7 years, 2 months and 27 days - FINALLY

Yeah, Foster finally lost his very first tooth. Apparently at the last dentist appointment the dentist recommended pulling the bottom two baby teeth since one of his "adult" teeth was already growing in behind the baby tooth. However, since then one of those baby teeth fell out (yesterday). But it looks like he'll need the second bottom tooth pulled since there is not enough room in his jaw.

I see a palate expander in his future, and huge orthodontia bills....

We, Oui, Wheeeeee, Wii

Any way you pronounce it we got it.

Laura is awesome - she was up and out and returned home on Black Friday all before I even woke up.

One store, one wii and one wii fit.

Whohoo!!!!!!!

Pictures to enjoy...

A forgotten welcome...

Welcome to the family new, flat-screen HD television. We love you and welcome you into our home...

This is a MUST-SEE video - watch it!! Even YOU.

A placeholder for...

...many things.

1. New job.
2. Prop. 8 and "family" and how we now feel.
3. The boys!
4. Vacations?
5. New job....

Soon, I promise.

And now the fight is on...

California's constitutional gay marriage ban, Proposition 8, was poised to pass as of Wednesday afternoon. As votes were still being counted, however, the California Supreme Court had already been petitioned to hear a legal challenge to the initiative.

The American Civil Liberties Union, Lambda Legal and the National Center for Lesbian Rights, filed the suit Wednesday on behalf of Equality California and six unmarried and possibly deprived same-sex couples. The plaintiffs urge the court to invalidate Proposition 8 on the grounds that the initiative process itself violated California's Constitution in aiming to prevent the judiciary from its duty to uphold equal protections for a minority: gays and lesbians. Any measure that changes the underlying principles of the Constitution, the plaintiffs charge, must first be approved by the state legislature before reaching a voter's ballot.

"A major purpose of the constitution is to protect minorities from majorities," said ACLU of Northern California staff attorney Elizabeth Gill.

Results...

Needless to say, I'm quite disappointed that Prop. 8 looks like it will pass (not what we wanted, we wanted "no on 8"). It's been a long, crazy ride. Most of the legal analysts believe our marriage will remain valid, but that's to be decided. What we learned thru this is that we have friends (and SOME family) that is so supportive of us that they fought with us, side-by-side to not have this hateful proposition pass. That means so much. The measure is passing by a slight margin - and since this has gone to the voters before in years past, what this means is that the fight is getting harder - harder to pass hatefulness in our state. And thankfully, I do not believe this is the end. Not by a long-shot.

BUT, the good news is that Obama won. WE WON my friends. We won. I cried tears of joy at 8:01pm Pacific Time when the results of the Western states came in and the news station called it. Our next president - I couldn't be more pleased. And did you hear his speech? He wants EQUALITY for ALL Americans - he specifically stated "Gay Americans" - first time EVER a president used the term in a positive way...hmmmm...the fight is so not over.

Other local propositions that I wanted are going "my way". Specifically, Prop. 2 (Treatment of Farm Animals) - I'm happy to say that protection for farm animals is on the way. AND, another VERY important proposition is Prop. 4 - (Proposition 4 threatens teen safety by mandating parental notification prior to a minor terminating a pregnancy) this one is a strong "NO" - thank Goodness the daughters in CA state, will have a choice to make this decision without the notification (in advance) of their parents - this prop. keeps them safe to obtain an abortion WITHOUT that notification. I know abortion is a hot topic and I'm NOT getting into that now, I'm just pleased that this one didn't pass.

So, in the end, I'm overjoyed that President Obama will be leading this country for the next 4 years (and hopefully more) - we deserve it.

And, we've learned who we can trust and rely on. Who in our family and circle of friends value our family as FAMILY. And most of all, that we are raising our three boys to be young men who are as tolerant and accepting as we are.

Peace out.

The Good News is - this guy! - The Change We Need

I would also have to say, to be honest, I think McCain's speech (his concession speech) was good, very good. He took the high road - good for him...

Because it's important and you should watch it.

This is important because I think many of the supporters of "Yes on 8" haven't really come up with their own agenda, or maybe have some questions, or even want to consider their choice.

Heck, I'm not even Christian but I can certainly appreciate the message.

Watch it, it's important.

An excellent question raised in the previous comment...

Mommynay asked "My understanding was that if it does pass all those marriages will be annulled...am I mistaken? While we do have domestic partnership the marriages would no longer be legal. Also my understanding was that even if it didn't pass the federal government still wouldn't recognize those marriages and we wouldn't gain many more benefits as Domestic Partnership pretty much covers all the same state based rights now anyway...Anyway I'm just curious and haven't found the time to go really research things too much. "

Well, actually, nobody is entirely sure.

I quote:
"Still, many legal observers have predicted that pre-Prop. 8 marriages would be upheld by the same state Supreme Court justices who authorized those marriages. That view is shared by Attorney General Jerry Brown, whose office would represent the state in any lawsuit over the ballot measure.
"I would think that the court, in looking at the underlying equities, would most probably conclude that upholding the marriages performed in that interval (before the election) would be a just result," Brown said in August.
Stanford law Professor Jane Schacter said the issue isn't clear-cut, but she thinks the court would be reluctant to revoke the right to marry after the fact. The main reason, she said, is that newlywed couples often rely on their marital status to take actions they might otherwise put off - adopting or having children, borrowing money, buying a home.
"We want to say to couples that when you marry, you can rely on being married," she said.
UC Berkeley law Professor Jesse Choper said the court might well conclude that retroactively nullifying a marriage would violate a couple's right to due process of law or violate the constitutional ban on interference with contracts.
Even the chief lawyer for the Yes on 8 campaign declined to predict that the court would overturn existing marriages.
"I don't think the law is clear on that," said attorney Andrew Pugno of Sacramento. He said Brown's position and the state court's evident sympathy toward same-sex marriage might sway the outcome."

AND:
According to Joan Hollinger, a professor at the University of California, Berkeley, Boalt Hall School of Law, "Constitutional scholars agree that the amendment cannot be effective retroactively."[27] The Williams Institute at the UCLA School of Law conservatively estimates that more than 11,000 same-sex couples have married in California between June 17 and September 17, 2008.[28]

And no, the benefits of our domestic partnership - which Laura and I have had now for almost 10 years is NOT the same as a legal marriage. Unfortunately, the federal government currently does not recognize our legal marriage but CA state does. Recently, with my new job - I was able to select the "married" box on forms, but again, only for CA state.

My hope would be that Prop. 8 does not pass and that the federal gov't (with Obama at the lead) will eventually realize that our marriage is as legal as any other and make ours legal at the federal level.

All the more reason to vote "NO on 8".

Why Prop. 8 is important to me...besides the obvious

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!

FYI: Read the comment section in the post below this one...

...thanks Anita!

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.

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!

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.

"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.

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.

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.

Pictures to share but keep reading, new posts below!

Logan and Seth

Playing our new game - Hedbanz looks silly but it's fun

Foster posing

Helping Seth to pose
Helping Logan to pose
Seth at Bates Nut Farm pumpkin patch
Logan
Foster