Well, so Bush thinks that couples shouldn't be allowed to legally marry if both members are of the same sex. I'm always curious how sex is defined in these circumstances. If I've had enough medical intervention to look like a man, can I still marry one, or would I be allowed to marry my girlfriend instead? Can intersex people marry men or women, but not other intersex people? If the issue is procreation, are marriages dissolved when the woman has an hysterectomy? And why do we recognise reconsituted families by allowing a man to adopt (and legitimate) children when he marries their mother? Why would the gender of the marrier make any difference?
I wonder whether his desire to defend marriage has something to do with dragging attention away from climate change. Apparently the Pentagon now thinks that climate change is a greater threat to national security than terrorism. Or possibly that is a nice example of a media panic - as the report is actually a worst-case scenario for the purposes of planning. Actual report lives here.
I hope Bush doesn't influence the passage of the local civil union bill for the worse. I don't care how people want to celebrate their relationships, or how many of what flavour vows they want to take, or who they want to get to witness and bless the whole shebang. I do care that the law is capable of recognising my actual family as accurately as possible.
wow. check it out. free, reasonably indexed old photos. I may not get any work done today at all.
Timeframes at the National Library.
so far this week I have failed to achieve either an apartment or a promotion, despite oportunities on each. I have lost a boss and (I feel sure) a marble or two. I worry the cat will get them.
And I worry noone will ever express anything thoughtful about race relations. I just watched Gerry Brownlee try to explain that Maori were being treated special (implying that this was wrong). I thought the main point was they were pointing out that they weren't English, and didn't necessarily wanted to be treated as if they were.
It seems patently obvious to me that standing up for your right to be different (and have adjustments made to accommodate that where relevant) is perfectly sensible. But then, I often find myself not quite fitting the pakeha norm.
I notice that people are talking about the pendulum swinging too far in favour of Maori. But I worry that the conversations are actually at cross purposes. Many accommodations can be made for Maori so they can pursue their cultural heritage that make little or no impact on anyone else. Take tangi leave for example. If the law said that parents could take time off to take care of sick children - would Dr Brash avoid hiring Catholics because they would be more likely to have many children? For once, being gay would be an advantage.
I don't really have anything to say about this one, other than it is a cool, short article about 'mindsight' (which involves noticing things have changed without being able to say why or what).
I suppose it would be very useful in sentry duty.
Petone has new public art. It sucks. Well, actually it blows. Or more correctly, spits. They have a new fountain. It looks like a big stack of overpriced metalic plat pots with water falling down them.
But it makes the place look like it has had money spent on it, and it draws attention to Lower Hutt's most interesting feature. Typical that Petone would have the thing which mentions Lower Hutt's most interesting feature, but nevermind. Artesian water is water that has been slowly filtered through the ground until it is quite, quite clean. And there is a huge amount of it under the Hutt valley, extending right under the harbour as far as Mirimar.
The fountain's water comes from this source.
And yes, you can drink it.