More Go Iowa! news

Iowa State Senate Majority Leader Mike Gronstal’s speech on the State Senate floor, explaining why he will not support an effort to amend the state’s constitution to reverse the recent unanimous ruling legalizing same-sex marriage in Iowa.

That’s just awesome.

Continue ReadingMore Go Iowa! news

Real Biblical Marriage

Passed along from a friend via email

If we were to create a constitutional amendment defining marriage based on the teachings of the Bible, it would look like this:

A. Marriage in the United States shall consist of a union between one man and one or more women. (Gen 29:17-28; II Sam 3:2-5)

B. Marriage shall not impede a man’s right to take concubines in addition to his wife or wives. (II Sam 5:13; I Kings 11:3; II Chron 11:21)

C. A marriage shall be considered valid only if the wife is a virgin. If the wife is not a virgin, she shall be executed. (Deut 22:13-21)

D. Marriage of a believer and a non-believer shall be forbidden. (Gen 24:3; Num 25:1-9; Ezra 9:12; Neh 10:30)

E. Since marriage is for life, neither this Constitution nor the constitution of any State, nor any state or federal law, shall be construed to permit divorce. (Deut 22:19; Mark 10:9)

F. If a married man dies without children, his brother shall marry the widow. If he refuses to marry his brother’s widow or deliberately does not give her children, he shall pay a fine of one shoe and be otherwise punished in a manner to be determined by law. (Gen 38:6-10; Deut 25:5-10)

G. In lieu of marriage, if there are no acceptable men in your town, it is required that you get your dad drunk and have sex with him (even if he had previously offered you up as a sex toy to men young and old), tag-teaming with any sisters you may have. Of course, this rule applies only if you are female. (Gen 19:31-36)

Continue ReadingReal Biblical Marriage

I wanna commitment ceremony you

Stephanie and I were having talk the other day with one of our friends over terminology and what we called our selves, our wedding, and what we’ll call ourselves once we’re married.

That’s not an unusual discussion, and gay people have different opinions about it. There are some who don’t embrace the words “marriage” “fiancée” and “wife” because there is historical baggage associated with all of them, surrounding women being treated as property.

I understand that argument, but I disagree with it – I think the historical “property” context in far enough in the past that not many people realize or associate those ideas with those words anymore. And I also feel that the words “marriage” “fiancée” and “wife” have tremendous power in them that the second-class terminology of “commitment ceremony” and “civil union” and “domestic partner” lack. Here’s a funny video about why that’s the case: once you start using those terms in context, they sound dumb:

Continue ReadingI wanna commitment ceremony you

So much to blog, so little time

I actually have things to write about lately, but haven’t geared up to do it. Lets see, where were we when we last tuned in? Oh, yeah, I was probably playing Packrat. Well, the gloss has come off that Facebook game somewhat, as I got collected most of the cards I could get a hold of easily and was stuck gold mining endlessly and hoping the rare cards would pop up for me, which they weren’t. It didn’t help that the developers changed several rules of the game and it’s not quite as fun, and pretty uneven on the fairness scale. And discovering that there are only 100 of the very rare Leopard card that once popped up for me but I couldn’t pick up due to a glitch in the game was disheartening. If only 100 people can win, it kinda sucks.

We’re far behind in wedding planning, but we finally got registered a couple of places. (They’re listed at our wedding page; you can get there from the image on the right.) Of course, we still need to add lots of items to the registries.

Stephanie went to Wyandotte, Michigan for a figure skating competition. We initially thought I’d go with her, but decided not to farm out the dog, so I stayed home and ran some errands and went (gasp) wedding dress shopping. Yes, I’m wearing a dress to our wedding. Don’t act all crazy. It’s the one and only day I will. I can be a princess on my wedding day, even if i don’t want to be any other day. (Okay, I actually own a tiara, so I act like a princess on other days, too. But just while vacuuming.)

Anyways, you may already know this, but wedding dress shopping can be crazy. I only found one thing I liked, and they didn’t have it in my size. You have to make an appointment for a sales person, and there was a 45 minute wait for dressing rooms. At one of the other places, you had to register with them to even set foot in the door. All I wanted to do was look, but they wouldn’t let me. I was planning on going to a few more places, but I think I’ve run down an alternative that, if it works as planned, will complement Stephanie’s dress nicely.

There are lots of other things we need to get in order, but if I start making a list here, I’m get an upset stomach with worry, so I won’t.

In other news – SJR7 – the marriage discrimination amendment is effectively dead at the Statehouse. On Friday, Rep. Scott Pelath, D-Michigan City refused to hear the bill in committee, meaning that it’s dead for this legislative session, and they’d have to take at least 4 years to get it through the Statehouse again.

This still doesn’t mean we can get legally married in Indiana, because there is a law on the books saying we can’t. It just means that the state can’t double-plus super deny us marriage. So, you know, that’s nice. Or something. Clearly, we’re getting married anyway. (See above shocking paragraph about me wearing a dress!) We just can’t get a piece of paper from the government saying so, which just seems sort of arbitrarily bitchy of them, when you look at it that way. But the nice Canadian government will give us a piece of paper saying we’re married, which is why we’re honeymooning in Toronto. Those Canadians are darned nice. And Massachusetts will recognized that we’re married with the piece of paper from Canada, but only if we live there. Also California, Vermont and a couple other states will say we’re civil-unioned. Which is like marriage, but without all the same legal rights. So, not really like marriage at all, but basically our own water fountain. Yay! At least we can get a drink. Except not here in Indiana. We don’t even get our own water fountains.

Whatever. I’m thinking pink and lavender gladiolas for my bouquet. What do you think?

Continue ReadingSo much to blog, so little time

Regarding SJR-7

I just wanted to say that there are a lot of hard working people who were tireless in getting SJR-7 stopped in its tracks. I’m afraid to start naming them, because I’ll manage to leave someone out – but every single person who was involved in the grassroots effort worked hard – much harder than I did – and I want them all to know that I appreciated everything they did. The people who got Cummins, Wellpoint, Lilly, DowAgro and other big companies to the table – you guys rock.
Of course, the amendment could still be introduced back into the legislature in 2008. But stopping it here was a major blow, and one worth celebrating. There’s no limit to the power of people working together…

Continue ReadingRegarding SJR-7

SJR-7 Died in Committee

From numerous sources, but quoting from the Indiana Equality email:

Marriage Discrimination Amendment dies in committee
Indianapolis – Indiana Equality announced today that the Indiana House of Representative’s Rules and Legislative Procedures Committee voted five to five on Senate Joint Resolution 7 (SJR-7). As a result, the amendment will not be brought for a vote by the full House of Representatives and will not be voted upon by the Indiana General Assembly.

The Indy Star has an article on it.

Advance Indiana breaks down the vote:

Rep. Terri Austin (D)-No
Rep. Scott Pelath (D)-No
Rep. Russ Stilwell (D)-No
Rep. Earl Harris (D)-No
Rep. Bob Kuzman (D)-No
Rep. Randy Borror (R)-Yes
Rep. Ralph Foley (R)-Yes
Rep. Eric Turner (R)-Yes
Rep. Matt Whetstone (R)-Yes
Rep. Dennis Oxley (D)-Yes

Wow, that was brave of the democrats to stand against this – we can’t forget them. I’ll be sending them some flowers, without a doubt.
I’m so happy I could cry.

Continue ReadingSJR-7 Died in Committee