John Hattaway » Politics

A Week’s Worth of Graveyards

smokingpen — Sat, 21 Mar 2009 23:54:16 +0000

I spent the last week working the graveyard shift. I get to do that for the foreseeable future. This is not something I am interested in doing long term, or something that I would change given that I am not fond of “this place” as an employer. I think if I have to work for “this place” the graveyard shift is the one to work.

Essentially, my job has me putting health and beauty products onto shelves. What I noted, almost immediately, was that people have a tendency to just shove anything into any spot that is available. As a result, trying to figure out what should be on the shelf as compared to what needs to be on the shelf and what is on the shelf is rather difficult. The outcome is a lot of time re-arranging shelves and product to ensure that the impending inventory coming up happens (relatively) quickly and that when I have a cart full of product I can put it places.

With all of that said, my sleeping habits have shifted from night to sleeping during the daytime. Daylight sleep is not cool. I know from previous experience that it is difficult on the body. We set up the office with a blackout curtain that I augmented with a sheet (around the outside) to block most of the light. We also started running white noise while I am sleeping so as to block most of the ambient noise in the house. The outcome is that I can get eight pretty good hours of sleep in from when I go to bed to when I wake up.

All-in-all, though, I am glad to have a job in the current economy. The governmnent tells me that things will begin looking better by the end of summer. Except, the current chairmen of the Federal Reserve Bank says the recession may do a 180, but that we can continue to expect to see increasing unemployment rates and foreclosures and bankruptcies. Talk about exciting. Sure, 2009 is supposed to be a golden year and at the same time it won’t do me a whole lot of good.

What I have noted, going into bookstores and walking through the business section are books that are written to help people survive a layoff/recession and books that are there to tell you what you can do to have a recession proof job. What is a recession proof job anyway? When money goes away or your piece of the financial pie is smaller than you want it to be, this means that any job is potentially vulnerable. Sure, some companies are set up to withstand the financial buffettings of a down market, but keep the market down long enough and no one survives.

We don’t know how bad the Great Depression was or how large the unemployment numbers were. We do know that a lot of people suffered and there is a lot written about that suffering. Many of our great American writers are a product of that era. My grandparents lived through it (on both sides) and as a result the way they handled money and lived their lives was influenced by bank failures and a lack of work.

I am not suggesting that we are in a similar situation as the Great Depression. Rather, I am saying that we don’t know how long this will go on. I don’t know how long I will have to work for “this place.” We just don’t know and I think that’s the point

John Hattaway | smokingpen | Alicia Grey | Clockwork Princess | Cassandra West

Real Heroes Fly

Changes Needed

smokingpen — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 23:38:16 +0000

And, “No,” I am not talking about me or this site (though I am sure both need changes).

When I voted for President Obama, I expected he would do exactly what he has been doing, working the Democratic party line. In fact, I expected him to work the highly liberal line. Hilary Clinton would’ve done the same thing except she would’ve kept the United States at war longer (because she is a woman and because she has to prove she has the ability to make those hard decisions). The outcome is that I am neither surprised nor disappointed nor upset nor terrified nor anything else by what has been happening. Regardless of what the (now) former president Bush is saying about his time in office and the twelve hardest decisions he had to make while in office. Just because a decision is hard does not mean it is right (or wrong) or even appropriate.

What gets me about politics, today, is that we have two parties and one or the other claims they are the “party of change” (as opposed to a “candidate of change“). The problem with this statement isn’t that each party claims to be the bastion of change, but rather that we can expect any change based off of choosing one party or the other. The very nature of change implies that something has to be different. Since neither the Republicans or the Democrats have done anything (significantly) different in decades and the only change one can expect when voting for one party or the other is whether or not a single issue is going to be decided more liberally or conservatively. In fact, you can pretty accurately determine how any specific piece of legislation is going to be decided based on who is in the majority and who is president.

This is not change. In fact, we haven’t had change in this country in enough years that I think we are “drinking the sand” not because we are deceived, but because we no longer know the difference.

One of the problems that exist is entirely financial. Because I make less money this year than I did last year and am working at a job where I am severely underemployed, my wife and I (and by extension our child) have to spend less money. We have less money coming in and therefore have to make sure less money goes out. This is not just true of my family but also millions of other families. We get to spend less and yet the government, instead of spending less, feels it necessary to spend more. To wit, AIG has received hundreds of billions of dollars in bailout money. The big news this past week has been the hundreds of millions of dollars in bonuses the company is paying out to its executives (some of whom drove the company into the ground). On top of which, it is the government that determined AIG was essential to the economy and that the country’s financial future depended on the continued existence of the company.

And yet, on top of that, the budget is still filled with pork and the president still signed it and we are still selling our children down the river because politicians refuse to stop spending money.

One of the things that has made our life a bit harder was that the state of Massachusetts (as in all other states) reduced operating budgets for this year. Before the collapse of the housing market, and the financial market, I was shortlisted on a job that I thought I wanted. After, the budget for the university I was applying to was reduced and all new hire opportunities were eliminated. Unless a job was essential to the function of the university, it wasn’t going to be filled. The outcome is that even states have had to reduce operating expenses for lack of funds.

The United States government has increased, drastically, its spending. Now, in order for the government to increase spending it has to get money from somewhere. In order to get money it has to sell bonds. In order to sell bonds with enough money in it to cover expenses it has to sell them to other countries since individuals don’t have money in the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars to trillions of dollars. In short, entire government economies are based on the United States spending money on credit.

What all of this leads to is that we need real change in our country. We need politicians that aren’t aligned with either the Republicans or the Democrats. We need a new way of passing legislation and of stopping the excessive spending. We need new ideas and a new direction.

At present, regardless of who we vote for or what they promise, CHANGE is not a part of their agenda.

CHANGE is merely a buzzword to encourage independents to vote for them.

This country needs real CHANGE and currently, we are not seeing it.

John Hattaway | smokingpen | Alicia Grey | Clockwork Princess | Cassandra West

Real Heroes Fly

Civil Rights

smokingpen — Fri, 06 Mar 2009 02:12:01 +0000

We currently live in a time of unprecedented change. This is history that is happening all around us. Every day something new changes that even twenty or thirty years ago seemed impossible. We have an African-American as president and we have the gay rights groups arguing in favor of same-sex marriage. Along with that, racial and social tolerance is better than it was even ten years ago. And when you turn on the television, the WASP is less of a force to be reckoned with than it ever has been before.

I would say, for appearance sake, we are doing a lot better. And I would say that I am pretty disgusted with the state of California. Before I do a whole lot to explain why, let me share something:

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

That is the preamble and second paragraphs to the Declaration of Independence. This is the basis under which the United States came to be through the War for Independence or Revolutionary War. It is as a result of these words that some of our base understanding for individual rights – life, liberty, pursuit of happiness – come into play. And as a result, when we speak of Civil Rights the combination of the Declaration of Independence and the Bill or Rights is what we are speaking of.

The problem, though, is less that we are guaranteed certain rights, but more that some people want to insist that all assumed rights by anyone who wants to put forth the effort deserve to be considered as an inaliable or civil right. And yet, they are not.

Erin has taken to pointing out that if she would let me, we would probably watch The American President every night. That is not entirely true, I do enjoy the movie. However, the protagonist of the movie, Andrew Shepherd, insists that we cannot be a truly free nation until someone is willing to defend the rights – with their lives – of someone doing or saying something they completely abhor while expecting that someone will do the same. In essence, we protect different forms of speech simply because we want all speech to be free. This is why people are able to swear in public and not be fined or arrested.

What we forget in our Hollywood movies and opinions is not that people have rights, but that not all rights are guaranteed or even necessary for any people. In short, and one of the prominent reasons I will not willingly move to California, is the same-sex marriage debate in California. I am opposed to it. Which makes it interesting (to me) that I live in a state where same-sex marriage is legal . . . for now. We will end up moving, but not because of that.

Just because a person or even a group of people declare something to be a right, civil or inaliable or otherwise, does not make it so. The ethical concerns of ensuring that people have access to rights is important. However, obfuscating the arguments of rights over responsibility of courts or governments is an argument that quickly leads to a slippery slope. In the case of California, the foundation of California’s law was changed so that marriage is defined as only between a man and a woman. Therefore, a man and a man or a woman and a woman are not legally recognized as married. The argument comes down to a simple word: marriage.

The outcome from that change to the basis of the law, though, is not gracious defeat but rather a racous outpouring of claims that voters have been disenfranchised and made lesser citizens. At no point have I heard of other rights being taken away. They can still speak and bare arms and publish circulars and do all of those other pesky things that are guaranteed under the basis for Federal Law. And I support that. What gets me is that the proponents for same-sex marriage are declaring that the passing of this constitutional ammendment, itself, is inherently wrong and illegal and as a result should be overturned.

Essentially, what is being allowed to take place is a subversion of the law through the courts. We are no longer dealing with groups that are using the courts to pass legislation (e.g. same-sex marriage… this was never passed through a legislature or citizens initative); but taking action within those same courts to overturn the basis from which they derive their power.

Now, people have used the Declaration of Independce for all sorts of reasons. They use it to defend Civil Rights. They use it to defend terrorist actions in assumed tyrany. They even use it to tell the government that it is no longer governing with the consent of the governed. I get all of that. However, for the first time in my life, for the first time in every person who is living today’s lives, we are actually seeing the basis of governing authority being tossed out and ignored. Sure, it’s on a state level. But it doesn’t stop with the states and eventually, if the California Supreme Court finds in favor of same-sex marriage, it will be taken to the United States Supreme Court as well as into every other state that has passed an ammendment in support of defining marriage.

For the first time in my life I am beginning to wonder if the Declaration of Independence isn’t suddenly becoming more pertinent not only to our nation and our government, but also to how we will ultimately be governed in the future.

John Hattaway | smokingpen | Alicia Grey | Clockwork Princess | Cassandra West

Real Heroes Fly

Back into Politics

smokingpen — Fri, 23 Jan 2009 16:32:49 +0000

I have decided, for the past little while, to pretty much say nothing in regard to the political discourse the nation is going through. This is, in part, due to the rather obvious change in nature of the voting public with an African-American president, first lady, and two children. Though, I do have to say that people who think the responsibilities of an African-American First Lady are any different than say Laura or Barbara Bush or Hillary Clinton are pretty stupid. Michelle Obama will perform her duties just like every other modern late 20th and early 21st century president’s wives.

With that out of the way, I think President Obama is doing a bang up job for his first few days. He’s ordered the GITMO prison to be closed within the next year. That’s a good development. He’s also ordered some of GW’s allowable coersion techniques to no longer be allowable. In essence, we as a nation are moving closer to a more strict interpretation of the Geneva Convention, of which the United States is a signator. There is absolutely nothing wrong with making sure that our military is treating enemy combatants humanely. And there is nothing wrong with those same combatants either being charged and tried for crimes or being released. Of course, there are issues as to where they would be released as some of the people in Guantanamo Bay are there with no where to go and no need to be in GITMO, opening the question, “Where do we send them?” The answer is to our soils under supervision, but what do I know.

Along with that, President Obama is pushing forward his stimulus package. This one will not benefit people like it did in the past under GW. He’s promoting job growth and economic development rather than trying to convince people to go out and spend money. Not necessarily a bad thing as we ended up paying off some bills with the check we got last year (apparently, this is a pre-2008 tax filing adjustment that will be further adjusted when we file taxes this year), which was nice. I am sure if we get a refund this year we will pay more bills. Lots-o-fun.

Of course, the outcome of the innauguration was that Chief Justice Roberts, who flubbed the Presidential Oath, had to redo the oath with President Obama on Wednesday evening sans his wife and all of the dignataries but with a whole bunch of press standing there watching, taking pictures (and notes) and film. As a result, and if you watched the inauguration, Chief Justice Roberts was laughable and now President Obama has taken the oath of office. Which reminded me of a M*A*S*H episode where Kilnger has decided to re-up in the military after his wife has left him for the butcher (or some other at home and not in the military kind of occupation) and Colonel Potter swears him back in with the Presidential Oath, thereby negating his re-upping in the military, which allows Klinger to not have to try to go AWOL. The point in this is, just because there is an oath doesn’t mean the person taking it immediately becomes president, and being president was something we decided Barack Obama was going to be at noon on January 20, 2009 whether he stood in front of the nation and promised to do the job or not. We expect the promise, the oath, and so we got it. And because (I am sure) there are legal obligations involved in this as well as voting obligations, he took it a second time more than twenty-four hours later.

Wicked fun.

There will always be things I don’t agree with from any President. GW pretty much got me disagreeing with him the moment he decided we needed to invade Iraq and knowingly deceived the nation into agreeing to the invasion. Obama is pro-abortion and as a result, I am not going to support those areas of his presidency; but then, I think the way GW went about stopping abortion funding in developing nations where rape and other crimes caused the pregnancy was equally bad. Not exactly a fan of abortion, but my opinion has altered over the years and I am not in a position (or have any desire) to share it.

The problem’s I have seen, other than another Kennedy trying to get into politics, is that Illinois has gone back to politics as usual. I think it is interesting that in the face of overwhelming evidence, the current (and impeached) governor denies he did anything wrong. Point in case, it is wrong to sell a political seat. The govenor offered the seat for money. He broke the law. The FBI has evidence. There is sufficient evidence to support the impeachment.

Anyway, at the moment politics are kind of boring. Ford stock is still down. Borders Group stock is slightly up (they have six months to go over $1.00 a share) and I am still looking for work.

John Hattaway | smokingpen | Alicia Grey | Clockwork Princess | Cassandra West

Real Heroes Fly

Inauguration Day

smokingpen — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 21:32:37 +0000

Yesterday Camper turned four months old. Granted, that is nothing in adult, older than 25 world; but for someone who is almost literally living every day as though it is the first, Camper is doing remarkably well and is happy and is changing like one would expect a baby to change. Yesterday also marked one month from the day we left Utah for places east. Unfortunately, I am still unemployed, but that is okay as I am still spreading my searching fingers and have at least one place that looks positive. In truth, I am hoping to find something that takes me off American soil for work, and Erin, and Camper with us.

As for the title, today, Barack Obama is now President Obama. That was rather fun to see. I voted for the man and then had Camper sitting on my lap as we watched the officials and important people (what makes them important???) file in. We watched as the presidential motorcade made its way from the White House to the Capital building. We watched as various individuals spoke and sang and performed. And then we watched as President Obama took the oath and then spoke. When that was done, as with most things, I was done watching. Camper slept a little here and there. So did Erin. But she was there with us and watched everything. Whether or not this will be something Camper can tell people he watched and was a part of, regardless of whether or not he remembers it, and he won’t since (as stated above) he’s all of four months old, is still to be seen. However, I have more faith in Obama than I did in McCain and certainly more than I had of the (now ex-) President Bush.

There are reasons. I’ve shared them in the past.

Erin had a good point today. She said, “Eight years ago someone with that last name would never have been president.”

I said, “Yeah. We would be seeing Hillary up there today instead of him.” Then I stopped and said, “No. We would’ve had a man up there. Just not Barack Obama. We don’t trust a woman, even Hillary, to lead us in a time of war.”

I found that interesting and true. We would’ve, as soon, linched Obama as vote for him. And by “we” I mean the majority of American’s. Though, it is interesting to note that most people would claim they are not the lynching kind. They are. Eight years ago would’ve proved that. Now I can’t wait for something important to happen that would allow us to see President Obama as a president. I think he will rise to the occasion. In truth, I think, given the candidates that ran, he is the best choice and the most capable.

With that out of the way, I don’t know what made today more special than, say, when GW was inaugurated. Or Clinton. Or anyone else. Sure, the media keeps telling us this is an historic day. And yes, anytime the leader of a large nation changes it’s pretty historic. And yes, I can even see history in the face of Obama as the first African-American president. That was exciting. But, as Erin said, he speaks well but didn’t really inspire today.

You see, I am of the opinion that the United States has been in a war since, oh, let’s say, 1914. There have been breaks. It got really hot in the early 1940’s. Calmed down for a little while. Then heated up again. We’ve been putting out our allies fires for a lot of years and building idiological walls against communism and socialism and all sorts of other -ism’s. And yet, we still remain in a state of war. Someday, when names like World War I and World War II and Korea and Vietnam and other conflicts are well and far behind us, some historian will name this war the Perpetual War. Or the American 100 Years War. Or something equally as pithy. We the people just get to live through it. Why does this matter?

Well, President Obama has promised to pull troops out of Iraq. I am for that. He has promised to actually do what we said we would do in Afghanistan. I am for that. What he has not done, and what we cannot expect him to do, is repeal the War Powers Act and as a result, like every other president before him since World War II, he signed it. It’s, once again, back into law. He will lead this country in a time of war. He has not served in the military. And as a result, I believe he will consider his actions far more carefully than GW did or for that matter even more carefully than Clinton. And that is important.

Today is a historic day.

John Hattaway | smokingpen | Alicia Grey | Clockwork Princess | Cassandra West

Real Heroes Fly

Without a Party

smokingpen — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 17:01:18 +0000

And I think this news story represents the very reason I don’t affiliate myself with any political party. Quick recap: the governor of Illinois has been arrested by the FBI for trying to garner favors and cash by fulfilling the duties of his job. One of the duties, replace President-Elect Obama as a senator in the state. The outcome of this is that he will probably lose his job, go to jail, be replaced himself, and prove that regular day-to-day cronyism is still alive and well in Chicago.

Richard Nixon actually tried his hand at a similar game. We call that game: Politics as Usual. He hired and encouraged a group of men, including G. Gordon Liddy, to break into the Democratic National Committees offices in the Watergate building. They actually did this a couple of times, and got caught because they did everything wrong the first time they broke into the offices.This, at its core, is the political game that was being played before and benefited John F. Kennedy when he entered office. In short, the idea that a political office can be bought is, unfortunately, one aspect of the political system of our country.

One of the things Gov. Blagojevich did was to attempt to get reporters on the Chicago Tribune fired in turn for his help (which is required by his job as being governor) in selling Wrigley Field. Apparently, the FBI have been listening to his phone calls and conversations and collecting evidence and now have arrested him.

The reason this is important to those paying attention is for two parts. First, the Democrats expected and are now disapointed at not getting a super-majority in the Senate and lost two key battle ground elections they expected to win simply because of voter dissatisfaction over President Bush. Second, the Democrats claimed that they were, far and away, the more moral party and as such did represent change in the political sphere. Granted, I voted for Obama because I felt he did represent change and that we had more of a chance to get that change under him than any other candidate – AND I thought we needed a different candidate all together that never bothered to run and as a result, given a winnowing of the field, Obama was the best choice. What that does not mean is that his party or the Democrats in general are a better party to lead the country, but (as stated before) they are more of the same and have very little that distinguishes them from the rest of the country.

John Hattaway | smokingpen | Alicia Grey | Clockwork Princess | Cassandra West

Real Heroes Fly

Bail me out, bail me out, bail me out – updated

smokingpen — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 21:04:26 +0000

The Big Three Automakers (e.g. the three largest auto makers in the United States) are begging congress for a bailout. CEO Rick Wagoner told the Senate Banking Committee that it was not a lack of management, lack of vision, lack of leadership, and etc. that is causing the Big Three to lose money, but a failure in the overarching financial institutions that is causing their problems.

Mr. Wagoner, you are absolutely incorrect. Let me tell you why. First, the vision of the Big Three has been on bigger and bigger vehicles and not on smaller more lightweight and more fuel efficient vehicles. As the prices per barrel of crude oil started rising the production of the SUV and larger car has not diminished. Only after gas hit $4.00 a gallon and oil more than $120 a barrel did the major manufacturers decide to do something. Instead of going back to the drawing board what you did, and not even successfully, was to advertise the line of more fuel efficient cars and not actually produce a fuel efficient vehicle. Granted, an SUV makes more money than a sub-compact; but the money made does not justify the lack of response to the changing economy and as a result does not equate to having a vision. Yes, you saw money and profits, what you should’ve been seeing was a method of lightening the economic burden of the people you are trying to sell cars to.

Foreign manufacturers, because of oil and gas prices, have been producing better cars for a long time. The Big Three in the United States have chosen not to compete with Toyota or BMW or Honda or Subaru or others. The outcome is poor strategy on the part of American auto makers. As a result, and starting in the 70’s, the American people have been screaming for better and more economic cars and have been fed larger and less economic cars. Part of the reason for the alleged apetite of the SUV is they become necessary in a world of SUV’s because the consumer has never been taught or trained to drive them. This is actually your fault. You and your cohorts and associates in the automotive manufacturing. This is not a cause of poor economic times, but the outcome of poor management and poor vision.

Workers are paid for too much money to work in the plants. As a result, the cost of employing workers is passed onto the consumer. We, as consumers, are tired of paying way too much money for cars when the value and reliability of an American car is far less than the value and reliability of a foreign car company. Guess what, your cars, your employees, and your plants aren’t worth it. Sure, your hands are invariably tied by the unions, and you continue to allow the unions to rule the roost and dictate manufacturing deadlines, wages, salaries, and more. This is historically poor management, and currently should be considered poor management. When the cost of a line worker with little to no skills far exceeds the salary of most middle class workers in the rest of the country you are doing something wrong.

I am not comfortable with the notion that your businesses are so important that they can affect the rest of the economy. Yes. It is true they will. But the outcome of greed (see previous paragraph) is an inability to balance costs with sales and as a result, and because part of the income for your companies are the interest rates on new car sales and leases, you lose money hand over fist by paying your employees too much money. You don’t produce anything truly innovate or exciting. You don’t produce low-enough-end products to appeal to a large portion of the population. And you don’t adapt to the current trends and needs of your customer base.

Your problems are not the result of the economy slowing down. No. Rather, your problems are a historical precendent of bad decisions, poor management, and a lack of vision and leadership at all levels and stages of the process. As a result, you don’t deserve a bailout and even though it will ultimately hurt, we don’t need the Big Three Automakers anymore because, quite honestly, you cost way too much money.

What is more important is that you are not as essential as the banks to keep the country alive, or to save the economy from a recession or depression. You are a corporation. They have a life span like most entities. As a result, corporations die. Fortunately, what will happen is that a foriegn company will buy you out and your brands will still exist. You, Mr. Wagoner, will hopefully be out of a job. And to that, I say good riddence.

Unfortunately, for America and for the tax payer, and for the global economy, congress will eventually help you out.

– updated Tuesday 4:11 p.m. 11/18/08

AlGore’s An Inconvenient Truth shows the numbers of efficient cars to profits and capitalization and how foreign companies are doing better as a result of more efficent cars than United States auto manufacturers who are far behind and below legislated standards set up in different countries that are not the United States. Our emissions standards are worse than China’s and people claim China is the worst poluters in the world. Though I am sure many people would disagree with this, AlGore’s premise and the science is supportable and even though I have a friend who lost funding because AlGore, as vice-president, didn’t exactly agree with the nature of the conversation (e.g. that plants grow better and are more abundant as a result of some global warming) the conclussions don’t account for positive and drastically negative side effects (e.g abrupt warming always results in massive cooling and more C02 means better crops).

Also, the New York Times ran a report on the requested bailout for the auto-industry (requires account to login). The reason this is important is because the union and the owners of the Big Three and the union or collaborating on their approach to getting more money. This is a marriage of, effectively, two evils to make sure that wages and the status quo doesn’t become interrupted. The death of the union and the resetting of wages, much like the resetting of housing prices and the stock market and gas prices is all essential for a healthy economy. At present wages and costs are too high for American auto makers to have any hope of competing.

John Hattaway | smokingpen | Alicia Grey | Clockwork Princess | Cassandra West

Real Heroes Fly

Done

smokingpen — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 00:24:12 +0000

I was writing a post on some of my opinons and views of the white powder that was sent to two of the LDS temples last week. I think the argument was pretty good. But, after sitting on it for a few days, I’ve decided that when it comes to same-sex marriage and the homosexuality issues that seem more prevalent today, I am done. Let me qualify that: I am done talking about it, though I am completely willing to support movements to define marriage as only between one man and one woman. I will write why I think redefining marriage is wrong. But, beyond this post, I will not give voice to any thoughts that give light to what is happening in that world. I am done.

John Hattaway | smokingpen | Alicia Grey | Clockwork Princess | Cassandra West

Real Heroes Fly

On the Definition of Marriage

smokingpen — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 06:43:49 +0000

One of the few things Rush Limbaugh ever said that I thought was worth hearing was, “Words mean things.” Granted, that is a rather simple way of saying that words have definitions and we are required to understand not only what the definitions of words are but also how those definitions affect what we are saying and what we intend to be saying. The English language is vague and there is no way to sufficiently transfer exact meaning of thoughts and feelings to other people, but within social context and literal definition we can get closer to a real understanding of what is meant.

The outcome of all of this is both appropriate speech and innapropriate speech in different social constructs. If you want to get some rather negitive connotations across, the language has wording built into it where the negative can be stated effectively with vernacular that is also very offensive. On the other hand, we have words and phrases that are very appropriate that get different meanings across that are positive in nature. As a result, there are positive words and phrases and negative words and phrases both of which combine with cultural meaning to give substance to what is said.

As a result, when the world talks about marriage it is not simply the union of two people. There is more to it than that. The LDS faith, under President Gordon B. Hinckley, defined marriage, in The Family: A Proclamation to the World:

“… solemnly proclaim that marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God and that the family is central to the Creator’s plan for the eternal destiny of His children.”

This was presented to the world in 1995, thirteen years before people have tried to redefine what marriage is and between whom. In the context of LDS doctrine, marriage is expressly between a man and a woman, is specifically part of The Plan of Salvation, and as such it is essential that members of the LDS faith either believe that when a prophet speaks they are under obligation to find out for themselves whether or not what the prophet said is true. In theory, what this means is that individuals will ponder, search, and pray about the revelation and then act accordingly.

In the context of Proposition 8 in California, what is happening is a redefining of what marriage is. Marriage is, traditionally, only between a man and a woman. World religions do not, pretty universally, acknowledge same-sex relationships. The outcome of this is not that same-sex couples don’t have the agency necessary to make the choice to be couples, but as a religion we do not support the notion that they have the right to redefine the historic, religious, and traditional definition of marriage. Marriage is, again, specifically between a man and a woman.

To me there should be no misunderstanding of what the position of the LDS church is and history dictates that there should be no confusion about what the LDS church will do. The LDS church has gotten involved in political discussions where questions that come up that directly contradict the stated doctrine of the church. I agree with church officials when they state that this is a moral issue and not just a political issue. I disagree with individuals who state that this is only a political issue.

What bothers me is that people make this an issue of equal rights. There are no equal rights questions here. This is not an issue of a minority group being treated differently. Being gay does not make someone a minority. I agree that being black or Hispanic or Asian or one of hundreds of other distinguishable things makes a person a minority. Being homosexual does not.

Claiming that homosexuality makes a person a minority is like claiming that being a theater major in college with an emphasis on bad one-act plays written by cloistered monks makes an individual a minority as well. The difference in this case is that people who are homosexual have more money and more political power than a college grad focussing on something that results in his or her stopping acting and starting the delivery of pizzas. The point is that I don’t think, and you cannot sufficiently argue, that homosexual individuals can be described as a legitimate minority for the same reason that the graduate who decided to deliver pizzas to eat can decide to go back to school or change focus and move on with their lives.

Yes, as the LDS church has stated, I believe that there are some genetic causes for homosexuality. Again, this does not inherently denote that an individual is automatically a part of a minority. At some point in the future we might be able to perform blood tests and see who has the proclivities toward homosexuality. Since that is not possible, at present, and since a homosexual white anglo-saxon male looks the same as a heterosexual white anglo-saxon male and since blood tests and other tests are going to come up identical, a scientific argument is much harder.

Can people believe they are born homosexual? Yes. I can also believe that the moon is made of cheese. My belief does not make it so. However, belief often leads to faith and faith leads to knowledge and since knowledge is the outcome of people expressing theories that are either proved or disproved the outcome is that I will not rule out an individuals belief of sexual orientation. I do know, in the cases where I’ve had intimate contact with homosexual individuals, that they speak in terms of choice and only speak in terms of genetic presidosition only when challenged on choice (or in many cases are tired of the challenge), and as a result, what people say is important.

Do I care that people are hurt by the definition of marriage? Yes and no, but not really. Yes, because I think a lot of honest people had their hopes and dreams crushed by this ammendment to the California State Constitution because they were told and they chose to believe that in order to be treated the same as everyone else the law has to state that marriage can include same-sex couples. This is not true. Which is why I don’t really care.

The reason I stand in opposition of this everywhere is because there is a slippery slope that these arguments tend to follow. In this case, and because I occasionally follow law suits that take place around the country, I’ve also noted that same-sex couples are taking arguments about discrimination in a whole slew of new areas from companies who don’t want to take “wedding” photos of same-sex couples to individuals who don’t want to “marry” them. What this means is that as a member of the LDS church watching as something that is doctrine (definition of marriage) is taken and redefined and watching as the same group is also suing to make groups who inherently don’t believe in or don’t care to deal with homosexuality are being forced to. What this distills down to is that my church, my worship, what I believe in will eventually be taken away or diluted to the point that it no longer means anything.

What will actually happen is that the work in temples will not stop, but marriage in a temple will simply be moved to other places. In England, since the law requires that all legal contracts be witnessed publicly, the outcome is that all marriages take place first in the eyes of the public and second a sealing takes place within the temple. In the United States, at present, the practice is that if a couple is married civily first they have to wait one year to be sealed in the temple. Since marriage and sealing are synonymous to members of the LDS church in the United States, you might connect same-sex marriage and the temple sealing ceremony makes its way onto court dockets and since the courts have the ability to change legislation (and not direct legality or constitutionality of legislation) they also have the ability to force companies, individuals, and churches to change policy. Ultimately, the LDS church will make the same arrangements anywhere where the definition of marriage is obscured or they will only allow marriages to be performed in temples in states that don’t recognize same-sex marriages.

Now, I admit that this is a worst case scenario. And I also admit that it is a worst case scenario that many homosexual members of the LDS church would like to see adopted. And I admit that I support Proposition 8 and will do what I can to support this as the legal definition anywhere I live. On top of all of that, I also admit that I have stopped following blogs and writers and individuals who (in my opinion) negatively support laws and ammendments like Proposition 8. I actually believe people should voice their opinion and support what they believe is right. If they believe that same-sex marriage is right than I support that opinion, though not the practice. When I am attacked for my beliefs in language that does not support the attack and told that my opinion and beliefs are immoral, that is where I draw the line.

Do what you want, but I support a definition of marriage that restricts it to a man and a woman and no one else.

John Hattaway | smokingpen | Alicia Grey | Clockwork Princess | Cassandra West

Real Heroes Fly

Election Results and Returns

smokingpen — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 21:06:23 +0000

Monday night Erin told me she wanted to watch the Comedy Central election night show, Indecision 2008, with Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert. When it came on I put that as one of the jump channels and flipped between Foxnews and CNN to see what the news agencies were reporting. Interestingly enough, Erin let me watch the returns (not exactly exciting) and Foxnews was far more liberal about awarding states (to Obama) than CNN had been most of the night. I started watching when most of the East Coast had finished and much of the Central States were reporting and before the Mountain States and definitely before the West Coast. As I watched, and Obama was already reporting about 200 electoral votes, I pointed out that California had 50+ (55 actually) electoral votes and all Obama had to do was win the west coast, which has gone Democrat since Reagan, and that with the early returns it was easy to state that Obama had won. Within a couple of hours, and after laughing our way through Indecision 2008, Obama went from about 200 electoral votes to nearly 300 when the west coast reported and the outcome is that he had an electoral landslide. This is what was expected for last night and it was interesting to watch it take place.

The event that really impressed me about the night was when John McCain, the maverick, got up in Arizona and in front of a crowd of supporters, announced that he’d been defeated and that the results were clearly in favor of Obama. When the crowd boo’d, he silenced them. And as he spoke he spoke of the need for the nation to get behind “his” president, President-elect Obama because it was time to support the man who won the election. Of all the things I’ve watched McCain do, this was, possibly, the best speech he has ever given. It was gracious, it acknowledged his defeat, it called his supporters to move forward in support of Obama, and it allowed the world to know that through this process a new leader had been chosen and that leader was going to get his support. I don’t recall either AlGore or John Kerry doing as much and their individual reactions resulted in the nation feeling a split between candidates and parties and having a real and leaving a feeling as though half the nation was disenfranchised. The outcome of McCain’s remarks is healing and as a result Obama taking over will be that much easier.

Yes, I am glad he won; but more, I am glad that things are starting off on the right foot to bring the nation back together.

John Hattaway | smokingpen | Alicia Grey | Clockwork Princess | Cassandra West

Real Heroes Fly