thomascwaters.com

I don’t remember how I first came across Christopher Dallman. It was probably  Twitter, or Facebook, and if I’m honest, his handsome picture had something that made me go further and get to his website and that took me to purchase some of his music and I was hooked.

This is his first official music video, and it is both lovely and moving. The song is tremendous and speaks me me in a big way. Hope you enjoy him as much as I do, and please support artists like him trying to make a name! Buy his music!

YouTube – Christopher Dallman – OVER MY HEAD – Official Music Video.

This is good stuff, both the bit about Davis, but also Colbert’s finger wagging at Fox News, who labeled SC Governor Sanford as a democrat?

Fox News, isn’t that an oxymoron?

Colbert Tells Viewers To Deny Rep. Cynthia Davis Food (VIDEO).

Earlier today, Christopher started to follow me on Twitter. As I do anytime antyone follows me,m I checked out his twitter feed and his URL and found this great video blog/program! Check him out!

Episode 1 of season 2 is about the importance of condoms, and he talks about receiving a message from a 15 year old girl about her 15 year old boyfriend who refuses to wear a condom. Chris is much nicer to her than I would be, but the bottom line is he tells her to care enough about herself to demand protection from STD’s and unwanted pregnancy. The radical right wants to paint gays as the problem for Family Values, but we aren’t the 15 year olds having sex with our boyfriends.

He doesn’t say if the girl’s last name is Palin. Just kidding!

Anyway, to hear some good advice from a cute 19 year old, check out the Chris Show. Chris- for the record, you are cute as a button, and your hair looks just fine!

YouTube – chris2pher322’s Channel.

OK. Last one from Law Dork tonight.

Cleve Jones Calls for National LGBT March on Washington « Law Dork, 2.0.

I’ve written before that I think the world of Chris over at Law Dork. His blog is an everyday read for me. I want to direct you to two posts he wrote about Cheney’s recent statement about Gay Marriage. The second continues the first, so read both. As a guy who cares about this issue, I really appreciate the way Chris works to articulate an issue. I learn much from his blogging.

As a blogger, I really appreciate how hard he works to break down and examine things. I think I too often start into a blog post with either too much to say, or too many things to talk about, and any of them could be better thought out.

What I found most interesting about Cheney’s statement, and his supposed position on gay marriage, is how little it really means or has meant. What effect, if any, has it ever had on anything? I think none at all. Chris I think gives Cheney far more credit than I would. I don’t know that his position has evolved very much at all. I guess a snail’s pace might be something…. I wonder however, if making any statement now (that isn’t much different from what he has ever said) has more to do with his ongoing assault on Obama, and his primary focus of trying to salvage his own legacy.

Cheney’s Marriage Equality Evolution « Law Dork, 2.0.

This story really made me smile, so I wanted to pass it along. My, has High School changed since I was a student! I wish they had interviewed the prom king for his impression.

Fairfax High’s prom queen is a guy – Los Angeles Times.

This article details 2 studies about how same-sex marriage can impact a state’s economy.

While legalizing gay marriage won’t plug the multimillion dollar budget gaps on its own, Thinkprogress.com had this to say about one study conducted at UCLA’s Williams Institute:

Marriage equality in Massachusetts has resulted in “clear economic gains” for the state. Since 2004, the state has seen an increase in young, highly-educated, “creative class” professionals in same-sex relationships. “Creative class individuals in same-sex couples were 2.5 times more likely to move to Massachusetts in the three years after marriage equality than in the three years before.”

Gay marriage equals money for states, new studies show – OhMyGov! – General News .

OK, this is (I think) the first really questionable or controversial thing I’ve ever put on this blog. Although, a couple of people had a real reaction to the “If Atheists Ruled…” video I embedded over at my other blog, qlatb.com. So, I’m already bracing myself for some backlash, but I had to do it. My partner LOVES this Lily Allen song, and I just think it is so wrong it is hilarious. So, enjoy, or if this isn’t your cup of tea, then come back tomorrow, and I’ll be back to my old self again. I really hope my Dad hasn’t started to read my blog… I’ll go back to behaving now.

BTW- I found this on Mike Tidmus blog. Really good blog!

YouTube – The GayClic Collab Against Homophobia (from France).

‘Remarkable’ gay marriage win for Iowa – ABC News Australian Broadcasting Corporation

On some level, when I first saw this story, I thought it wasn’t much. Like, old news… what’s the point? But it got more interesting for me when I read the section called “Opponents Strike Back,” where Bryan English, the PR director for the Iowa Family Policy Centre (NOT Center) is quoted. He feels the country is being dragged into a constitutional crisis!

Now I actually think there are plausible justifications against same-sex marriage. I don’t personally agree with them, but that is the meat of the issue that people on different sides have differing ideas that all need to be put out there and discussed as the country continues to move forward. When we don’t have 2 sides allowed to lay out ideas, that’s when I think our democracy is in trouble. So, I’m all for hearing plausible ideas against same-sex marriage.

All that English can come up with? The “activist judge” thing. That’s it. Very disappointing if one wants to actually hear ideas. But very promising if you are a marriage equality supporter.

“We’re governed by a constitution, not by seven justices in black robes sitting behind the bench, and it’s time to put them back in their place.

“I think that as much as this decision in Iowa is the next step for the folks trying to force legalisation of homosexual marriage through the courts, I also think it’s perhaps the straw that broke the camel’s back in this constitutional crisis and people are starting to rise up and say ‘enough, this has got to stop’.”

The Iowa Family Policy Centre has already begun lobbying for an amendment to the state constitution to outlaw gay marriage, but the vote on that may not be possible until 2012.

“The people of Iowa and really the people around the country just never thought that the Iowa Supreme Court would be so bold as to ignore the law and ignore the constitution and rule the way they did,” Mr English said.

I’m so confused. That there is a panel of judges, isn’t that part of constitutional law? and didn’t they rule that the ban was unconstitutional- their decision based completely on the state’s constitution? and this was a set of 7 judges who agreed unanimously in the decision?

The constitution protects all citizens, and the couples who filed the suit were good Iowa residents, so I’m surprised to see them characterized as  ”folks trying to force legalisation of homosexual marriage through the courts…”  but here is my favorite line:

just never thought that the Iowa Supreme Court would be so bold as to ignore the law and ignore the constitution and rule the way they did

Wow. Ignore what law? Ignore the constitution.. what? Did they read the justice’s decision? I tried to see if I could determine what degree Mr English holds that makes him more expert than the Iowa Supreme Court when it comes to knowing the law and the constitution, but I couldn’t find any mention.

The article mentions a voter referendum in 2012. There had been talk about a call for a Constitutional Convention this year, so I guess that is definitely off?

Marriage Equality is on the way, there is no doubt about it. With five states now offering same-sex marriage, it isn’t going away. The issue will be how long will the battle be drawn out delaying the inevitable win, and will the opposition decide to actually get involved in the discourse so that marriage equality laws are structure to protect everyone’s rights? The more time and energy wasted on crazy, activist judges verbiage, the more opponents to the issue are disadvantaged. Whatever plausible arguments that they could be raising are overshadowed by the ludicrous stuff they are passing off as rhetoric.

The other possibility is that they have nothing substantive to put out there, and marriage equality for Iowa is here to stay!

‘Remarkable’ gay marriage win for Iowa – ABC News Australian Broadcasting Corporation.

I’m not going to write too much about this, except to say, this is a good read for anyone interested i a progressive view of gay rights. The linked blog comment is attached to an actual blog entry which attempts to paint a secular case against Marriage Equality. I don’t think very successfully, but it is a helpful step in understanding a conservative position. An appreciation of “conservatism” is useful, as the Republican Party continues it implosion/redefinition. Part of the argument against a re-branding of the Republican Party can be traced t these same ideas. Don’t mess with the status quo, while the other perspective is just one of trying to force the party more to the religious right and keep the party from moving towards a moderation which really supports a big tent mentality.

Conservatism, and the Radical Religious Right, are not one in the same, although the conservative movement has been run by those on the religious right for long enough, it can be hard to see a dividing line. So, in the case of the associated blog linked below, the argument that same-sex marriage is “against nature” is one illustration how these two are so well intermingled, while the argument that since heterosexual marriage has been the norm for a long time, it shouldn’t be messed with is more purely conservative, and quite secular.

A secular case against homosexual marriage?.