The SoapBoxers

Why do solutions to problems have to be all or nothing these days? A few years ago, my state was reconsidering the deposit on cans and bottles. One group in our legislature wanted to put a five cent deposit on all cans, regardless of use. This would include soup cans and the like. Others wanted to drop the whole deposit effort. The question I had was; what problem were they trying to solve? The original intent of the can and bottle deposit was to put a financial stimulus in returning the items with the goal of reducing road side trash. From the data I could find, this was exceptionally successful. Not from people saving their cans and bottles, but because industrious people went around picking them up to redeem them.

So, if we look at what the legislature was taking up; was there a sudden increase in soup cans on the side of the road, or had the deposit suddenly become too big of a burden for the citizens of our state? Neither condition was evident. The deposit program is actually a pretty big money maker for the state, with many people simply throwing their containers away or people purchasing on their way through the state. At the end of the debate, no change was made, much to my relief.

Now we have new national legislation on health care, or rather health insurance. It was an all or nothing debate. The legislation completely dismembers the existing health care system by putting the government in as the primary health insurance provider (even though this is denied by many who voted for it). I do not understand why the specific problems were not addressed. The main reason seems to be that no one could define any real reasons or problems in the system. All of the arguments were nebulous. Some people can not afford insurance, true, but does this require an overhaul of the system? Some people are denied coverage, again true, but again is this a full fledged disaster?

My father chimed on the debate stating that we have a member of our family without insurance. What did we do before the government stepped in? Most of us depended on family to pay the bill. Those who could not went to the hospital and were cared for by the county (this is true for every county in the United States). So if some people cannot afford insurance, why not provide some sort of support? With the new law, many part time employees are losing what coverage they have due to cost. If some people are denied treatment, set up an agency to investigate and help those people who really need it get treatment.

I really wish I could take the time to really read legislation (before or after it is passed) since our legislators do not seem to be doing the job (the speaker of the house actually said we cannot know what is in the bill until we pass it). The problem is, I do not have the time or the training to comb though it. I could not find it, but at one time I knew where in the bill it stated that taxes in this bill will not be considered taxes. I hope there is no penalty associated with this statement, as I will definitely consider any extra charges as taxes.

I am not currently under threat of losing my health care or insurance. The company I work for has sent out informational sheets telling us that things will be changing, but they could not tell us how until they are told. My doctor has suggested retiring rather than dealing with the added costs and effort that the government program will entail. So I will still have insurance (of some kind) and still have health care (of some kind), but all will be well, right? My question is; how much should I be saving to pay for my free health care?

Image via Wikipedia

Have you ever wondered why only two political parties are dominating the American political scene? In every other democratic nation of the world, there are multiple parties requiring coalitions to govern. Not so in the United states, where the only time cooperation is necessary is when the legislative and executive branches of the government are in separate hands.

There are several institutional reasons for the two party system in America. First of all, the United States is not a democracy, it is a democratic republic. This is important in that in a true democracy, the people are continuously involved in the governing process, such as in Switzerland where there are elections almost every week. Second, our elections are fixed by the calendar, not by events. In the socialist democratic nations such as France, Germany and the United Kingdom, any vote of confidence lost by the ruling party or coalition will result in a new election. Third, we have separation of our legislative and executive branches. In most democracies of the world, the legislature elects a prime minister who is the defacto executive of the country. Sure, the United Kingdom has the Queen and many nations have presidents, but these people are there to be the consistency rather than the power.

All of this still does not add up to a two party system. I believe that the United States falls into this habit (yes habit) based on our innate love of a stand up fight. We want just two people in the ring beating the snot out of each other. Everything we do for entertainment or even business is a one on one match. From sporting events like the BCS championship to the burger wars, we only concentrate on the top two. There are others out there, but all of the publicity goes to the top two with a slight mention of the also rans.

When this country was in its infancy, we had two parties; the Democratic-Republicans and the Federalist. After a few years, the Federalists dropped out and the Whigs came along. Just before the Civil ware, the Whigs collapsed and the Democratic-Republicans split into the Democrats and the Republicans. Most of the Federalists became Whigs when they lost several presidential elections in a row and were in a feeble minority in both houses. The same thing happened when most of the Whigs became Republicans.

The talking heads have always pointed out that a vote for a third party is a throw away vote. When you are talking pure ability to get elected, that may be true in the short run. A grass roots effort to fundamentally change an existing party can be devastating to that party’s power such as is predicted for the Republican party with the Tea party movement. But if neither major party supports even some of your basic values, then voting for the least bad is still a bad decision. It re-enforces the existing power.

It took 24 years for the Whigs to gain even a moniker of power after the Federalist collapse. It took 16 years of the Democratic-Republicans to recover from the Jackson Democrat revolt, which also resulted in the current parties.

There are plenty of options for you if you want to vote your platform, there are only two if you are voting for power.

Here are just a few of the ones I looked up, there are plenty more.

Modern Whig – http://www.modernwhig.org/
Green – http://www.gp.org/index.php
Constitution – http://www.constitutionparty.com/
Socialist – http://www.sp-usa.org/
Conservative – http://www.conservativepartyusa.com/
Libertarian – http://www.lp.org/
Communist – http://www.cpusa.org/

Martin Kelly starts off  a month of guest fiction stories.  If you want your short story to be featured, send me an email at kosmo@observingcasually.com

There is nothing quite as pleasant as a cool bright fall day in the heartland of America. Make it a Saturday in a university town, and it gets even better. The band is playing, the people are gathering, many drinking too much, all eating too much. This was going to be a great season.

Coach Grendle had finally put together the best team in the league. Nine returning seniors, the two best freshmen in the state, a Heisman candidate at both running back Walter Sumpter and quarterback Jackie Shamacker and award candidates all over the defense. This was one last warm up before league play. The first two games had been against strong teams, one from the west coast and one from the deep south. Both wins were solid; 38-28 and 24-10. Today they faced the tech school from across the state. It was an annual gimme game that pleased the regents. It was nice to play at home this year, their stadium was small and old with no heating in the locker room, not like the newly renovated one hundred and ninety million dollar stadium for today’s game.

As each team lined up for the opening kickoff, Coach Grendle scanned the field. The Tech players looked so young and small. He spotted Coach Smackly on the far side line and gave him a grim look and a nod. Coach Smackly smiled and waved. This would be the only televised game for Tech, they were happy to be here even if they were thirty two point underdogs.

The kick off was a beautiful high arch. Wilson caught the ball and plowed straight ahead. It took four tech players to finally pull him down. Grendle’s proud offence jogged onto the field. Sumpter to the left for 14 yards followed by a quick slant from Shamacker to Wilson for 14 more, just as the planned. Grendle was taking notes, thing that were not quite perfect and need to be for league play. It was the third play that changed the world.

Sumpter took off straight up the middle. He had several of the big guys escorting him up the field. Five yards, then ten, before the Tech Safety caught him. The tackle was clean and should have been uneventful, except for the presence of the guard and center. A combined 500 pounds landed on Sumpter’s leg. Coach Grendle knew the leg was broken before the pile was untangled. There was a long delay as Sumpter was carried off of the field on a golf cart.

Grendle had worked through disasters like this in the past. He had five more running backs ready to go. Jackson was good, not as fast and not as strong as Sumpter, but still high quality. After a long break, the defense can usually get caught flat footed. Grendle signaled for a deep pass.

Shamacker dropped back in a smooth motion. Wilson was breaking free, but then another mistake. McMiller, the left guard stepped backward and stepped on Shamacker’s foot. Off balance McMiller and the Tech linebacker fell on Shamacker. His pass fluttered in a sickening arch directly to the Tech Safety who was guarding the Jackson as he left the backfield. There was no one between him and the end zone. Touchdown Tech, and another golf cart for the home team.

Coach Grendle saw many things in those few moments. This game they could still win, but the rest of the season was over. He would have to talk to Smackly after the game. Smackly was good friends with the retiring coach at A&I. Another losing season and the alumni will be calling for his head.

For the first time, President Obama is actually proposing an economic stimulus package which will provide some permanent benefit to the country, and everyone is condemning him. I am a fiscal conservative, so by nature I am opposed to government spending beyond the bare minimum (military, road, ports and courts). Starting three years ago and up until the beginning of September, every “stimulus” was simply spending with no true benefit.

First we bailed out the banks, then the automobile manufacturers. We threw a lot of money at states which resulted in a lot of signs telling us where the money was being spent, even though all of the projects were already underway before the money was approved.

Now for the first time, the President has proposed upgrading the country’s infrastructure. This means new projects on highways, railroads, seaports, airport, bridges and canals. The right claims this will just save the unions and only provide a single year of employment. The left claims that it is a waste to support the oil industry by encouraging more transportation. I feel that the President is correct. Infrastructure programs are beneficial long after the work is complete. Ask your grandparents about trying to get from Chicago to Los Angeles before the interstate system was completed or before jet aircraft and the building of O’Hare and LAX.

I also agree with the President’s decision to visit the Pentagon on September 11. I was shocked to hear that he was not going to ground zero, primarily because all of the news outlets made it sound like he was going golfing or something. The problem was he was not going to New York City, where these reporters are based. The Vice President was there, that should not be considered an insult. If we are to have the President physically attend every major remembrance, he would never have a chance to get anything else done.

Are the losses at ground zero somehow more important than the Pentagon? What about our losses at Pearl Harbor? The Northridge Earthquake? The San Francisco Earthquake of 1900? The Galveston Hurricane of 1901? The Gettysburg battle field? Should the President visit each of these sites on the appropriate anniversary?

He went to the Pentagon. He went to New Orleans. He even picked up a tar ball on the Gulf Coast. What is it that we want him to do? What can he actually do? He has been in office almost two years and New Orleans is still a mess. Does this become his fault?

We as Americans really need to think about what the President’s roll is. He is not a messiah, nor is he a pariah. He is a man, elected to be the executive of our government. He is to enforce the laws passed by congress and guide our foreign affairs. He can be a cheer leader, a consoler, even a lecturer, but he is not a rock star or super hero. I am more that willing to criticize any President’s policies, but to criticize every decision is to make a caricature out of yourself.

I just feel that I have to make one more comment, well several actually. If someone owns a book and wants to burn it, they have every right to do so. If someone can buy a property and establish a place of worship, they have every right to do so. If they are doing something to make a statement and annoy other people, that is their right, at least in the United States. These decisions just make them jerks.

I am personally glad that the Koran burning did not happen. I also hope that it never does. Back in the 1950, when zealots took books from schools and public libraries to burn, that was a crime of theft and destruction of public property. When they go out and buy copies of the Koran to burn, that is just bad taste and poor economic choices.

As far as the Mosque goes, I tried to do a little research. There is very little hard data for the religious demographics of Manhattan or for that matter, the number and location of Mosques. Based on a Columbia University study, and Google Maps (neither professes to be a good source), there are roughly 102,000 Muslims in Manhattan with 17 Mosques. There are roughly 1,029,000 Christians in Manhattan with 173 churches. That seems to be parity. The existing Mosques and Churches are pretty evenly spread around the island, with only 1 Mosque on the southern tip, but 26 churches in the same area.

As far as parity goes, are we claiming that only Christians who work in the financial district deserve easy access to their places of worship? This would seem rather presumptuous. Is it bad taste to open one that close to ground zero? I don’t think so since there is one even closer according to Google Maps. Is it rude to make it a 13 store building and name it Cordoba House (referencing the first major victory of Islamic conquest in Spain)? To me, this starts pushing to towards jerkdom, regardless of how reasonable and calm the good Imam sounds on CNN.

We have to remember, we are in the United States, and that means anyone can act like a jerk any time they want as long as they do not actually harm anyone. This is not true for other countries. For example, in Canada, you can be put in prison for hate speech if you quote the Bible against homosexuality (interestingly, quoting the Koran for the same purpose has not resulted in prison yet, but give them time). In Saudi Arabia, bringing a Bible into the country can result in prison time, and opening a Christian church is forbidden (except in military bases for foreign armies and at foreign schools).

I feel very fortunate to live in the Unites States, where anyone can stand on a corner and expose all of their prejudices for the entertainment of the all who will listen.

On this Labor day, I thought I would take up Kosmo’s challenge to write short story. For your enjoyment, a story called “The Bomber Pilot”

Forty four hours since they had taken off and just one hour way from home. Captain Andrew Decker was proud to be the pilot of a B-2 Spirit Bomber. Major Walter Hampton was his commander sitting in the left seat for this leg of the mission. They had been the flight crew for take off, the bombing run and now for landing. Captain Zachary Wetherby and Lieutenant Catherine Miller were the second crew sleeping after their trans-pacific effort.

Andrew loved flying and loved being part of the strategic bomber command. All those hot shot fighter pilots might get the girls, but he was home four nights a week in the loving embrace of his wife Rosalyn (Rosie) and playing with his kids, Emily and Andy junior.

Forty five minutes out. “Call for clearance, then wake them up,” Major Hampton ordered. “Little Rock, Spirit of Ohio, forty five minutes out, requesting clearance,” Andy broadcast. “Ohio, ping IFF,” was the instant response. Andy activated the identification device. “Ohio, we confirm, clear runway four nine, you are next in line, no traffic.” “Roger runway four nine, g’day.” Andy switched to the intercom, “Wake up, we are home.” Andy didn’t hear the groans from the sleeping area as they sat up and fastened their harnesses. They still had to de-brief before finally getting home to sleep. Cathy was single and lived in the single officer’s dorm, Zach was on deployment, his family was in Dover, Delaware. Andy and Walter had taken the last leg to be awake when they got home.

Andy remembered a Navy story of a sailor coming home after a long deployment. His letter home was “you had better meet me at the dock with a mattress strapped to your back.” The response letter was “you had better be the first man off the boat.” After two day missions, Andy felt the same way.

They landed and got through de-brief. The mission had been perfect. The target was verified destroyed, there was no politically incorrect collateral damage, and for once, the French agreed with the target. Andy had called home as soon as they had landed, and again after de-brief, but there was no answer. Rosie must have been getting Emily from school. They could never plan his return since is take off and landing schedule were classified. Oh, well, he would just surprise her.

The drive across the base to married housing was quick. Kids were out playing, other air force jockeys doing their things. Rosie’s car was parked in front of the house, she must have just gotten home. Well if she listened to the messages, she knew he was back, no surprise. He parked the bright yellow Corvette next to the little blue Prius and hopped up the steps of the front porch.

The front door was slightly open. That was odd, he would have expected it if the kids were out front playing, but they were inside. He pushed it open and called out in a booming voice “DADDY’S HOME!” There was no response. He didn’t smell supper cooking, didn’t hear the kids. He walked through the house to the kitchen and looked into the back yard, not there either. Maybe they were next door with the Wilson’s. Rosie and Jackie were best friends and the kids were about the same ages. Andy decided to clean up a bit before heading over. He went to his bed room taking off his flight suit as he walked. At the door to the bed room he stopped.

Rosie and the kids were lying on his bed. They looked like they were sleeping, but Andy knew that they were not. The spread was soaked with blood. It took him a long time before he could move, then suddenly he rushed into the room and scooped his wife up in his arms. He held her lifeless body against him, her blood soaking his flight suit and shirt. He stood, holding her and crying. He didn’t notice as his body slowly sagged down and he set her back on the bed.

When his world came back into focus, he had to do something. He ran next door and started pounding, screaming for Jackie. Jackie’s smile flickered on when she saw him, then off when she saw the blood. “Andy what has happened?” “They are dead, they are all dead,” he stammered between sobs. Jackie backed up and grabbed the phone. She called the base police without taking her eyes off of Andy. As calmly as she could, she told the dispatcher the address and that she believed that three people had been killed.

Andy just stood there, shaking and sobbing. He had been out protecting his country and he had not been there to protect his family. His energy gave out and he collapsed on Jackie’s porch.

When he awoke, he was in a hospital bed, clean, and dressed in a hospital gown. There was an MP outside the open door and a Colonel sitting next to him. “Welcome back Captain.” “Yes, Sir, have you found out what happened to my family?” “We thought that you might be able to fill us in on that Captain.” “I walked in, saw them…” he sobbed, “I tried to pick up my wife … hold her…” Andy started to cry again. “Hm, Captain, please control yourself. We would like to know what happened during the hour between your debrief and you arrival at the Wilson front porch?” “What do you mean? It was only a couple of minutes.”

“Captain, we understand the stress that missions can cause, we are just trying to determine what happened.” “I told you, I walked in and found them,” there was some desperation in his voice as he realized that the Colonel was suggesting he had killed his own family. The Colonel leaned close, “Captain, there was no forced entry, the knife was cleaned and in the sink, and the time of death matches when you were there. What happened?”

Andy realized then that the killers had heard his message. They had killed his family as he pulled up. He had warned them so they could get out the back door. He was now the only suspect.

I had the opportunity to witness a USAF air show at Offutt Field in Omaha, Nebraska this weekend. It was an incredible experience for many reasons. Air Shows are first and foremost an exposition of what our tax dollars have purchased and why. The fact that it is also very entertaining is just a pleasant side effect.

The show is a two part program; the dynamic show of a limited number of aircraft in flight demonstrations and the static show of a much larger selection of aircraft on the tarmac for close up viewing. Mixed in with the military aircraft are some private shows that are fun for the kids and filler between the military activities. There was a nice little write-up in the Omaha World Herald.

I will admit that I have a fascination with aircraft, military or civilian, so this may read like a sales pitch. On the civilian side, there was the Geico speed aerial show, the wing walker on a biplane, and the Embry Riddle stunt plane along with a small helicopter that was flying when I entered the field. The military flights included the Nave F-18J super hornet demonstrator, Air Force F-22 Raptor demonstrator, the Air Force Thunderbirds (6 F-16 eagles) and a flight over by an Air Force B-2 Spirit Bomber.

I was impressed by the capabilities of the 20 year old aircraft (F-16 and F-18), but the F-22 just blew my socks off. It is so small, fast and nimble. I wanted to have a chance to talk with the pilots but that was restricted to the VIPs, and although I have a high opinion of myself, the Air Force and the Military Police at Offutt do not share that opinion. I had to watch from behind the barriers like all of the other common people.

The static display was much more hands on. There was a B-52 Stratofortress bomber with the bomb doors open so that you could look up inside. There was a C-17 Globemaster transport that you could climb around in (it can hold a couple of school busses. The other modern vehicles included a KC-10 tanker, C-130 transport, E-3 electronics surveillance, AH-64 Apache Attach Helicopter, H-1 Medical Helicopter, and A-10 Thunderbolt Attach Aircraft.

The historic aircraft had flown in the morning and were set up for static display by the time I got there. There were P-51 mustang fighters, a Japanese Zero, P-38 Lightnings, B-24 Hudson and B-25 Liberator Bombers, and several Navy aircraft I did not get to.

All in all, it was a good show. If you really had to have your car there, parking was provided, but there were busses every 15 minutes to several parking lots. There were several watering stations and the food and beverages were reasonably priced (about half what you would pay at a ball game). The organizers (I assume it was the USAF) were also efficient in their security. There were military police from every branch along with the local police. They only searched about every 5th car and they had enough metal detectors so that the entrance lines never slowed down.

What made this air show especially nice is that my teenage son accompanied me. Just the two of us, make spur of the moment decisions as to where to go and what to look at. In addition to the fine company and the excellent entertainment, it was also my birthday. I can write this up as a good day. If you ever have the chance to go to one of these shows, I would definitely recommend it. Even if you do not especially like air planes, you should take a chance to see where a large amount of tax dollars are being spent.

What should we do about the federal budget?

Over the last few weeks, there have been several articles about federal spending on this page.  Squeaky had an article about waste and Zarberg wrote about the magnitude of the defense budget among other things.  I wrote responses to both articles, not particularly well written responses.  In this article I will attempt to only address the fiscal issue of the budget and not try to apply a justification aspect.

My basic comment is “STOP SPENDING”.  When I look at what our government has done over the past 50 years, I see the same pattern regardless of the party of the President or the composition of the Congress.  Each year, there seems to be a push to buy the votes of a specific part of the population.  In each effort, we see the budget exceed the income except for a few years in the lat 1990’s (and I would contend that this was actually accounting slight of hand).

Right now, today, we have an enormous deficit.  To remedy this, our government is spending more money.  When you or I are faced with such a short fall, we generally do not think “SPENDING FRENZY”, instead we cut back on the things that would be nice to have, we replan the things we need in the long run and we concentrate on what is most important today.  I will give some personal examples.

I would like to actually go on a vacation.  I want to update my kitchen.  I need to replace the windows and doors in my house.  I need to cut down 4 trees that are too close to my house and are damaging it.  Right now and for the next 8 years, I need to help my kids through college.  Each month, I need to pay for food, mortgage, gasoline, insurance and clothing.  That pretty much sums up my expenses since I have paid off my car.

I could get a second mortgage on the house and pay for the kids’ college.  I could take a third mortgage to pay for the rest.  But what do I do when my car wears out?  I will have spent all of my income and all of my credit.  Instead, the windows and trees will have to wait.  The vacation, along with the kitchen, are not even in the plan.  Right now, today, I am keeping the family housed, clothed and fed while the kids attend college.

Our government, like many people, just gets more credit and more loans.  The latest version of this is the plan to make it easier for small businesses to get loans, not help them get out of debt, mind you, but to get further into debt.

I know we need a military, but really, do we need the G.I. Joe with the Kung-Fu grip?  Yes, health care costs are getting high, but do we need to pay for everyone’s prescriptions?  Yes we have several industries that have been mismanaged and are failing, but does our government have to throw money down that drain as well?  And to make matters worse, there is no real way to understand what is actually happening unless you spend hours reading the congressional record and the Wall Street Journal and listening to the BBC, since the rest of the American media has become a headline buffet with lots of calories but no nutritional value.

Here is an example to cover both my rant on spending and the lack of reporting.  Late last week, Fox news reported that 2 democratic Senators held a session and passed a 600 million dollar package to fund border security.  The headline would make you think that there were no rules and the spending was out of control.  A more in depth report was published in the Wall Street Journal describing the unusual event.  It turns out that the Senate had already passed the bill by an overwhelming majority (there are in fact rules but the spending is still out of control), but since it had a funding section, it had to have been passed by the House first.  Since the votes were out of order, to save time and money, two senators returned to Washington D.C. from their recess to clean up the paper work.  It just turned out to be 2 democrats; there was not evil plot after all.

Regardless of how many times it is said and who says it, you cannot spend yourself out of debt.  What our government need to do (and I blame our congress for failing to do this, both parties) is to sort through all of the programs and prioritize.  They have to live within a budget just like everyone else.  Sure each of us will complain when our pet program gets a reduction or is deferred to later years, but there has to be some effort.  This will take time and a lot of negotiating, but that is what we hire our Senators and Representatives to do.  Besides that, we need to stop blaming the President.  He suggests actions through policy statements, but he cannot initiate a singe piece of legislation as President (although this President could have started every one of his programs two years ago when he was in the Senate).

Write your congressman.  Let them know what you want, fear, think.  They want and need to know.  If he or she consistently fails to meet your expectations, then you protest by voting.  If you do not get involved, then only the lobbyists will have their ears.

My basic philosophy is fiscal conservatism.  I believe that if you reduce spending and reduce the amount of money the federal government needs, the economy will grow and the federal government will get more money for the things that are really necessary.  At the very least, only spend what you can afford.  In either case, I get back to my original rant; STOP SPENDING!

Last week a federal judge determined that proposition 8 was unconstitutional.  Proposition 8 is an amendment to the constitution of the state of Californian which forbids gay marriage by inserting the definition of marriage as one man and one woman.  This proposition and the judge’s ruling have created a firestorm of news articles.  Now I am a not a social conservative, therefore I do not really have a strong opinion as to whether a gay couple’s relationship should be labeled as a marriage, a union or any other term.  My concern is with the unintended consequences of this argument.

First, let’s look at the amendment.  It is rather simple and is focused on the definition; one man and one woman.  It was passed by a super majority of the people of California.  I am not a lawyer, but from what I can tell, this amendment only pertained to marriage in California and did not block the recognition of gay marriages from other states such as Massachusetts.  This presents a problem for the state at least at the tax level, as California does have separated tax tables for married couples just like the federal government.  How do your recognize something that could not have happened in the state?  That is just one of many ramifications.

Now let’s look at the Judge’s decision.  The judge stated that the amendment was discriminatory and therefore violated the United States Constitution.  This is interesting in that the United States Constitution has very specific things that are protected from discrimination, and gay marriage is not one of them.  I am not debating whether this is discrimination or not, I am just looking at the consequences.  IF we eliminate the definition, which was apparently not needed in the past, we have to consider what we do for other forms of marriage.  Does this decision mean that polygamy lays are unconstitutional?  Again, this is just one example.

In the past, we have had laws and constitutional amendments that now seem rather silly.  Until the 1960’s there were still laws forbidding interracial marriage.  Does this latest round of legal intrigue fall into this category?  If we look further into our history, we can see other laws and institutions that have been supported by majorities of the people and even upheld by the supreme court, later to be changed or thrown out.  I cannot predict the future, but these arguments which are so important today will at some future date seem rather odd to school children, if it is even mentioned at all.  I can predict that this issue will continue to be the source of many spiteful comments as each group believes that they are on the moral high ground.

The full text of the proposal is copied below from http://voterguide.sos.ca.gov/past/2008/general/text-proposed-laws/text-of-proposed-laws.pdf.

PROPOSITION 8

This initiative measure is submitted to the people in accordance with the provisions of Article II, Section 8, of the California Constitution.  This initiative measure expressly amends the California Constitution byadding a section thereto; therefore, new provisions proposed to be added are printed in italic type to indicate that they are new.

SECTION 1. Title

This measure shall be known and may be cited as the “California Marriage Protection Act.”

SECTION 2. Section 7.5 is added to Article I of the California Constitution, to read:

SEC. 7.5. Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.

The full text of the Judge’s decision can be found at http://media.scpr.org/documents/2010/08/04/Perry_Trial_Decision.pdf.

From time to time I wax poetic about emotions. Perhaps it is because I am aging, or perhaps everyone gets sentimental from every now and again. This is a discussion of love and the many forms it takes; I declare seven.

The first love that I can remember was so far back in my life that I cannot remember when it started. That love I shared with my parents. My mother’s embrace; caring, soothing, always there. My father’s protecting aura; constant, strong and safe. I live far from my parents now, but they are always close.

That love is enduring, it can never be broken.

The second love I recognized was the love of family. My brother, sister, grand parents; always part of my life, even when I wanted to get away. The family is strength. They build up and bring back down to Earth. The greatest joys of my life were in November of 1990, September of 1992 and January of 1996 with the births of my children. The heaviest loss in my life was the death of my brother. November of 1992 was the lowest month of my life.

That love is enduring, it can never fade.

Then I learned to love my friends. Voluntarily putting my emotions in the hands of other was a challenge. The relationships that I have enjoyed have been so fulfilling. Friends who I reconnect with time after time. Each time I have had to move, the separation of those relationships has been painful. When I moved in 1978 as a child, those pains were deep. I searched out several of those friends to reconnect through summer trips and eventually inclusion in my marriage celebration.

That love is enduring, it is a gift of self.

As I moved into the world, and became independent, I learned of self love. I thought I could stand alone. I fought the good fights, when I had to. I loved life and learned to believe in myself. The loss of that love is the loss of self.

That love has to endure, it is self fulfilling.

In the fall of 1987, I learned of a new love. I gave my whole being. In the summer of 1988, I learned what it meant to cleave to another, to cease to be two and become one. I love my wife so deeply that I do not know how we will go on when one of us has passed.

That love is enduring, it makes me complete.

Through out my life, I have learned why and how America is special. In the summer of 1969, I saw the courage, ingenuity and perseverance of an entire country come to fruition on the Sea of Tranquility. In the Fall of 2001, I saw what separated us from a large portion of the world. We care for strangers, we unite in disaster.

That love endures, it is what makes us great.

Although I have been Roman Catholic all of my life, it was only in name. The care of my children, the desire to separate wrong from right, the need for a higher authority, drove me back to the church. The love of God is all love combined. The stranger becomes you neighbor, your neighbor becomes your brother, your country becomes something to fight for.

That love is enduring, it is freely given, all you have to do is receive it.