Canada is also pushing to decriminalize the possession of small amounts of marijuana.
Do you suppose Canada -- which opposed the U.S. war in Iraq -- is doing these things, in part, to stick it to the United States? Hmmm ...
I dunno if you'll laugh or want to punch someone. I know I'm vacillating between those.
In any case, kudos to Canada. I mean, really, it's about time someone got their heads out of their asses on this. This whole hating gay marriage thing is just plain terrible discrimination, shame on anyone who thinks that marriage is only suitable for straight folks.
And if you even try to use the "But marriage is for the children that come of it," argument, I will resolutely say, "Fuck you." Why in the hell would you let me get married if that were the case? Fuck you. Legally marriage is about sharing of property, medical benefits, and rights to power of attorney, among other things. How'd you like it if your bloody husband or wife was dying in the hospital and you weren't allowed to see them??? Fuck. You.
"Same-sex marriage devalues the real thing in the same way that counterfeits devalue the authentic," said Ken Conner of the Family Research Council.
However the fuck does that work???? I mean, to me that's like saying, "Oranges devalue the meaning of fruit, because only Apples are the real fruit." What? Is he saying that people of the same sex don't have real love for each other? Good lord! Why is this reported!
Not that I expect anyone on my list disagrees, mind you. But I was subjected to the horrible campaign in California where they finally voted that gays who get married in other places would not be recognized as married in California. I yelled at the radio's ads for "Family Values" on that one for quite a while.
Anyway, rant out.
Oh yah, back to the news. eyebeams, if you're still reading, you might enjoy this line as well:
Canada's not anti-American. But it's always prided itself on being different from the United States -- less violent and less religious.
Oh, and on a very strange note, everything in this CNN article, all quotes intact, was reported on Fox News broadcast tonight. Including all of the quotes stated by the people, only with voices. Interesting little tidbit there, I guess the marriage of Fox News and CNN becomes clear.
And in other news...
Hrmm, I guess the current trend is that things that haven't been found can't possibly mean they don't exist, it means they "disappeared". Oh yah, and they pose a big threat to us now (which I'm sure will be used to support the call for more action, not as a warning of possible consequence of more action -- this was, by the way, one of the points that anti-war types had a few months ago). More on that on CNN.
Oh, wow, this is making me laugh. Misdirected Anger:
SECRETARY OF DEFENSE Donald H. Rumsfeld, seeking to play down the extent of crime in postwar Iraq, extrapolated from the District's homicides last year and concluded that Baghdad's murder rate is lower than Washington's. He then committed the error of saying as much in a news conference this week, and local officials, led by Mayor Anthony A. Williams and Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton, predictably went ballistic.
Good lord, is he really that dumb? I mean, seriously... isn't the county with the highest violent crime rate in America in DC, or around it? My information on that might be dated, though.. it was my dad who would announce it when we visited the area. A brief scan of Googling shows that it's still pretty bad there though (MD has the second highest crime rate, 5th highest murder rate). So.... The most crime ridden country in the world and the one of the most crime ridden cities within that high crime rate... "Well, postwar Iraq isn't as bad as that," is pretty meaningless. But beyond that, he's also extrapolating from what statistics? The army has consistently stated it doesn't want to go into postwar Iraq stats, especially in any sorts of listings of people who've died. So, on what information is he basing this statement? No, don't give me "Well, he's privy to information we don't get," because the reason for no stats being given is that they just plain don't want to collect them. Is he just basing the murder rate on our own boys being killed? Somehow, I'll grimly suppose so.
Oh, by the way, in case you haven't heard, Saddam Hussein's still alive.
May I recap? Because someone asked me recently, "Now that the war is over, do you really still think it was bad?" I blinked, because here's how I see it:
1) No WMDs found. So there's blown away the original pretext for the war.
2) Hussein's status remains unknown (and increasingly likely he's alive). There's a big hole in the current pretext of "We saved Iraq from Saddam!"
3) The people of Iraq continue to protest our presence there, increasing daily. Now there's even cropping up organized militia forces to oust us, so there goes the argument that it's for the people of Iraq. Oh, that brings me to,
4) It looks increasingly likely that we're just taking it all over, there's no actual Democracy in our "postwar Iraq". (By the way, that's a great article.)
5) There was an interview with a soldier, returned from Baghdad after a guerilla grenade injured him. He very carefully stated, "I took an oath to defend my constitution, and to obey the orders of my superior officer." I found that a pretty odd statement to make. Our military doesn't want to be there anymore either, they want to come home. I want them home too, I'd like to see Marko alive.
Parts 1-3 aren't even important as reasons for my being against the war. But the fact that they have occurred make me wonder why the American Public isn't standing up and saying, "Hey! Wait! What's going on here already?" Oh yah, this is where kearsley's idea of it all being the fault of video games and music videos comes in. Rock on. :)
OK, peace y'all, I'm out.