, not in the legislature, and not in the courts.
Here and there, we can expect more of the same. In the marriage version of Whack-A-Mole, the anti folk feign democratic concerns, but simply return from another angle after defeat. They state their position, then blithely ignore it after their losses.
This is the perseverance of the mentally deficient.
Way uptown, in Ottawa, the New York Times reports on the Canadian version. In using religious fundies to get elected, PM Stephen Harper promised to hold a vote on revisiting the law and related structure passed in Canada. He successfully avoided it so far, apparently knowing he'd lose badly.
Even more than here, Canadians are sick of the whining and vitriol of the anti-SSM types. The election votes reflect and the public polls strongly state that SSM is the law of the land and that the Parliament needs to get on with real issues.
Oh no. The Christian right is not about to let the will of the people and the law of the land get in the way of calumny and schadenfreude. They want to punish homosexuals and have no intention of letting reality intervene.
"With the legalization of gay marriage, faith has been violated and we’ve been forced to respond," said Charles McVety, a leader of several evangelical Christian organizations that oppose gay marriage and president of the Canada Christian College in Toronto. "Traditionally people of faith in Canada have not been politically active," he said. "But now we’re finally seeing organizations that are professionalizing what was a very amateur political movement."As in Massachusetts, those who would conflate civil contract law with religious ritual are not bothered that there are thousands on their side and millions on the other. The NYT article notes that a vote on whether even to discuss SSM again is only to appease these annoying sorts. Yet, Harper know that the vast majority of the voters -- moderates, lefties and French Canadians included -- have no desire to revisit SSM and that pushing to do so could well mean the end of his government.
As a hint of what they and we can expect, underlying the SSM strife is the big issue of how powerful, or limited, the fundies are.
"Let’s say there’s a vote and the issue dissipates from the agenda in the same way abortion has faded away," Mr. Malloy said. "Then they won’t have a clear-cut issue they can strongly organize on. They’re developing a base here but they need something to organize and keep the funds going."Clearly appeasing these divisive and anti-equality forces is not productive. Whack-A-Mole.
The Christian movement’s leaders are discussing how to sustain the momentum and growth spurred in the campaign against gay marriage. They agree that one issue is not enough to fuel a long-term movement. But they disagree on how to carry the momentum of the marriage campaign into other socially conservative issues like euthanasia and polygamy.
Tags: massmarrier, Canada, Stephen Harper, SSM, same-sex marriage
Thursday, November 16, 2006
SSM -- Users Using Users
In a pathetic attempt to manipulate potential voters outside of Massachusetts, Cap'n Brylcreem, our on-and-off governor, Willard M. Romney, will slither to the State House on his sabbath. He'll 
join a shame rally hosted by the Mass Family Institute/VoteonMarriage.
The sponsoring group of the anti-SSM, anti-gay amendment will demand a vote on it when the Constitutional Convention comes out of recess on January 2nd, the last possible day to vote to advance the amendment toward its goal of a 2008 general-election vote.
Bay Window Background: There's great color and detail on how the recess vote came about in the current Bay Windows.
According to the Boston Globe, Romney's office is helping plan the rally. The Cap'n's spokes-whatever Eric Fehrnstrom said,"Look, this issue is not going to go away, not until the people get a chance to vote. Legislators took an oath to uphold the Constitution, and the Constitution requires that they take a vote on the marriage amendment. They cannot put themselves above the people they represent. No matter how anyone feels about the . . . issue, we should all be able to agree that democracy must have its day."
That is the same position as Kris Mineau, the sponsor's executive director, and the highly politicized Archbishop Sean O'Malley have struck. Considering their disdain and disregard for democracy, fairness, legality, and honesty throughout this amendment drive, it is to laugh a cynical laugh.
And for the cynics, consider the players and whom they are using:
We have long and even recently held that this drive proves incontrovertibly that here, as in many states, the ballot initiative process has developed serious flaws. What we should all be screaming for is a fine-tuning of this to return it to its constitutional reason to exist. This should be at the top of incoming governor Deval Patrick's agenda. There is no justification for jerking the voters around for three to six years in such processes that have malicious and illegal intent.
In this case, a competent and gutsy attorney general would have stopped this illegal effort to overturn a court decision. We didn't have one of those.
However, even if that had happened, we see how the process has been perverted. We are exhausted by that bunch of users using each other and the voters for their nefarious purposes. We certainly don't need two more years of this.
Enough.
Let the haters scream, but let's get on with the business at hand. Patrick has much to repair before he can get the General Court to the work of the people. Then let that work start with fixing the ballot initiative petition process.
Tags: massmarrier, Massachusetts, amendment, same sex marriage, ConCon
join a shame rally hosted by the Mass Family Institute/VoteonMarriage.The sponsoring group of the anti-SSM, anti-gay amendment will demand a vote on it when the Constitutional Convention comes out of recess on January 2nd, the last possible day to vote to advance the amendment toward its goal of a 2008 general-election vote.
Bay Window Background: There's great color and detail on how the recess vote came about in the current Bay Windows.
According to the Boston Globe, Romney's office is helping plan the rally. The Cap'n's spokes-whatever Eric Fehrnstrom said,"Look, this issue is not going to go away, not until the people get a chance to vote. Legislators took an oath to uphold the Constitution, and the Constitution requires that they take a vote on the marriage amendment. They cannot put themselves above the people they represent. No matter how anyone feels about the . . . issue, we should all be able to agree that democracy must have its day."
That is the same position as Kris Mineau, the sponsor's executive director, and the highly politicized Archbishop Sean O'Malley have struck. Considering their disdain and disregard for democracy, fairness, legality, and honesty throughout this amendment drive, it is to laugh a cynical laugh.
And for the cynics, consider the players and whom they are using:
- Cap'n Brylcreem, the weasel who would be President, is pretending that not only is he a protector of democracy, but that he was against SSM all along. People with the sense God gave lettuce know better.
- Mineau manipulated the voters and the Roman Catholic hierarchy here to try to disguise taking existing rights from homosexuals as well as overturning a court decision mandating marriage equality.
- O'Malley ordered his bishops, who ordered his priests to have petitions circulated in a legally dubious skirting of church next to politics.
- Blue Mass Group and a few other bloggers have hopped into bed with Mineau to overlook the anti-democratic, anti-civil-rights aspects of this amendment drive. They are clearly used and confused, but adamant in their let-the-people-vote position.
We have long and even recently held that this drive proves incontrovertibly that here, as in many states, the ballot initiative process has developed serious flaws. What we should all be screaming for is a fine-tuning of this to return it to its constitutional reason to exist. This should be at the top of incoming governor Deval Patrick's agenda. There is no justification for jerking the voters around for three to six years in such processes that have malicious and illegal intent.
In this case, a competent and gutsy attorney general would have stopped this illegal effort to overturn a court decision. We didn't have one of those.
However, even if that had happened, we see how the process has been perverted. We are exhausted by that bunch of users using each other and the voters for their nefarious purposes. We certainly don't need two more years of this.
Enough.
Let the haters scream, but let's get on with the business at hand. Patrick has much to repair before he can get the General Court to the work of the people. Then let that work start with fixing the ballot initiative petition process.
Tags: massmarrier, Massachusetts, amendment, same sex marriage, ConCon
Wednesday, November 15, 2006
Pissy About Process
When I ran a UU church board, our meetings were often paused while a member who was a minister and UUA employee saying that this or that "violated process." That distraction has popped up like our friend the old mole on the issue of handling the amendment initiative to stop same-sex marriage here.
Our own take does not favor the process people. However, if you have missed this cycle, do head over to Ryan's Take, particularly his latest.
He's been the lead warrior against the let-the-people-vote faction at Blue Mass Group. If you click through from his post there, make sure to have a big cup of whatever you drink to see you through the comments.
It's illustrative of the hidden hot buttons of self-identified lefties. Read 'em and weep. Read 'em and laugh.
Tags: massmarrier, Massachusetts, amendment, same sex marriage, ConCon
Our own take does not favor the process people. However, if you have missed this cycle, do head over to Ryan's Take, particularly his latest.
He's been the lead warrior against the let-the-people-vote faction at Blue Mass Group. If you click through from his post there, make sure to have a big cup of whatever you drink to see you through the comments.
It's illustrative of the hidden hot buttons of self-identified lefties. Read 'em and weep. Read 'em and laugh.
Tags: massmarrier, Massachusetts, amendment, same sex marriage, ConCon
SSM, Mind Your Own Business
In Henny Penny panic anticipating or reacting to our same-sex marriages, 27 states have passed DOMA-style amendments to their constitutions. The decreasing margins of victory may not indicate acceptance of SSM.
Instead, anti-gay forces may have run up against the limits of how they can manipulate the most gullible of the voters. They can cross over the line that many Americans consider inviolable -- demanding government intrusion into and control of private concerns.
A clear take on that is in Uncle Sam, keep out in Salon by author and attorney Glenn Greenwald. He postulates that the Arizona defeat and the narrow Colorado victory for such amendments is more libertarian than liberal.
As he puts it:
Greenwald goes so far to say that this is a big chance for Democrats. Republicans have gone a long way down a wrong path. He writes:
Just today, two pieces in the Boston Globe illustrate how bullheaded our clerics are being, even now. In one that does not appear to be online (New England in brief short), there is yet another Bishops decry... headline.
MSM note: For decades, press observers have chuckled over Bus plunge... heads and stories. To the press, a bus crash of even a few feet must always include plunge. In Boston at least, we can't seem to have any story on the Roman Catholic hierarchy without the phrase Bishops decry.
In this case, the allegedly non-political church is "deeply disturbed" by the recess of the Constitutional Convention. Archbishop Sean O'Malley said, "The effort to silence the people through inaction and delay has no place in democracy."
You will pardon us if we snort at his 1) invoking democracy from the most undemocratic of structures and 2) referring to silencing the people, which is his M.O.
Likewise, in Baltimore the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops released new documents reinforcing old restrictions. While acknowledging that 96% of married parishioners use birth control, they said don't do it. As part of the announcement, Archbishop Joseph F. Naumann (Kansas City) said, "As teachers, we have an obligation to teach, not just about the things people agree with, but the difficult things as well. . . . We have a responsibility to try and help our people understand things that, because of the culture being hostile, aren't easily accessible to them."
In other words, listen up, dummies. In addition, they suggested that anyone who didn't want to adhere to the tightening restrictions skip communion. That would be otherwise known as separating themselves from God and the church.
These sessions are never without their irony. This conference includes a call to minister to gay parishioners. In the words of the bishops, "persons with a homosexual inclination" are "disordered." However, the clerics said that even though they would maintain a strong opposition to homosexuality, homosexuals should feel welcome in their churches.
In a prolonged Who Moved My Cheese moment, reactionary and regressive politicians -- secular and clerical alike -- have been going down those same paths repeatedly. In this case, they may have finally gotten to the point where no voters will be left at the end.
Tags: massmarrier, same sex marriage, election, amendment
Instead, anti-gay forces may have run up against the limits of how they can manipulate the most gullible of the voters. They can cross over the line that many Americans consider inviolable -- demanding government intrusion into and control of private concerns.
A clear take on that is in Uncle Sam, keep out in Salon by author and attorney Glenn Greenwald. He postulates that the Arizona defeat and the narrow Colorado victory for such amendments is more libertarian than liberal.
As he puts it:
But last week's election results demonstrate that the GOP faces a towering problem nationally. The activist social conservative agenda demanded by its Southern evangelical base is precisely what alienates voters in the rest of the country, particularly those with an aversion to federal government intervention in their lives.
Greenwald goes so far to say that this is a big chance for Democrats. Republicans have gone a long way down a wrong path. He writes:
No political party can be everything to everyone. As Republicans are forced to rely more and more on their base of white Southern evangelicals, they will be increasingly viewed as the party of intrusive governmental control. In the process, the Democrats have the chance to become the party that stands for the right of adults to make decisions about their own lives free of moralistic governmental interference and regulation. Those who cast their votes based principally on such libertarian sentiments -- driven by the belief that the government should, to the greatest extent possible, stay out of their lives -- will view the Democratic Party as the far more attractive choice.We might add that reactionary religious politicians have not learned the lesson either. They have failed in similar efforts to mandate personal conduct, driving away their parishioners in the process. Even good Roman Catholics we know, those who attend mass regularly, go to confession and support their parish financially don't buy the whole package. They are wont to sigh or laugh at the increasingly conservative, restrictive pronouncements from our local archbishop and the Pope.
Just today, two pieces in the Boston Globe illustrate how bullheaded our clerics are being, even now. In one that does not appear to be online (New England in brief short), there is yet another Bishops decry... headline.
MSM note: For decades, press observers have chuckled over Bus plunge... heads and stories. To the press, a bus crash of even a few feet must always include plunge. In Boston at least, we can't seem to have any story on the Roman Catholic hierarchy without the phrase Bishops decry.
In this case, the allegedly non-political church is "deeply disturbed" by the recess of the Constitutional Convention. Archbishop Sean O'Malley said, "The effort to silence the people through inaction and delay has no place in democracy."
You will pardon us if we snort at his 1) invoking democracy from the most undemocratic of structures and 2) referring to silencing the people, which is his M.O.
Likewise, in Baltimore the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops released new documents reinforcing old restrictions. While acknowledging that 96% of married parishioners use birth control, they said don't do it. As part of the announcement, Archbishop Joseph F. Naumann (Kansas City) said, "As teachers, we have an obligation to teach, not just about the things people agree with, but the difficult things as well. . . . We have a responsibility to try and help our people understand things that, because of the culture being hostile, aren't easily accessible to them."
In other words, listen up, dummies. In addition, they suggested that anyone who didn't want to adhere to the tightening restrictions skip communion. That would be otherwise known as separating themselves from God and the church.
These sessions are never without their irony. This conference includes a call to minister to gay parishioners. In the words of the bishops, "persons with a homosexual inclination" are "disordered." However, the clerics said that even though they would maintain a strong opposition to homosexuality, homosexuals should feel welcome in their churches.
In a prolonged Who Moved My Cheese moment, reactionary and regressive politicians -- secular and clerical alike -- have been going down those same paths repeatedly. In this case, they may have finally gotten to the point where no voters will be left at the end.
Tags: massmarrier, same sex marriage, election, amendment
Tuesday, November 14, 2006
SSM Getting Down in Cape Town
South Africa has joined Canada and a few European countries in legalizing same-sex marriage. Rather, the legislation it passed today makes marriage or civil unions gender neutral.
It is difficult to imagine a more socially conservative nation such as ours doing this anytime soon. The South African law needs a pro forma provincial approval before being signed into law.
The wire-service report said the legislation passed by a surprising 230 to 41 votes, with three abstentions. There was no word on whether opponents would file suit claiming it is unconstitutional.
This came in the form of a Civil Union Bill to the National Assembly. It allows a "voluntary union of two persons, which is solemnized and registered by either a marriage or civil union." It does not specify gender. It also gives government marriage officials the option of refusing performing same-sex unions for "conscience, religion and belief."
The ruling African National Congress supported it. During debate, Home Affairs Minister Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula told the legislators, "When we attained our democracy, we sought to distinguish ourselves from an unjust painful past, by declaring that never again shall it be that any South African will be discriminated against on the basis of color, creed culture and sex."
Tags: massmarrier, South Africa, same sex marriage, civil unions
It is difficult to imagine a more socially conservative nation such as ours doing this anytime soon. The South African law needs a pro forma provincial approval before being signed into law.
The wire-service report said the legislation passed by a surprising 230 to 41 votes, with three abstentions. There was no word on whether opponents would file suit claiming it is unconstitutional.
This came in the form of a Civil Union Bill to the National Assembly. It allows a "voluntary union of two persons, which is solemnized and registered by either a marriage or civil union." It does not specify gender. It also gives government marriage officials the option of refusing performing same-sex unions for "conscience, religion and belief."
The ruling African National Congress supported it. During debate, Home Affairs Minister Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula told the legislators, "When we attained our democracy, we sought to distinguish ourselves from an unjust painful past, by declaring that never again shall it be that any South African will be discriminated against on the basis of color, creed culture and sex."
Tags: massmarrier, South Africa, same sex marriage, civil unions
Get These Legislators Off My Lawn!
Dust-up, rhubarb, spitting contest...however you view the current contention over the Massachusetts legislature recessing without voting up or down on the anti-same-sex marriage amendment, it's a mess.
Understandably, the anti-SSM and anti-gay forces who shepherded this dreadful thing so far are pissed. The keening and snarling are fierce and unrelenting.
Of course, these let-the-people-vote folk are disingenuous about their claims that they are only for respecting our constitution and the rights of the public. In reality, their aims have been to put discrimination into the constitution and tear existing rights from one group, homosexuals. They show no shame in their dishonest and dishonorable and illegal tactics to advance their amendment. They use the gun-shy timorousness of a high court cowering after their post-Goodridge criticism.
They have found a staunch ally in the occasionally liberal Blue Mass Group. We could hope that David took the let-the-people-vote tack just to build traffic. We fear otherwise. BMG is riding the wrong horse in the wrong race and maybe on the wrong track.
BMG did get a traffic boost with one outrageous post here and another here. The comments continue to flood in. Some, including me, hold that this is a civil rights issue, which as Deval Patrick stated so strongly, should never be subject to a plebiscite. Many other commenters take a far more libertarian view and are willing or eager to let the most literal forms of initiative petitions play out, regardless of the malice they embody, the harm they do, or the tainted way they slithered to the Constitutional Convention.
All those arguments, from many angles, are on the BMG site.
Meanwhile, a refreshingly humane and reasoned lead editorial in the Springfield Republican offers a wonderful coda to this issue. We very rarely run an entire piece from a paper, but this one is short and elegant in expression:
Tags: massmarrier, Massachusetts, amendment, same sex marriage, ConCon
Understandably, the anti-SSM and anti-gay forces who shepherded this dreadful thing so far are pissed. The keening and snarling are fierce and unrelenting.
Of course, these let-the-people-vote folk are disingenuous about their claims that they are only for respecting our constitution and the rights of the public. In reality, their aims have been to put discrimination into the constitution and tear existing rights from one group, homosexuals. They show no shame in their dishonest and dishonorable and illegal tactics to advance their amendment. They use the gun-shy timorousness of a high court cowering after their post-Goodridge criticism.
They have found a staunch ally in the occasionally liberal Blue Mass Group. We could hope that David took the let-the-people-vote tack just to build traffic. We fear otherwise. BMG is riding the wrong horse in the wrong race and maybe on the wrong track.
BMG did get a traffic boost with one outrageous post here and another here. The comments continue to flood in. Some, including me, hold that this is a civil rights issue, which as Deval Patrick stated so strongly, should never be subject to a plebiscite. Many other commenters take a far more libertarian view and are willing or eager to let the most literal forms of initiative petitions play out, regardless of the malice they embody, the harm they do, or the tainted way they slithered to the Constitutional Convention.
All those arguments, from many angles, are on the BMG site.
Meanwhile, a refreshingly humane and reasoned lead editorial in the Springfield Republican offers a wonderful coda to this issue. We very rarely run an entire piece from a paper, but this one is short and elegant in expression:
Gay marriage debate needs to take a recess
Tuesday, November 14, 2006
Opponents of gay marriage suggest that state lawmakers violated the state constitution last week when they refused to vote on a citizen-initiated proposal to ban gay marriage.
"This is the constitution of Massachusetts," said Kristian M. Mineau, president of a group opposed to gay marriage, as he held a copy of the constitution. "The constitution says that this Legislature has the obligation to take final action on our amendment. They just trashed it."
This would make a good subject for a panel discussion at Western New England College School of Law. We could only know for certain whether lawmakers violated the constitution if one of the deans at the college could somehow summon the ghost of John Adams to moderate the panel.
We are far more certain that the framers of the constitution would be pleased state lawmakers refused to aid and abet efforts to amend the constitution so that it would discriminate against a minority group.
Lawmakers may or may not have violated the letter of the law, but the decision to recess the constitutional convention without a vote upheld the spirit of the constitution.
Activists on both sides agree that the vote to recess until Jan. 2, 2007, effectively kills any chance that the measure will make the statewide ballot in 2008. Mineau says he might start a new petition to place an amendment on the 2010 statewide ballot. He should abandon the effort.
We hesitate to identify the group which Mineau represents. It's the Massachusetts Family Institute. That implies that those who support gay marriage are somehow anti-family. More than 8,100 same-sex couples have been joined legally since gay marriages began in May 2004 in Massachusetts. They are family.
It is in the best interests of all families in the Bay State if the state's lawmakers can concentrate their full attention on more important business, such as education, health care and jobs.
We respect and defend the right of religious organizations to decide who may or may not marry in their places of worship, but no religious organization has the right to decide who can get married in City Hall.
It's time to move on.
Tags: massmarrier, Massachusetts, amendment, same sex marriage, ConCon
California SSM Simmering Again
Despite last month's rejection of same-sex marriage rights, California's high court will consider considering it again, from a different angle.
Filed yesterday, this is the version that puts the constitutional question directly to the state Supreme Court, based on an appeal of the reversal of the original victory. Whew. The brief history, from the Equality California news on it, is:
The Supreme Court does not have to review the appeals decision. If it decides to, that may take a year or more. It does have to say it will or won't within 90 days.
Right-wing talk shows and blogs are having a great time with the news that two of the original plaintiffs, Lancy Woo and Christy Chung, just separated after 18 years and a child together. Of course, that's understandable and meaningful, because mixed-gender couples never separate. Um hum.
They are registered domestic partners who were denied the right to marry. Their exit from the case does not affect it legally.
Interestingly enough, the AP story ends with that angle:
Activist judges, in a pigs eye.
Tags: massmarrier, same sex marriage, California
Filed yesterday, this is the version that puts the constitutional question directly to the state Supreme Court, based on an appeal of the reversal of the original victory. Whew. The brief history, from the Equality California news on it, is:
In April 2005, San Francisco Superior Court Judge Richard A. Kramer ruled that barring same-sex couples from marriage unconstitutionally discriminates on the basis of sex and violates the fundamental right to marry. The California Court of Appeal overturned Judge Kramer’s ruling in a 2–1 decision last month, saying that California may continue to bar same-sex couples from marriage. The petition filed today asks the California Supreme Court to reverse the Court of Appeal decision.More specifics are available from the AP report.
The Supreme Court does not have to review the appeals decision. If it decides to, that may take a year or more. It does have to say it will or won't within 90 days.
Right-wing talk shows and blogs are having a great time with the news that two of the original plaintiffs, Lancy Woo and Christy Chung, just separated after 18 years and a child together. Of course, that's understandable and meaningful, because mixed-gender couples never separate. Um hum.
They are registered domestic partners who were denied the right to marry. Their exit from the case does not affect it legally.
Interestingly enough, the AP story ends with that angle:
Same-sex marriage opponents have argued that the July breakup of Julie and Hillary Goodridge in Massachusetts and the August breakup of Carolyn Conrad and Kathleen Peterson in Vermont show that same-sex unions do not have the staying power of heterosexual marriage. But the nation's divorce rate hovers between 40 and 50 percent while same-sex couples in officially sanctioned relationships appear to be separating at a much lower rate. In Vermont, which became the first state to enact civil unions five years ago, 113 of 8,109 couples have terminated them, about 1.4 percent.Far more important from our view is that the California court has shown the same timidity that the Massachusetts and New York high courts have. All seem terrified of making a stand. They are nearly begging their legislatures to resolve the conflicts between equal rights and gender restrictions in marriage.
Activist judges, in a pigs eye.
Tags: massmarrier, same sex marriage, California
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
