So, you all know how I feel about Prop. 8 -but the deeper reason why it's important to me is that it really affects my kids. Foster (age 7) is semi-aware of what's going on. He sees the signs, the ads on TV, etc.
But worst of all, he wants to know if his mommy Laura (I gave birth to him) would have to "go away" if Prop. 8 passes. What a bunch of crap.
What we told him is the truth. There are people who do not want me and mommy Laura to be married (even though we are) - for their own reasons they do not agree. As much as we disagree, they are allowed their beliefs.
BUT, we are LEGALLY married and even if Prop. 8 passes, we will remain LEGALLY married, forever and ever. AND, nobody is going away, we are family - and a damn good one.
So, even though I hope and pray and donate money and talk to people and hang signs and write signs on my car -------- if Prop. 8 passes, our life will remain as it is. We're still going to be married (though not in the eyes of our federal government- not yet...;-)) in CA State and that won't change - regardless of the outcome.
I know that I did my best to stop Prop. 8 from passing. I still don't get how my life impacts those who favor Prop. 8 - regardless of how you feel about same-sex marriage, discrimination is wrong. And those who favor Prop. 8 are pulling out all the ugly lies and making false statements. And most recently, at a Yes on Prop 8 "rally" a spokesman actually compared the right of same-sex couples to marry to the rise of Adolph Hitler and Nazi Germany.
Really...tells a lot about those in favor.
P.S. well, it's a good thing Obama will win - that's a huge bright spot!
10/28/2008
Is it wrong to LOVE your vacuum?
I must say that since we bought THIS at Target, I actually LOVE to vacuum.
I've always wanted a Dyson but couldn't get past the price. However, we used some wedding money and we bought it during a week that Target was giving a $100 gift card with it. AND, Target was donating some money from each vacuum sold to "The Breast Cancer Research Foundation".
I really LOVE this vacuum - although I'm highly disgusted by what this picks up vs. my old vacuum (that one went by the way of Craigslist).
Consider this my PSA for Dyson.
I've always wanted a Dyson but couldn't get past the price. However, we used some wedding money and we bought it during a week that Target was giving a $100 gift card with it. AND, Target was donating some money from each vacuum sold to "The Breast Cancer Research Foundation".
I really LOVE this vacuum - although I'm highly disgusted by what this picks up vs. my old vacuum (that one went by the way of Craigslist).
Consider this my PSA for Dyson.
10/27/2008
Where did I get it?
The story about the "Yes on 8" sending threatening letters to "No on 8" supporters was recently on the news and posted on the NO ON 8 website.
One of the original stories is at this site.
Copies of the letter from the website are found here
Oh, and newest encouraging news is that the "California Teachers Assn. donated $1 million this week to defeat a ballot initiative seeking to ban same-sex marriage in California, joining the ranks of wealthy gay rights activists and Hollywood politicos as one of the major donors to the campaign. "For us, it's a civil rights issue," said the association's President David Sanchez. "We don't believe people should be treated differently."
Yes, this is the SAME population of people that the "Yes on 8" supporters claim will be FORCED to teach about same-sex marriage. Hmmmm, seems like they already know the truth and donated ONE MILLION dollars to "No on 8".
Thank you teachers!
One of the original stories is at this site.
Copies of the letter from the website are found here
Oh, and newest encouraging news is that the "California Teachers Assn. donated $1 million this week to defeat a ballot initiative seeking to ban same-sex marriage in California, joining the ranks of wealthy gay rights activists and Hollywood politicos as one of the major donors to the campaign. "For us, it's a civil rights issue," said the association's President David Sanchez. "We don't believe people should be treated differently."
Yes, this is the SAME population of people that the "Yes on 8" supporters claim will be FORCED to teach about same-sex marriage. Hmmmm, seems like they already know the truth and donated ONE MILLION dollars to "No on 8".
Thank you teachers!
10/26/2008
If lies don’t work, then maybe threats will...this is just really sad and really low
That’s what the Yes on 8 campaign seems to think – they are now sending threatening letters to businesses and supporters of Equality California – warning that they will go after our donors if they don’t donate to their campaign and refrain from supporting Equality California in the future. We will not be intimidated by their threats and we will stand with our supporters.
See below and you can click on each one to enlarge it and see it in all it's embarrassing glory.
See below and you can click on each one to enlarge it and see it in all it's embarrassing glory.
"I'm just like YOU" she says - ummm - guess not...
Since her selection as John McCain's running mate, the Republican National Committee spent more than $150,000 on clothing and make-up for Gov. Sarah Palin, her husband, and even her infant son, it was reported on Tuesday evening.
Mainly, however, Democrats (in this scenario) are not prone to forgiveness. After all, it was during this same campaign cycle that Republicans belittled the $400 haircut that former Sen. John Edwards had paid for with his own campaign money (the funds were later reimbursed). And yet, the comparison to that once-dominant news story is hardly close: if Edwards had gotten one of his legendary haircuts every singe week, it would still take him 7.2 years to spend what Palin has spent. Palin has received the equivalent of $2,500 in clothes per day from places such as Saks Fifth Avenue (where RNC expenditures totaled nearly $50,000) and Neiman Marcus (where the governor had a $75,000 spree).
Beyond the political tit-for-tat, however, the revelation of the clothing expenditures offers what some Democrats see as a chance not just to win several news cycles during the campaign's waning days but to severely damage Palin's image as a small-town, 'Joe Six-Pack' American.
"It shows that Palin ain't like the rest of us," Tom Matzzie, a Democratic strategist told the Huffington Post, when asked how the party would or could use the issue. "It can help deflate her cultural populism with the Republican base. The plumber's wife doesn't go to Nieman's or Saks."
Indeed, the story could not come at a more inopportune time for the McCain campaign. During a week in which the Republican ticket is trying to highlight its connection to the working class -- and, by extension, promoting its newest campaign tool, Joe the Plumber -- it was revealed that Palin's fashion budget for several weeks was more than four times the median salary of an American plumber ($37,514). To put it another way: Palin received more valuable clothes in one month than the average American household spends on clothes in 80 years.
A Democrat put it in even blunter terms: her clothes were the cost of health care for 15 or so people.
Mainly, however, Democrats (in this scenario) are not prone to forgiveness. After all, it was during this same campaign cycle that Republicans belittled the $400 haircut that former Sen. John Edwards had paid for with his own campaign money (the funds were later reimbursed). And yet, the comparison to that once-dominant news story is hardly close: if Edwards had gotten one of his legendary haircuts every singe week, it would still take him 7.2 years to spend what Palin has spent. Palin has received the equivalent of $2,500 in clothes per day from places such as Saks Fifth Avenue (where RNC expenditures totaled nearly $50,000) and Neiman Marcus (where the governor had a $75,000 spree).
Beyond the political tit-for-tat, however, the revelation of the clothing expenditures offers what some Democrats see as a chance not just to win several news cycles during the campaign's waning days but to severely damage Palin's image as a small-town, 'Joe Six-Pack' American.
"It shows that Palin ain't like the rest of us," Tom Matzzie, a Democratic strategist told the Huffington Post, when asked how the party would or could use the issue. "It can help deflate her cultural populism with the Republican base. The plumber's wife doesn't go to Nieman's or Saks."
Indeed, the story could not come at a more inopportune time for the McCain campaign. During a week in which the Republican ticket is trying to highlight its connection to the working class -- and, by extension, promoting its newest campaign tool, Joe the Plumber -- it was revealed that Palin's fashion budget for several weeks was more than four times the median salary of an American plumber ($37,514). To put it another way: Palin received more valuable clothes in one month than the average American household spends on clothes in 80 years.
A Democrat put it in even blunter terms: her clothes were the cost of health care for 15 or so people.
10/23/2008
Prop. 8 TRUTH about schools...because the supporters of 8, are mistaken
A lesson about Prop. 8 - The following was in the October 21, 2008 edition of the L.A. Times. The CA Superintendent of schools, Jack O'Connell himself, shot down the lies that the Prop. 8 supports are spewing. It's simply NOT true. Read for yourself, do your own damn homework, don't follow the herd...VOTE.
Despite what proponents say, its defeat would not change what California's schools teach.
October 21, 2008
Californians tend to be an open-minded crowd that wouldn't take kindly to a campaign attacking homosexuality or attempting to strip away people's rights. So the well-financed and savvy backers of Proposition 8 have produced waves of advertising aimed instead at making voters believe that supporters of same-sex marriage are intent on stripping away everyone else's rights, and that this ballot measure is the only way for traditionally religious people to retain them. With the defeat of this proposed ban on gay marriage, they say, schools would begin indoctrinating children as young as kindergartners to be wholehearted supporters of such marriages. The ads point to the case of a Massachusetts teacher reading the picture book "King and King," about a gay royal wedding.
This is emotional stuff for many parents. But the dry reality of California education law tells a different story. Under SB 71, which passed in 2003, the Legislature set out the framework for comprehensive sex education, which includes the brief reference to marriage from which these dire Proposition 8 warnings are drawn: "Instruction and materials shall teach respect for marriage and committed relationships." Schools aren't required to teach comprehensive sex education, but if they do, this is one of many rules they must follow. The law also gives schools the option of discussing gender, sexual orientation and family life, though that's not required as part of the more comprehensive program. Most important, the law contains paragraph after paragraph guaranteeing parents the right to review the material being taught and to have their children excused from all or any part of it. It would be naive to say that no California teacher will ever mention homosexuality, or that SB 71 prevents all teachers, elementary or otherwise, from reading "King and King" or similar books to their students, or telling them about the history -- and existence -- of gay marriage. Schools across the nation have done such things for years, with or without legal recognition of gay marriage.
Proposition 8 would change none of that. The measure would do one thing: use the state Constitution as the device to take away an existing, fundamental right from a particular group of people, so that a loving adult in that group could not marry the person of his or her choice.
Teachers will choose books to read and will impart information about the world to their students. That's true now; it was true before the California Supreme Court ruling in May that recognized the right to same-sex marriage; and it will be true whether Proposition 8 passes or, as it deserves to do, fails.
Despite what proponents say, its defeat would not change what California's schools teach.
October 21, 2008
Californians tend to be an open-minded crowd that wouldn't take kindly to a campaign attacking homosexuality or attempting to strip away people's rights. So the well-financed and savvy backers of Proposition 8 have produced waves of advertising aimed instead at making voters believe that supporters of same-sex marriage are intent on stripping away everyone else's rights, and that this ballot measure is the only way for traditionally religious people to retain them. With the defeat of this proposed ban on gay marriage, they say, schools would begin indoctrinating children as young as kindergartners to be wholehearted supporters of such marriages. The ads point to the case of a Massachusetts teacher reading the picture book "King and King," about a gay royal wedding.
This is emotional stuff for many parents. But the dry reality of California education law tells a different story. Under SB 71, which passed in 2003, the Legislature set out the framework for comprehensive sex education, which includes the brief reference to marriage from which these dire Proposition 8 warnings are drawn: "Instruction and materials shall teach respect for marriage and committed relationships." Schools aren't required to teach comprehensive sex education, but if they do, this is one of many rules they must follow. The law also gives schools the option of discussing gender, sexual orientation and family life, though that's not required as part of the more comprehensive program. Most important, the law contains paragraph after paragraph guaranteeing parents the right to review the material being taught and to have their children excused from all or any part of it. It would be naive to say that no California teacher will ever mention homosexuality, or that SB 71 prevents all teachers, elementary or otherwise, from reading "King and King" or similar books to their students, or telling them about the history -- and existence -- of gay marriage. Schools across the nation have done such things for years, with or without legal recognition of gay marriage.
Proposition 8 would change none of that. The measure would do one thing: use the state Constitution as the device to take away an existing, fundamental right from a particular group of people, so that a loving adult in that group could not marry the person of his or her choice.
Teachers will choose books to read and will impart information about the world to their students. That's true now; it was true before the California Supreme Court ruling in May that recognized the right to same-sex marriage; and it will be true whether Proposition 8 passes or, as it deserves to do, fails.
10/20/2008
Check your facts Ma'am...and Sir...
This information below has been floating around - and mostly, taken WAY out of context by the "Yes on 8 (Yes on Hate)" supporters.
Some readers have requested a bit of fact-checking on the recent field trip some San Francisco first-graders took to see their teacher married. So here you go.
About the School:
Creative Arts Charter School is a K-8 school that focuses on an arts-integrated, project-based curriculum. Children in grades K-5 spend two years with the same teacher. Parent and family involvement in the school is “critical to school success.”
One of the guiding principles of the school is, “Respect for all community members defines our actions and our attitudes; it must never be compromised.”
The school is non-sectarian in its programs, admissions policies, employment practices, and all other operations, does not charge tuition, and does not discriminate on the basis of race, ethnicity, national origin, sexual orientation, gender identity or disability. Admission is for children whose ages meet the current California Education Code requirements and who reside in California.
About Family Involvement at the School:
When children enroll at the school, families commit to volunteer 40 hours per year at the school. In addition to volunteer expectations, “every family attends Community Meetings, celebrations and social events. … Many important tasks are completed due to each family’s commitment to volunteerism….The rich programs provided by CACS would not exist were it not for a very high level of family involvement and support.”Volunteer opportunities are created to reflect the diverse interests and availability of family members.
About the First Grade Curriculum at CACS:
Part of the Social Studies focus for first-graders includes: “In 1st grade, the students build on concepts of community explored in kindergarten, such as interdependence, group responsibilities and individual responsibilities. Concepts of cultural difference and acceptance of those differences are highlighted for each child in the classroom and families are invited to come in and share their personal traditions.”
About the Wedding Field Trip:
With all of the above in mind, take a moment to re-consider the students’ field trip.
First, the children and parents were well-acquainted with their teacher because she’d been with them throughout all of Kindergarten and because of the high level of parental involvement required at the school.
Second, the field trip was organized by a volunteer parent who wanted to surprise the teacher. Even though it was organized by a parent, permission slips were required. No children were forced to attend the wedding, in fact, at least two children remained at the school.
Third, attending such a field trip and any resulting discussions could easily be seen as a way to help the students understand cultural differences, personal traditions, interdependence and community building.
Finally, these parents chose this school for this children, and all of the parents who allowed their children to attend the wedding chose to educate their children in this way. If we don’t want schools to teach our children things we don’t believe, we shouldn’t be removing the option for other parents to teach their children things they believe, either.
Some readers have requested a bit of fact-checking on the recent field trip some San Francisco first-graders took to see their teacher married. So here you go.
About the School:
Creative Arts Charter School is a K-8 school that focuses on an arts-integrated, project-based curriculum. Children in grades K-5 spend two years with the same teacher. Parent and family involvement in the school is “critical to school success.”
One of the guiding principles of the school is, “Respect for all community members defines our actions and our attitudes; it must never be compromised.”
The school is non-sectarian in its programs, admissions policies, employment practices, and all other operations, does not charge tuition, and does not discriminate on the basis of race, ethnicity, national origin, sexual orientation, gender identity or disability. Admission is for children whose ages meet the current California Education Code requirements and who reside in California.
About Family Involvement at the School:
When children enroll at the school, families commit to volunteer 40 hours per year at the school. In addition to volunteer expectations, “every family attends Community Meetings, celebrations and social events. … Many important tasks are completed due to each family’s commitment to volunteerism….The rich programs provided by CACS would not exist were it not for a very high level of family involvement and support.”Volunteer opportunities are created to reflect the diverse interests and availability of family members.
About the First Grade Curriculum at CACS:
Part of the Social Studies focus for first-graders includes: “In 1st grade, the students build on concepts of community explored in kindergarten, such as interdependence, group responsibilities and individual responsibilities. Concepts of cultural difference and acceptance of those differences are highlighted for each child in the classroom and families are invited to come in and share their personal traditions.”
About the Wedding Field Trip:
With all of the above in mind, take a moment to re-consider the students’ field trip.
First, the children and parents were well-acquainted with their teacher because she’d been with them throughout all of Kindergarten and because of the high level of parental involvement required at the school.
Second, the field trip was organized by a volunteer parent who wanted to surprise the teacher. Even though it was organized by a parent, permission slips were required. No children were forced to attend the wedding, in fact, at least two children remained at the school.
Third, attending such a field trip and any resulting discussions could easily be seen as a way to help the students understand cultural differences, personal traditions, interdependence and community building.
Finally, these parents chose this school for this children, and all of the parents who allowed their children to attend the wedding chose to educate their children in this way. If we don’t want schools to teach our children things we don’t believe, we shouldn’t be removing the option for other parents to teach their children things they believe, either.
Pictures to share but keep reading, new posts below!
10/19/2008
Is gay marriage wrong?
*I have posted this before quite a while back, but really, it's so funny, I couldn't help myself...besides with the elections looming, it's pretty timely*
1. Being gay is not natural. Real Americans always reject unnatural things like eyeglasses, polyester, and air conditioning.
2. Gay marriage will encourage people to be gay, in the same way that hanging around tall people will make you tall.
3. Legalizing gay marriage will open the door to all kinds of crazy behavior. People may even wish to marry their pets because a dog has legal standing and can sign a marriage contract.
4. Straight marriage has been around a long time and hasn't changed at all; women are still property, blacks still can't marry whites, and divorce is still illegal.
5. Straight marriage will be less meaningful if gay marriage were allowed; the sanctity of Britney Spears' 55-hour just-for-fun marriage would be destroyed.
6. Straight marriages are valid because they produce children. Gay couples, infertile couples, and old people shouldn't be allowed to marry because our orphanages aren't full yet, and the world needs more children.
7. Obviously gay parents will raise gay children, since straight parents only raise straight children.
8. Gay marriage is not supported by religion. In a theocracy like ours, the values of one religion are imposed on the entire country. That's why we have only one religion in America.
9. Children can never succeed without a male and a female role model at home. That's why we as a society expressly forbid single parents to raise children.
10. Gay marriage will change the foundation of society; we could never adapt to new social norms. Just like we haven't adapted to cars, the service-sector economy, or longer life spans.
NOT TO MENTION:
“I mean, think about it. Other than the war in Iraq, the Katrina disaster, the deficit, the CIA leak, torture, stopping stem cell research, homeland security, global warming, and undercutting science, we’ve yet to really feel the negative effects of the Bush administration.” ~ Bill Moyers
1. Being gay is not natural. Real Americans always reject unnatural things like eyeglasses, polyester, and air conditioning.
2. Gay marriage will encourage people to be gay, in the same way that hanging around tall people will make you tall.
3. Legalizing gay marriage will open the door to all kinds of crazy behavior. People may even wish to marry their pets because a dog has legal standing and can sign a marriage contract.
4. Straight marriage has been around a long time and hasn't changed at all; women are still property, blacks still can't marry whites, and divorce is still illegal.
5. Straight marriage will be less meaningful if gay marriage were allowed; the sanctity of Britney Spears' 55-hour just-for-fun marriage would be destroyed.
6. Straight marriages are valid because they produce children. Gay couples, infertile couples, and old people shouldn't be allowed to marry because our orphanages aren't full yet, and the world needs more children.
7. Obviously gay parents will raise gay children, since straight parents only raise straight children.
8. Gay marriage is not supported by religion. In a theocracy like ours, the values of one religion are imposed on the entire country. That's why we have only one religion in America.
9. Children can never succeed without a male and a female role model at home. That's why we as a society expressly forbid single parents to raise children.
10. Gay marriage will change the foundation of society; we could never adapt to new social norms. Just like we haven't adapted to cars, the service-sector economy, or longer life spans.
NOT TO MENTION:
“I mean, think about it. Other than the war in Iraq, the Katrina disaster, the deficit, the CIA leak, torture, stopping stem cell research, homeland security, global warming, and undercutting science, we’ve yet to really feel the negative effects of the Bush administration.” ~ Bill Moyers
10/15/2008
A thoughtful approach I received...
"I find the rhetoric about "saving the sanctity" of marriage hypocritical, to say the least. Do they really think "traditional" marriages are never performed to get a green card? To keep someone out of jail? To "cash-in" on big money? To force a young man to marry his pregnant girlfriend? To force two people that have never met, to become joined in an arranged marriage? What of the many weddings that take place in the numerous chapels across Nevada, in the middle of the night, between two people that just met, with one or both so drunk they won't remember what they did in the morning? And, if as 'they' say, Domestic Partnership is exactly the same as marriage, then the fight is really about the name, not the institution itself! However, the mere fact that it has a different name, THAT makes it different!This is the first time, that I can think of, where a constitutional amendment has actually sought to take away rights, rather than protect them."
The Good News...
...next Wednesday I start my new career as a Hospice Medical Social Worker (making more than in my previous position!).
This is VERY good news! I've been searching for a job just like this one for quite a while. It's really a "make your own daily schedule" type of position as it's 95% field work - but that's the type of position I enjoy vs. sitting behind a desk all day. A very autonomous position.
Now, off to finish up all those home projects and "stuff" that I soon won't have much time for.
This is VERY good news! I've been searching for a job just like this one for quite a while. It's really a "make your own daily schedule" type of position as it's 95% field work - but that's the type of position I enjoy vs. sitting behind a desk all day. A very autonomous position.
Now, off to finish up all those home projects and "stuff" that I soon won't have much time for.
10/14/2008
Thumbs UP!
For those of you who are out of state, out of the country (or maybe out of touch? ;-)), CA Prop. 8 is on the November ballot to specifically eliminate the rights of gays and lesbians to marry. That is to rewrite the CA constitution to ELIMINATE a right of a specific group of people. Obviously we are totally against it (even Laura's mother is AGAINST it and voted "NO" on this).
Heck, even the Episcopalians are against it, as stated here:
"We believe that continued access to civil marriage for all, regardless of sexual orientation, is consistent with the best principles of our constitutional rights," Bruno said at the press conference, according to the Times. He added: "We do not believe that marriage of heterosexuals is threatened by same-sex marriage."
And frankly, I think that last sentence is key. Nobody can say just how the marriage of gays and lesbians is threatening to heterosexual marriage. NOBODY. Because it doesn't, it can't - and like I've said before, it my marriage is threatening to someone else's marriage then that marriage is NOT solid. And just so you know, my marriage is ROCK-SOLID.
What was I getting at? Oh yeah, so in taking our stance against this discrimination, Laura and I both have messages on our rear windshields in opposition of Prop. 8. And I can't tell you how many times we got the "Thumbs UP" or the "I agree" (yelled at from the next car over on the freeway), or even the car honk and nod. So, if by some depressing chance Prop. 8 is voted in, it won't change a thing for us. We're still married and will remain so. I think we've come a long way, this wouldn't have even been brought to the polls just 15 years ago. And if it is voted in, then I firmly believe it will be defeated at another point in time. Either that or the thought that ALL marriages as we now know them should be eliminated in favor of civil unions for all (yes my friends, that is on the drawing board).
And just this morning I received 2 thumbs up and one "You've got MY vote" (from the car to my right at the red light) - and that's what matters. All in a 5 minute span.
Peace out.
Heck, even the Episcopalians are against it, as stated here:
"We believe that continued access to civil marriage for all, regardless of sexual orientation, is consistent with the best principles of our constitutional rights," Bruno said at the press conference, according to the Times. He added: "We do not believe that marriage of heterosexuals is threatened by same-sex marriage."
And frankly, I think that last sentence is key. Nobody can say just how the marriage of gays and lesbians is threatening to heterosexual marriage. NOBODY. Because it doesn't, it can't - and like I've said before, it my marriage is threatening to someone else's marriage then that marriage is NOT solid. And just so you know, my marriage is ROCK-SOLID.
What was I getting at? Oh yeah, so in taking our stance against this discrimination, Laura and I both have messages on our rear windshields in opposition of Prop. 8. And I can't tell you how many times we got the "Thumbs UP" or the "I agree" (yelled at from the next car over on the freeway), or even the car honk and nod. So, if by some depressing chance Prop. 8 is voted in, it won't change a thing for us. We're still married and will remain so. I think we've come a long way, this wouldn't have even been brought to the polls just 15 years ago. And if it is voted in, then I firmly believe it will be defeated at another point in time. Either that or the thought that ALL marriages as we now know them should be eliminated in favor of civil unions for all (yes my friends, that is on the drawing board).
And just this morning I received 2 thumbs up and one "You've got MY vote" (from the car to my right at the red light) - and that's what matters. All in a 5 minute span.
Peace out.
10/13/2008
My head will soon explode...
So, I'm not sure if my sinus' are acting all crazy or I have a cold or both. But for the past 2 or 3 days I've woken up with a sinus headache and a completely stuffy nose.
I'm not surprised - last week (read a few posts down) our patio thermometer read close to 110 degrees. Today we were in long pants and long-sleeve shirts and Laura put the heat on.
Come Tuesday and Wednesday, the expected temp. here will be around 90 - 93.
Come on WINTER - I'm waiting...
Maybe by then my cold/sinus will have figured out how to behave and play nice, 'cause I'm not liking this at all.
I'm not surprised - last week (read a few posts down) our patio thermometer read close to 110 degrees. Today we were in long pants and long-sleeve shirts and Laura put the heat on.
Come Tuesday and Wednesday, the expected temp. here will be around 90 - 93.
Come on WINTER - I'm waiting...
Maybe by then my cold/sinus will have figured out how to behave and play nice, 'cause I'm not liking this at all.
10/10/2008
Because you need to know the truth...
Proponents of Prop 8 continue to lie in their television ads.
Here’s what’s fiction and what’s fact:
Fiction: Teaching children about same-sex marriage will happen here unless we pass Prop 8.
Fact: Not one word in Prop 8 mentions education, and no child can be forced, against the will of their parents, to be taught anything about health and family issues at school. California law prohibits it, and the Yes on 8 campaign knows they are lying. Sacramento Superior Court Judge Timothy Frawley has already ruled that this claim by Prop 8 proponents is “false and misleading.”
Fiction: Churches could lose their tax-exemption status.
Fact: Nothing in Prop 8 would force churches to do anything. In fact, the court decision regarding marriage specifically says “no religion will be required to change its religious policies or practices with regard to same-sex couples, and no religious officiant will be required to solemnize a marriage in contravention of his or her religious beliefs.”
Fiction: A Massachusetts case about a parent's objection to the school curriculum will happen here.
Fact: Unlike Massachusetts, California gives parents an absolute right to remove their kids and opt-out of teaching on health and family instruction they don't agree with. The opponents know that California law already covers this and Prop 8 won't affect it, so they bring up an irrelevant case in Massachusetts.
Fiction: Four Activist Judges in San Francisco…
Fact: Prop 8 is not about courts and judges, it's about eliminating a fundamental right. Judges didn't grant the right, the constitution guarantees the right. Proponents of Prop 8 use an outdated and stale argument that judges aren't supposed to protect rights and freedoms. This campaign is about whether Californians, right now, in 2008 are willing to amend the constitution for the sole purpose of eliminating a fundamental right for one group of citizens.
Fiction: People can be sued over personal beliefs.
Fact: California’s laws already prohibit discrimination against anyone based on race, religion, gender, or sexual orientation. This has nothing to do with marriage.
Fiction: Pepperdine University supports the Yes on 8 campaign.
Fact: The university has publicly disassociated itself from Professor Richard Peterson of Pepperdine University, who is featured in the ad, and has asked to not be identified in the Yes on 8 advertisements.
Fiction: Unless Prop 8 passes, CA parents won't have the right to object to what their children are taught in school.
Fact: California law clearly gives parents and guardians broad authority to remove their children from any health instruction if it conflicts with their religious beliefs or moral convictions.
Regardless of how you feel about the issue, we should not eliminate fundamental rights for ANY Californians. Please vote NO on Prop 8.
Here’s what’s fiction and what’s fact:
Fiction: Teaching children about same-sex marriage will happen here unless we pass Prop 8.
Fact: Not one word in Prop 8 mentions education, and no child can be forced, against the will of their parents, to be taught anything about health and family issues at school. California law prohibits it, and the Yes on 8 campaign knows they are lying. Sacramento Superior Court Judge Timothy Frawley has already ruled that this claim by Prop 8 proponents is “false and misleading.”
Fiction: Churches could lose their tax-exemption status.
Fact: Nothing in Prop 8 would force churches to do anything. In fact, the court decision regarding marriage specifically says “no religion will be required to change its religious policies or practices with regard to same-sex couples, and no religious officiant will be required to solemnize a marriage in contravention of his or her religious beliefs.”
Fiction: A Massachusetts case about a parent's objection to the school curriculum will happen here.
Fact: Unlike Massachusetts, California gives parents an absolute right to remove their kids and opt-out of teaching on health and family instruction they don't agree with. The opponents know that California law already covers this and Prop 8 won't affect it, so they bring up an irrelevant case in Massachusetts.
Fiction: Four Activist Judges in San Francisco…
Fact: Prop 8 is not about courts and judges, it's about eliminating a fundamental right. Judges didn't grant the right, the constitution guarantees the right. Proponents of Prop 8 use an outdated and stale argument that judges aren't supposed to protect rights and freedoms. This campaign is about whether Californians, right now, in 2008 are willing to amend the constitution for the sole purpose of eliminating a fundamental right for one group of citizens.
Fiction: People can be sued over personal beliefs.
Fact: California’s laws already prohibit discrimination against anyone based on race, religion, gender, or sexual orientation. This has nothing to do with marriage.
Fiction: Pepperdine University supports the Yes on 8 campaign.
Fact: The university has publicly disassociated itself from Professor Richard Peterson of Pepperdine University, who is featured in the ad, and has asked to not be identified in the Yes on 8 advertisements.
Fiction: Unless Prop 8 passes, CA parents won't have the right to object to what their children are taught in school.
Fact: California law clearly gives parents and guardians broad authority to remove their children from any health instruction if it conflicts with their religious beliefs or moral convictions.
Regardless of how you feel about the issue, we should not eliminate fundamental rights for ANY Californians. Please vote NO on Prop 8.
10/08/2008
10/07/2008
You know it's gonna be hot when...
...your son's school principal sends this e-mail:
Hello!This is Rochelle D____, principal of W_____ Elementary calling to advise all families to prepare your student for extremely high temperatures tomorrow. Please have your student come to school dressed in light, loose fitting clothing and use sunscreen. During hot weather, students need extra fluids and I encourage you to send extra water with them to school and make sure they consume at least 6-8 glasses of water or cool liquid throughout the day. Our school will limit outdoor activities and will do everything possible to create a comfortable learning environment for students throughout the day. Thank you!
Tomorrow it's expected to be in the low to mid-90's here where we live. Now, I know that's not as bad as it can be but people, we live in San Diego. Land of the "Perfect Weather". This my friends is not perfect. It's also worrisome since this is "Fire Weather". This is just about the exact time frame that last year's wildfires occurred. Hopefully we do not have a repeat.
The annoying thing is that on Saturday, it's supposed to be about 66 - yeah a 30 degree drop. No wonder my sinus' are acting up.
So, I told Foster about the "e-mail from his principal" and he selected his outfit for tomorrow, and put a water bottle in his backpack.
I was actually planning to prune the backyard in preparation for a retreat happening at our house in a few weeks but methinks tomorrow may not be the best day.
No problem, I'll do it next week.
Stay cool.
Hello!This is Rochelle D____, principal of W_____ Elementary calling to advise all families to prepare your student for extremely high temperatures tomorrow. Please have your student come to school dressed in light, loose fitting clothing and use sunscreen. During hot weather, students need extra fluids and I encourage you to send extra water with them to school and make sure they consume at least 6-8 glasses of water or cool liquid throughout the day. Our school will limit outdoor activities and will do everything possible to create a comfortable learning environment for students throughout the day. Thank you!
Tomorrow it's expected to be in the low to mid-90's here where we live. Now, I know that's not as bad as it can be but people, we live in San Diego. Land of the "Perfect Weather". This my friends is not perfect. It's also worrisome since this is "Fire Weather". This is just about the exact time frame that last year's wildfires occurred. Hopefully we do not have a repeat.
The annoying thing is that on Saturday, it's supposed to be about 66 - yeah a 30 degree drop. No wonder my sinus' are acting up.
So, I told Foster about the "e-mail from his principal" and he selected his outfit for tomorrow, and put a water bottle in his backpack.
I was actually planning to prune the backyard in preparation for a retreat happening at our house in a few weeks but methinks tomorrow may not be the best day.
No problem, I'll do it next week.
Stay cool.
10/06/2008
"Meat Boy" - Vegetarians - you're being warned...
So tonite I was horrified by the amount of crap that was out in the house. I didn't want to clean it all up (it was 99% kids stuff) so I did my usual nagging to clean up.
It was getting close to dinner time and I know if it waits until after dinner (then bath and bed) - it will NOT get done. So I 'bribed' the kids as usual - is it a BRIBE to 'reward' them to do it OR is it a reward? Either way, I offered my usual - quarters - to all who pick up and clean up. Foster and Logan were on it like bees on honey. Seth on the other hand was still standing there while his brothers were doing a pretty good job of getting the stuff put away.
Hmmmmm. I was trying to find his "weak point". I offered him a quarter to which he replied "no, I don't want any". Then I offered him 10 extra minutes to stay up tonite, to which he replied "no, I don't want to stay up, I'm tired". Well, hmmmm, what to offer...suddenly I remembered his weak point. I exclaimed that dinner was almost ready and I would give him meat! Well, that boy's eyes lit up and off he went to clean up "his share" of the toys.
Meat.
Does a body good.
It was getting close to dinner time and I know if it waits until after dinner (then bath and bed) - it will NOT get done. So I 'bribed' the kids as usual - is it a BRIBE to 'reward' them to do it OR is it a reward? Either way, I offered my usual - quarters - to all who pick up and clean up. Foster and Logan were on it like bees on honey. Seth on the other hand was still standing there while his brothers were doing a pretty good job of getting the stuff put away.
Hmmmmm. I was trying to find his "weak point". I offered him a quarter to which he replied "no, I don't want any". Then I offered him 10 extra minutes to stay up tonite, to which he replied "no, I don't want to stay up, I'm tired". Well, hmmmm, what to offer...suddenly I remembered his weak point. I exclaimed that dinner was almost ready and I would give him meat! Well, that boy's eyes lit up and off he went to clean up "his share" of the toys.
Meat.
Does a body good.
10/03/2008
My proudest parenting moment (of the day)...
...the boys are "fighting" over who gets to clean the windows on the door, the dryer and the floor.
Be still my beating heart...
Be still my beating heart...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
