Some stuff.

[strokeof_genie]

Finished Composition class, saw Tom Petty (fantastic, damnit, I want to follow his tour), saw Lady Gaga (awesome performance omg, she's so fucking adorable live and much more beautiful than in pictures, they don't do her justice at all), and saw Inception.

I became obsessed with Inception, and dove into the kink meme. fire_at_wi11, let's talk more. LOL

This is my most prolific fandom. Ever. Like, I wrote a lot in the Supernatural or RPS fandom, but I rarely posted anything, and it was like pulling teeth because I...well. Half of the actors I've met, now, so I feel terribly creepy. With Inception? It's eaten my brain, so I'm taking advantage of it before my brain grows back. Still terribly creepy since 75% is porn, but. I don't seem to care. My lack of shame seems shameful, almost.

Everything is now heeere~

Can you tell that I have an OTP? I think that's it for now. I've started more, and will update this list when I'm done.

ALSO PROP 8 WAS RULED UNCONSTITUTIONAL HELLS YES

Comments

[strokeof-genie.livejournal.com]

They just basically laid out exactly how the discrimination is irrational and bred from fear and dislike, and isn't actually threatening to "traditional" marriage in any way.

Here are the court transcripts. I think that some people will argue that it all came about because he's gay, but you can look at his previous cases and see that he's above reproach, in that regard. He's ruled against gay people before, and is hardly linear with his rulings re: traditionally conservative or liberal. I like this article because it highlights how interesting his rulings are, and how logical they have to be. He's a fascinating man. There's no way he ruled this way because he's gay.

I'm saying that he was trying to lay out a fact-based argument that most straight people would have a hard time with (refuting the facts as they are portrayed by religious individuals against it.)

I'm not so sure about that. Well, about the straight people having a hard time with it all; see, I'm from Missouri, and we are a predominantly conservative bunch. Maybe it's because of the people I associate with and choose to surround myself with, but no one has had any issue with his ruling.

Or, the issue they have is that it was even necessary in the first place. I think there was added pressure on him to get this right, since he is in a homosexual relationship, but I think that a straight person could see with the arguments provided on both sides that yes, it is discrimination and it isn't upholding everyone's legal rights, as according to the 14th amendment.

"Moral disapproval alone is an improper basis on which to deny rights to gay men and lesbians. The evidence shows conclusively that Proposition 8 enacts, without reason, a private moral view that same-sex couples are inferior to opposite-sex couples. FF 76, 79-80; Romer, 517 US at 634 (“[L]aws of the kind now before us raise the inevitable inference that the disadvantage imposed is born of animosity toward the class of persons affected.”). Because Proposition 8 disadvantages gays and lesbians without any rational justification, Proposition 8 violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

CONCLUSION Proposition 8 fails to advance any rational basis in singling out gay men and lesbians for denial of a marriage license. Indeed, the evidence shows Proposition 8 does nothing more than enshrine in the California Constitution the notion that oppositesex couples are superior to same-sex couples. Because California has no interest in discriminating against gay men and lesbians, and because Proposition 8 prevents California from fulfilling its constitutional obligation to provide marriages on an equal basis, the court concludes that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional."

It's so...okay, I was raised to keep an open heart and open mind. The open heart thing still applies, even though I identify myself as straight because I have never, aside from crushes on celebrities, been attracted to a woman. I just can't see how anyone, straight or gay, could defend prop 8 other than to say "BECAUSE IT'S GAY, AND GROSS AND EVIL UNDER THE EYES OF GOD!"

Of course, it could be my wishful thinking that a judge married to the person of the opposite sex would be as rational, but I do truly think they would be. When you get down to it, under the separation of Church and State, and under the 14th amendment, these people have no argument.

[athenesolon.livejournal.com]

Ok, I think you might have somewhat misunderstood my statement above. It was mostly a throwaway comment. I actually liked the fact that is was so logical even before I knew he was gay. I'm just saying he had an extra onus to lay out ALL of the facts rather than just saying "they're right" (also an oversimplified statement). Also few people are going to look beyond the "oh he's gay" comment on him sadly (which I think is poor research but that seems to be the case in modern society where they oversimplify everything and lose the context of the matter) which is why it I believe it will receive less criticism over him being gay. BTW, I'm also from Missouri (St. Louis growing up but now in Cape Girardeau) and unfortunately I do know some that are not happy about it and rooting for the appeal (sadly). I hate living in Rush Limbaugh territory sometimes.

Speaking of the 14th amendment, have you seen that there is a movement afoot (and was gaining traction for a bit) to get it repealed??? O_O I read this a while back (or at least to revise the amendment to get rid of the birthright citizenship stuff. *shakes her head at this*

[strokeof-genie.livejournal.com]

OMG, sorry for the misunderstanding! I feel so bad about going all wannabe polsci liberal major on you now, D:

I hadn't heard about the 14th amendment thing. Wow, that's...special. I wish I could say I'm surprised, but I'm not. People are crazy assholes.

[athenesolon.livejournal.com]

That's all right. Luckily any amendments or alterations to amendments require a HUMONGOUS super-majority. I don't think it will win but the fact that Repubs like McCain are holding hearings on altering it makes me wish I'd never CONSIDERED voting for the guy (well before Obama won the primaries BTW). I won't be taking any chances though. Blunt, McCaskill and Emerson (my local House Rep) will be hearing my voice on this issue.