There is still one more Sunday in November to wear the official MoHo uniform to church. I'll leave the poll up through December 3rd.
... and in case anybody is wondering - yes, this is a picture of me in my MoHo uniform.
Someone suggested a montage of pictures of MoHo's in uniform. Unfortunately, I don't have enough pictures. Send me your pictures and I'll see what I can do. (or point me to where they've been posted on your blog).
Saturday, November 29, 2008
Friday, November 28, 2008
Thanksgiving disaster
We had 25 people over for Thanksgiving dinner yesterday (including 4 toddlers). So, we cooked two turkeys to feed the masses.
Or, at least we thought we would have two turkeys to feed the masses - until our dog got to one of them
We made do with one turkey - and now we don't have any turkey leftovers - and a house full of company whom we were planning on feeding with said leftovers. We have stuffing, gravy, but no turkey.
At least we have leftover pie
Or, at least we thought we would have two turkeys to feed the masses - until our dog got to one of them
We made do with one turkey - and now we don't have any turkey leftovers - and a house full of company whom we were planning on feeding with said leftovers. We have stuffing, gravy, but no turkey.
At least we have leftover pie
Thursday, November 27, 2008
Thankfulness
The truth of the matter is, I'm really not very gay in my everyday real life. I love Home Depot; I have a collection of power tools (and I know how to use them); I don't go around ranting about gay rights, proposition, 8, or anything else gay related. If you were to meet me, unbeknownst of who I am - I doubt I would set off your gaydar - well except, perhaps, if you met me in the theater when I went to see High School Musical 3 :)
The subtitle of this blog is: An exploration of what it means to be Married, Mormon, . . . and Gay. This is where I express my gay self. I really don't expose much of the non-gay part of me here - because this is my gay blog - this is where I allow my inner gay to roam free; so, it is fitting that this be where I express my gay gratitude.
I am gay grateful for
The subtitle of this blog is: An exploration of what it means to be Married, Mormon, . . . and Gay. This is where I express my gay self. I really don't expose much of the non-gay part of me here - because this is my gay blog - this is where I allow my inner gay to roam free; so, it is fitting that this be where I express my gay gratitude.
I am gay grateful for
- Finally accepting the fact that I am gay
- Being married to a woman who didn't leave me when she learned that she is married to a gay man
- My gay friends I've met here in the queerosphere and elsewhere
- Gay pioneers who ushered in an era of gay rights - and who produced a societal environment where I could finally accept being gay
Tuesday, November 25, 2008
Teens can now rejoice
Nebraska has amended it's 'Safe Haven' law which allows an unwanted child to be dropped off at a hospital - no questions asked. It seems when they first drafted the law they failed to put in an age limit - and people were driving to Nebraska from all over the country to drop off their children - some as old as 17 years - the last being a 14 year old boy from California. It adds a whole new threat to a parents repertoire - "If you don't shape up - we're going to Nebraska!"
But no more - on Saturday the amended law went into effect so that it only applies to newborn babies born in the previous 30 days - which is more consistent with similar "baby moses" laws in the other 49 states.
For those poor unwanted older children who were abandoned in Nebraska - and who will probably be emotionally scarred for the rest of their lives - isn't it wonderful that their parents were, most likely, heterosexual?
But no more - on Saturday the amended law went into effect so that it only applies to newborn babies born in the previous 30 days - which is more consistent with similar "baby moses" laws in the other 49 states.
For those poor unwanted older children who were abandoned in Nebraska - and who will probably be emotionally scarred for the rest of their lives - isn't it wonderful that their parents were, most likely, heterosexual?
Monday, November 24, 2008
Evil baby dolls
Q: What does Mattel have in common with gays?
A: They are both being targeted by fundamentalist Christians
Apparently, Mattel got itself in hot water with fundamentalist Christians because of their Little Mommy Cuddle 'n Coo dolls which allegedly says (depending upon who you talk to) either "Allah is light" or "Satan is right". Mind you, the doll doesn't actually say any real words, it babbles and coos (supposedly like a real baby), and some of these sounds have been interpreted to be sending an evil subliminal message to America's children - yes, those same children who have been targeted by the evil homosexuals who are out to convert their children.
The fundamentalist Christians have made this into a big enough stink that some stores are actually pulling the doll from their shelves. Someone even made a YouTube video
www.youtube.com/watch?v=ckxgWaODw4g
Now, I will admit that if I listen really carefully it does kinda sorta sound like it is saying "Allah is Light" - but, isn't this simply because the suggestion has been planted in my brain? Had I listened to this doll before hearing of this controversy, I seriously doubt I would have heard anything other than simulated babbling and cooing. In fact, my thoughts would more likely have been along the line of "that's annoying - how do you take the batteries out of this thing?"
It doesn't even make sense. Even if you did give your little girl a talking baby doll who says "Allah is Light" as part of its repertoire, it's not like it will lead her to declare jihad against the family.
And the people who are complaining - are the same people who supported proposition 8 in California.
Enough said ...
A: They are both being targeted by fundamentalist Christians
Apparently, Mattel got itself in hot water with fundamentalist Christians because of their Little Mommy Cuddle 'n Coo dolls which allegedly says (depending upon who you talk to) either "Allah is light" or "Satan is right". Mind you, the doll doesn't actually say any real words, it babbles and coos (supposedly like a real baby), and some of these sounds have been interpreted to be sending an evil subliminal message to America's children - yes, those same children who have been targeted by the evil homosexuals who are out to convert their children.
The fundamentalist Christians have made this into a big enough stink that some stores are actually pulling the doll from their shelves. Someone even made a YouTube video
www.youtube.com/watch?v=ckxgWaODw4g
Now, I will admit that if I listen really carefully it does kinda sorta sound like it is saying "Allah is Light" - but, isn't this simply because the suggestion has been planted in my brain? Had I listened to this doll before hearing of this controversy, I seriously doubt I would have heard anything other than simulated babbling and cooing. In fact, my thoughts would more likely have been along the line of "that's annoying - how do you take the batteries out of this thing?"
It doesn't even make sense. Even if you did give your little girl a talking baby doll who says "Allah is Light" as part of its repertoire, it's not like it will lead her to declare jihad against the family.
And the people who are complaining - are the same people who supported proposition 8 in California.
Enough said ...
Saturday, November 22, 2008
Stuck
I have this stupid song stuck in my head
It's driving me crazy
It's driving me crazy
the devil tries his best,NO!!! it hurts . . .
he hopes we get real stressed,
He keeps on pressing me,
until I just become depressed.
Felt like a little boy,Why is this happening to me ???
someone he could annoy,
but hey I'm not his toy,
and men are that they might have joy.
The next time I go out,Pleeeaaassseee . . . make it go away [sob]
I will be true and shout.
The church has the truth on earth,
oh whoa oh oh oh, and
that each of us, are people of worth.
Thursday, November 20, 2008
Yokels
I'll be taking tomorrow (Friday) off and won't return to work until Tuesday December 2nd. We have family coming into town for Thanksgiving and a week chock full of stuff (like taking the grandkids to the zoo); so, I don't know how much blogging time I'll have.
Speaking of grandkids, this Pickles comic made me smile
Welcome to my family - this comic is now hanging on our fridge.
Speaking of grandkids, this Pickles comic made me smile
Welcome to my family - this comic is now hanging on our fridge.
Thursday, November 13, 2008
I know where I've been
I watched "Hairspray" (again) last night. Queen Latifah is just so classy in her role as Motormouth Maybelle. I love her line
"Well you two better get ready for a whole lot of ugly coming at you from a never ending parade of stupid."I think this is my favorite song
MOTORMOUTH
There's a light
In the darkness
Though the night
Is black as my skin
There's a light
Burning bright
Showing me the way
But i know where i've been
There's a cry
In the distance
It's a voice
That comes from deep within
There's a cry
Asking why
I pray the answer's up ahead
'Cause i know where i've been
There's a road
We've been travelin'
Lost so many on the way
But the riches
Will be plenty
Worth the price we
Had to pay
There's a dream
In the future
There's a struggle
We have yet to win
And there's pride
In my heart
'Cause i know
Where i'm going
And i know where i've been
MOTORMOUTH & ENSEMBLE
There's a road
We must travel
There's a promise
We must make
'Cause the riches
Will be plenty
Worth the risk
And chances that we take
There's a dream
In the future
There's a struggle
We have yet to win
Use that pride
In our hearts
To lift us up
To tomorrow
'Cause just to sit still
Would be a sin
ENSEMBLE
I know it, i know it
I know where i'm going
MOTORMOUTH
And lord knows i know...
Where i've been
MOTORMOUTH & ENSEMBLE
Oh! When we win,
I'll give thanks to my god
'Cause i know where i've been
There's a light
In the darkness
Though the night
Is black as my skin
There's a light
Burning bright
Showing me the way
But i know where i've been
There's a cry
In the distance
It's a voice
That comes from deep within
There's a cry
Asking why
I pray the answer's up ahead
'Cause i know where i've been
There's a road
We've been travelin'
Lost so many on the way
But the riches
Will be plenty
Worth the price we
Had to pay
There's a dream
In the future
There's a struggle
We have yet to win
And there's pride
In my heart
'Cause i know
Where i'm going
And i know where i've been
MOTORMOUTH & ENSEMBLE
There's a road
We must travel
There's a promise
We must make
'Cause the riches
Will be plenty
Worth the risk
And chances that we take
There's a dream
In the future
There's a struggle
We have yet to win
Use that pride
In our hearts
To lift us up
To tomorrow
'Cause just to sit still
Would be a sin
ENSEMBLE
I know it, i know it
I know where i'm going
MOTORMOUTH
And lord knows i know...
Where i've been
MOTORMOUTH & ENSEMBLE
Oh! When we win,
I'll give thanks to my god
'Cause i know where i've been
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
Arrogance
I happened to come across a blog post where the blogger was exploring the question "Can Testimony Exist While Opposing Prop. 8?" I'm not trying to pick on this particular blogger - I only use it to illustrate a view that seems to be widely held across the LDS church.
First of all, the very question exudes a certain arrogance. It reeks of a "if you're not for us then you're against us" attitude - which itself is a twisted variation of the words of Jesus Christ where he said "for he that is not against us is for us" (Luke 9:50).
The sentiment seems to be that Jesus Christ spoke to the prophet that His people should actively oppose proposition 8 in California and the prophet then brought His word to the people. So, to oppose this is not only going against the teaching of the prophet - but you are in direct opposition to Jesus Christ. And, if you are opposing Jesus then you, by definition, must be following Satan - how can a person claim to have a testimony when they are following Satan?
If you accept the premise that the direction to the saints in California encouraging them to do all they can and donate their time and means to defeat proposition 8 came directly from Jesus Christ via the prophet - then there is no argument. It becomes a matter of doctrine - and who, in their right mind, would oppose doctrine?
But was the opposition to the proposition 8 by the LDS church a point of doctrine or policy? As a faithful latter day saint, I must acknowledge that doctrine is unchanging - it is the same yesterday, today, and forever. However, I also concede that while doctrine may not change, our understanding of doctrine can and does evolve over time. I know that is certainly true for myself - and it only seems reasonable that it is true for the church as a whole as well. And then there is the matter of policy. Church policies can and do change over time. Policies change to keep up with the pace of changes in society.
When I first joined the church, women were not allowed to say prayers in sacrament meeting - it was viewed as a priesthood responsibility. Yet, the very idea of that in today's environment seems ludicrous. Was that a doctrinal change? Did God take a priesthood responsibility and make it a responsibility for all saints - men and women? Or did our understanding of the doctrine of prayer and priesthood responsibility evolve such that the brethren concluded that praying in sacrament meeting was not the sole responsibility of the priesthood? And is it mere coincidence that this change happened in the midst of sweeping changes throughout society regarding women's rights?
Which brings me back to the question: Was opposition to proposition 8 in California a matter of doctrine or policy? Many latter day saints seem to conclude the former - that it was their moral responsibility to change the California constitution to define marriage as being between a man and a woman. But, some of us view it as a matter of policy - one that we disagree with.
Does it even make a difference? Is opposing the brethren on a matter of policy just as grievous as opposing them on a matter of doctrine? Can a person claim to have a testimony while disagreeing with a policy?
The simple fact of the matter is, there are church policies that I think are dumb. For instance, we are no longer supposed to 'cook' in the kitchens in our meetinghouses - they are only to be used to 'warm' food. So, in response - at our ward annual pancake breakfast - we no longer cook pancakes, we warm pancake batter (in a circular shape until it firms up). Now, I'm sure there are bishops who interpret the policy very literally and require the pancakes to be cooked at members homes and brought to church to be warmed up in the ovens. Other bishops, like ours, take a more liberal interpretation of policy, preferring to go by the spirit of the law rather than the letter of the law. Does this mean that one is wrong and the other is right? Or is it possible that they can both be right?
Now making pancakes is certainly different than two guys engaging in gay sex. But, is the underlying principal applicable? Isn't it possible that the decision to oppose proposition 8 was a policy decision - one made by committee rather than by direct revelation? And isn't it also possible that some of us, because of our own unique life experiences, cannot support that policy? And, is it just and right for other latter day saints to question the faith and testimony of those who cannot support a particular policy?
In my mind, I also question if opposing proposition 8 on grounds of morality is even correct. To cast it as a moral issue suggests that if we keep gays from getting married then they'll stop having gay sex. Was there anything in the language of proposition 8 that dealt with sex? Does the passage of proposition 8 forbid gays from engaging in gay sex?
The answer, of course, is a resounding "No!" So, if it wasn't about morality then what was it all about? The purpose of proposition 8 was to remove the rights of same sex couples to marry one another. And, yes it was removing rights because they had those rights in California on November 3rd and lost them on November 4th. And, when you are dealing with rights then it is, by definition, a 'civil rights' issue. On November 4th the voters in California passed, by a very narrow margin, a constitutional amendment removing the right of all Californians to marry someone of their same gender. It is not a right that was only applicable to a subset of the population - it is a right that is no longer available to all residents of California, one that would likely only be exercised by the gay population. Just because someone chooses to not exercise a right doesn't mean they don't have the right. As an adult male over 21, I have the right to consume alcohol - I choose not to, but that doesn't mean I don't have the right. And, I can choose to not consume alcohol on grounds of my religious beliefs while supporting the rights of others to imbibe to their hearts content.
Likewise, as a gay man in a committed monogamous mixed orientation marriage, I can support the rights of other gay men to enter into a committed monogamous gay relationship. And, I can mourn with them when the right to call that relationship a 'marriage' is taken away from them. And, I can do all of this while having a testimony of the restored gospel of Jesus Christ and be temple worthy.
First of all, the very question exudes a certain arrogance. It reeks of a "if you're not for us then you're against us" attitude - which itself is a twisted variation of the words of Jesus Christ where he said "for he that is not against us is for us" (Luke 9:50).
The sentiment seems to be that Jesus Christ spoke to the prophet that His people should actively oppose proposition 8 in California and the prophet then brought His word to the people. So, to oppose this is not only going against the teaching of the prophet - but you are in direct opposition to Jesus Christ. And, if you are opposing Jesus then you, by definition, must be following Satan - how can a person claim to have a testimony when they are following Satan?
If you accept the premise that the direction to the saints in California encouraging them to do all they can and donate their time and means to defeat proposition 8 came directly from Jesus Christ via the prophet - then there is no argument. It becomes a matter of doctrine - and who, in their right mind, would oppose doctrine?
But was the opposition to the proposition 8 by the LDS church a point of doctrine or policy? As a faithful latter day saint, I must acknowledge that doctrine is unchanging - it is the same yesterday, today, and forever. However, I also concede that while doctrine may not change, our understanding of doctrine can and does evolve over time. I know that is certainly true for myself - and it only seems reasonable that it is true for the church as a whole as well. And then there is the matter of policy. Church policies can and do change over time. Policies change to keep up with the pace of changes in society.
When I first joined the church, women were not allowed to say prayers in sacrament meeting - it was viewed as a priesthood responsibility. Yet, the very idea of that in today's environment seems ludicrous. Was that a doctrinal change? Did God take a priesthood responsibility and make it a responsibility for all saints - men and women? Or did our understanding of the doctrine of prayer and priesthood responsibility evolve such that the brethren concluded that praying in sacrament meeting was not the sole responsibility of the priesthood? And is it mere coincidence that this change happened in the midst of sweeping changes throughout society regarding women's rights?
Which brings me back to the question: Was opposition to proposition 8 in California a matter of doctrine or policy? Many latter day saints seem to conclude the former - that it was their moral responsibility to change the California constitution to define marriage as being between a man and a woman. But, some of us view it as a matter of policy - one that we disagree with.
Does it even make a difference? Is opposing the brethren on a matter of policy just as grievous as opposing them on a matter of doctrine? Can a person claim to have a testimony while disagreeing with a policy?
The simple fact of the matter is, there are church policies that I think are dumb. For instance, we are no longer supposed to 'cook' in the kitchens in our meetinghouses - they are only to be used to 'warm' food. So, in response - at our ward annual pancake breakfast - we no longer cook pancakes, we warm pancake batter (in a circular shape until it firms up). Now, I'm sure there are bishops who interpret the policy very literally and require the pancakes to be cooked at members homes and brought to church to be warmed up in the ovens. Other bishops, like ours, take a more liberal interpretation of policy, preferring to go by the spirit of the law rather than the letter of the law. Does this mean that one is wrong and the other is right? Or is it possible that they can both be right?
Now making pancakes is certainly different than two guys engaging in gay sex. But, is the underlying principal applicable? Isn't it possible that the decision to oppose proposition 8 was a policy decision - one made by committee rather than by direct revelation? And isn't it also possible that some of us, because of our own unique life experiences, cannot support that policy? And, is it just and right for other latter day saints to question the faith and testimony of those who cannot support a particular policy?
In my mind, I also question if opposing proposition 8 on grounds of morality is even correct. To cast it as a moral issue suggests that if we keep gays from getting married then they'll stop having gay sex. Was there anything in the language of proposition 8 that dealt with sex? Does the passage of proposition 8 forbid gays from engaging in gay sex?
The answer, of course, is a resounding "No!" So, if it wasn't about morality then what was it all about? The purpose of proposition 8 was to remove the rights of same sex couples to marry one another. And, yes it was removing rights because they had those rights in California on November 3rd and lost them on November 4th. And, when you are dealing with rights then it is, by definition, a 'civil rights' issue. On November 4th the voters in California passed, by a very narrow margin, a constitutional amendment removing the right of all Californians to marry someone of their same gender. It is not a right that was only applicable to a subset of the population - it is a right that is no longer available to all residents of California, one that would likely only be exercised by the gay population. Just because someone chooses to not exercise a right doesn't mean they don't have the right. As an adult male over 21, I have the right to consume alcohol - I choose not to, but that doesn't mean I don't have the right. And, I can choose to not consume alcohol on grounds of my religious beliefs while supporting the rights of others to imbibe to their hearts content.
Likewise, as a gay man in a committed monogamous mixed orientation marriage, I can support the rights of other gay men to enter into a committed monogamous gay relationship. And, I can mourn with them when the right to call that relationship a 'marriage' is taken away from them. And, I can do all of this while having a testimony of the restored gospel of Jesus Christ and be temple worthy.
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
The official MoHo uniform
Mo⋅ho [moh-hoe]
–noun
Apparently, some in the queerosphere were not aware of the official MoHo uniform - a blue shirt and green tie, as depicted here and here. Well, now that the cat's out of the bag, so to speak, I have an idea. Let's all wear it to church on some Sunday in November. And, if you feel so inclined, post a picture on your blog (headless is OK), or send it to me and I'll post it here. Then return and report via the poll on the right
FAQ
Q: Which Sunday should I participate on?
A: Any remaining Sunday in November, 2008
Q: What if I'm not gay?
A: You're welcome to participate to show your solidarity with your MoHo brothers and sisters.
Q: What if I'm not a guy?
A: I'm not even going to pretend I understand women's fashion - so you're welcome to participate; but, you'll need to come up with a uniform of your own.
Q: What if I'm no longer active in the LDS church?
A: Any church counts. If you no longer attend any church services then good intentions count.
–noun
- a Mormon Homosexual
- of, pertaining to, a person with some association with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints who experiences same gender attraction
- a seismic discontinuity between the base of the Earth's crust and the top of the mantle
Apparently, some in the queerosphere were not aware of the official MoHo uniform - a blue shirt and green tie, as depicted here and here. Well, now that the cat's out of the bag, so to speak, I have an idea. Let's all wear it to church on some Sunday in November. And, if you feel so inclined, post a picture on your blog (headless is OK), or send it to me and I'll post it here. Then return and report via the poll on the right
FAQ
Q: Which Sunday should I participate on?
A: Any remaining Sunday in November, 2008
Q: What if I'm not gay?
A: You're welcome to participate to show your solidarity with your MoHo brothers and sisters.
Q: What if I'm not a guy?
A: I'm not even going to pretend I understand women's fashion - so you're welcome to participate; but, you'll need to come up with a uniform of your own.
Q: What if I'm no longer active in the LDS church?
A: Any church counts. If you no longer attend any church services then good intentions count.
A different perspective
This was recently posted on the Gay Christian Network. (and reprinted here with permission)
I believe most gay couples simply want their union legally recognized so that they can have the same legal rights as heterosexually married couples - rights that married couples often take for granted, such as both parents being legal guardians of their children, being able to make medical decisions if their spouse is incapacitated, legal residency if one member is not a US citizen.
Gay couples aren't trying to indoctrinate school children or put religious clergy in jail for expressing opposing views. They are not out trying to destroy the sanctity of marriage. Quite the opposite - they want to celebrate the sanctity of marriage in their own relationships.
I get it!
Now ... how can I convince others to 'get it'? How can I convince straight people to look past their natural heterosexual aversion to gay intimacy? ... And, is it possible to do this without 'outing' myself in the process?
It is my understanding that a marriage license simply acknowledges and recognizes a commitment 2 people have made to each other. It recognizes what already is. Just like a government birth certificate or death certificate does. A government birth certificate doesn't give someone permission to be born; it legally recognizes that someone has been born. A government death certificate doesn't give somebody permission to die; it legally acknowledges that someone has already died.This really helps to put it into perspective for me. Gay couples are not out trying to push an agenda. I'm sure there are some in the GLBT community who have some sort of agenda - but so do some on the Christian right.
. . .
This is what gay people are fighting for. They want their marriages, their commitments to be legally recognized so they can enjoy the same legal protections and rights and privileges that their heterosexual counter parts do. They want legal protection for their marriages.
I believe most gay couples simply want their union legally recognized so that they can have the same legal rights as heterosexually married couples - rights that married couples often take for granted, such as both parents being legal guardians of their children, being able to make medical decisions if their spouse is incapacitated, legal residency if one member is not a US citizen.
Gay couples aren't trying to indoctrinate school children or put religious clergy in jail for expressing opposing views. They are not out trying to destroy the sanctity of marriage. Quite the opposite - they want to celebrate the sanctity of marriage in their own relationships.
I get it!
Now ... how can I convince others to 'get it'? How can I convince straight people to look past their natural heterosexual aversion to gay intimacy? ... And, is it possible to do this without 'outing' myself in the process?
Monday, November 10, 2008
Random thoughts
I was kinda not looking forward to going to church yesterday. There has been a lot of smugness on the part of members after the passage of prop 8 in California - and I just didn't want to hear any snide remarks. Thankfully, there were none, at least that I heard.
I got pulled into the 8 year old primary class to help out (since men are no longer allowed to teach primary alone - they must team teach with either their wife or another man). The brother I was helping out was the primary presidents husband - and he just found out right before Sacrament meeting. So, we were passing the lesson back and forth with one of us reading up on the next session while the other taught. All in all, it went well, I thought. Although, teaching 8 year olds is like herding kittens.
* * * * *
I wore a blue shirt with green tie to church yesterday - the official MoHo uniform. When I was asked why I was wearing a blue shirt, I responded that all of the cool guys wear blue. I also got several complements on my green tie. Odd, since I've worn that green tie before - I guess the blue shirt just sets it off better than my usual white shirt.
* * * * *
I'm still bummed out about prop 8 passing in California. I don't know why it is affecting me - I don't even live in California. And, I'm in a mixed orientation marriage; so, a same sex marriage is not in my future - even if it were available. But, I've made friends here in the queerosphere for whom it directly impacts. And it angers me when anybody does anything to hurt my friends. And, why do they even care? If you don't approve of gay marriage then don't marry someone of your same gender - end of discussion.
* * * * *
I've been building some raised beds for a vegetable garden (I'll probably blog about this project when it is closer to completion - with some pictures). Anyway, I did complete a small section and planted some seeds for a winter garden (radishes, carrots, beets, turnips, and spinich) - and they are starting to sprout. Hopefully, we won't have a hard freeze until after Christmas.
* * * * *
I hate daylight savings time. It just never made any sense to me why you could cut a foot off the bottom of a blanket and sew it back on the top. Now it gets dark so dang early and I'm not able to get as much done outdoors as I would like :(
* * * * *
My wife made apple dumplings on Sunday - I LOVE apple dumplings. They were most delicious.
* * * * *
I made a chicken curry tonight for dinner - it was OK, but it wasn't as good as I wanted it to be. Anybody got a good curry recipe? Nothing too spicy. I like spicy - but my wife's a wuss when it comes to spicy :)
* * * * *
I love Alton Brown's "Good Eats" on the Food Network. I have a bunch of episodes recorded on our DVR. Now I want to cook duck, and make my own Gyro's, corned beef, and chili powder. BTW, his Coconut Cake is to die for - seriously. It's a bit of work -but it's definitely worth it. To get the full effect, you'll also need to follow his recipe for Coconut Milk and Cream and Coconut Extract.
* * * * *
It's raining really hard right now. I hope we don't lose power - that would really suck.
I got pulled into the 8 year old primary class to help out (since men are no longer allowed to teach primary alone - they must team teach with either their wife or another man). The brother I was helping out was the primary presidents husband - and he just found out right before Sacrament meeting. So, we were passing the lesson back and forth with one of us reading up on the next session while the other taught. All in all, it went well, I thought. Although, teaching 8 year olds is like herding kittens.
* * * * *
I wore a blue shirt with green tie to church yesterday - the official MoHo uniform. When I was asked why I was wearing a blue shirt, I responded that all of the cool guys wear blue. I also got several complements on my green tie. Odd, since I've worn that green tie before - I guess the blue shirt just sets it off better than my usual white shirt.
* * * * *
I'm still bummed out about prop 8 passing in California. I don't know why it is affecting me - I don't even live in California. And, I'm in a mixed orientation marriage; so, a same sex marriage is not in my future - even if it were available. But, I've made friends here in the queerosphere for whom it directly impacts. And it angers me when anybody does anything to hurt my friends. And, why do they even care? If you don't approve of gay marriage then don't marry someone of your same gender - end of discussion.
* * * * *
I've been building some raised beds for a vegetable garden (I'll probably blog about this project when it is closer to completion - with some pictures). Anyway, I did complete a small section and planted some seeds for a winter garden (radishes, carrots, beets, turnips, and spinich) - and they are starting to sprout. Hopefully, we won't have a hard freeze until after Christmas.
* * * * *
I hate daylight savings time. It just never made any sense to me why you could cut a foot off the bottom of a blanket and sew it back on the top. Now it gets dark so dang early and I'm not able to get as much done outdoors as I would like :(
* * * * *
My wife made apple dumplings on Sunday - I LOVE apple dumplings. They were most delicious.
* * * * *
I made a chicken curry tonight for dinner - it was OK, but it wasn't as good as I wanted it to be. Anybody got a good curry recipe? Nothing too spicy. I like spicy - but my wife's a wuss when it comes to spicy :)
* * * * *
I love Alton Brown's "Good Eats" on the Food Network. I have a bunch of episodes recorded on our DVR. Now I want to cook duck, and make my own Gyro's, corned beef, and chili powder. BTW, his Coconut Cake is to die for - seriously. It's a bit of work -but it's definitely worth it. To get the full effect, you'll also need to follow his recipe for Coconut Milk and Cream and Coconut Extract.
* * * * *
It's raining really hard right now. I hope we don't lose power - that would really suck.
Friday, November 7, 2008
Reaping what you sow
Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.
Galatians 6:7 [emphasis added]
Mind you, there has always been some enmity between the LDS church and the GLBT community at large. But, the churches distinction between attraction and behavior and it's message of 'hate the sin, love the sinner' tempered much of the anger - especially when compared to the rhetoric and actions of other Christians against the GLBT communty.
Like it or not - whether we accept it or not - the GLBT community is a force to be reckoned with. Many businesses already recognize this. They are not offering heath benefits to same sex couples out of the goodness of their hearts - they are doing it because they do not want to incur the wrath of the GLBT community. The business world recognizes that the GLBT community is not a bunch of effeminate men carrying placards and throwing a fit in the streets. It is doctors, lawyers, CEO's, and other people in positions of authority and power. To ignore the GLBT community is bad business. To be labeled a 'gay hater' could lead to business death.
A religion, of course, is not the same as a business; but, like a business, it is an institution run by men - who can and do make mistakes. Many of the success factors in business can also be a success factors in a religious setting. Missionary work is, in effect, the business of selling God.
Will the protests and angry rhetoric against the LDS church die down? Probably. Emotions are high right now. The GLBT community needs to vent their frustration - and the LDS church is on the receiving end. But, we should not fool ourselves into thinking that, eventually, the GLBT community will forgive and forget. The dragon has turned - and it has focused it's gaze directly on Temple Square in Salt Lake City, Utah. The rallying at LDS temples will eventually stop - the protesting will eventually die down. But the anger at the LDS church is here to stay. And, eventually, that anger will turn away from rally's, boycotts, and protests - which are largely exercises in futility. Civil rights has come a long way since the 60's. Effective ways of achieving their goals have been fine tuned over the years. And now, those years of experience and practice will be put to use in finding ways to really hurt the LDS church and prevent it from being as powerful of a political force in future battles.
Is all of this anger directed towards the LDS church justified? Will history record the actions of the LDS church and its members in California as our modern day Mountain Meadows massacre? That will be the question of the ages.
In the latest press release from the LDS church, it recognizes that this election is merely the latest skirmish and does not mark "an end to the debate over same-sex marriage in this country." They state
But one thing is clear, there are individuals who have been deeply scarred by the actions of the LDS membership in California. Their lives having been forever altered, and not in a good way. Some of these scars may never heal.
While I am choosing to remain active in the church in the aftermath of proposition 8, I may never be able to look at my church and local leaders in the same way. My sense of awe has been diminished. For the first time in 34 years, since joining the church back when I was a teenager, the thought has entered my mind that irreconcilable differences could, one day, result in the church and I to parting ways - and that scares the hell out of me!
Galatians 6:7 [emphasis added]
- Protesting at LDS temples across California and elsewhere
- Calls for protest rally's at LDS chapels
- Calls for boycotting Mormon owned businesses
- Calls for boycotting Utah businesses and ski resorts
- Families no longer on speaking terms
- People leaving the LDS church
- Threats to 'out' closeted gays in the Mormon church
Mind you, there has always been some enmity between the LDS church and the GLBT community at large. But, the churches distinction between attraction and behavior and it's message of 'hate the sin, love the sinner' tempered much of the anger - especially when compared to the rhetoric and actions of other Christians against the GLBT communty.
Like it or not - whether we accept it or not - the GLBT community is a force to be reckoned with. Many businesses already recognize this. They are not offering heath benefits to same sex couples out of the goodness of their hearts - they are doing it because they do not want to incur the wrath of the GLBT community. The business world recognizes that the GLBT community is not a bunch of effeminate men carrying placards and throwing a fit in the streets. It is doctors, lawyers, CEO's, and other people in positions of authority and power. To ignore the GLBT community is bad business. To be labeled a 'gay hater' could lead to business death.
A religion, of course, is not the same as a business; but, like a business, it is an institution run by men - who can and do make mistakes. Many of the success factors in business can also be a success factors in a religious setting. Missionary work is, in effect, the business of selling God.
Will the protests and angry rhetoric against the LDS church die down? Probably. Emotions are high right now. The GLBT community needs to vent their frustration - and the LDS church is on the receiving end. But, we should not fool ourselves into thinking that, eventually, the GLBT community will forgive and forget. The dragon has turned - and it has focused it's gaze directly on Temple Square in Salt Lake City, Utah. The rallying at LDS temples will eventually stop - the protesting will eventually die down. But the anger at the LDS church is here to stay. And, eventually, that anger will turn away from rally's, boycotts, and protests - which are largely exercises in futility. Civil rights has come a long way since the 60's. Effective ways of achieving their goals have been fine tuned over the years. And now, those years of experience and practice will be put to use in finding ways to really hurt the LDS church and prevent it from being as powerful of a political force in future battles.
Is all of this anger directed towards the LDS church justified? Will history record the actions of the LDS church and its members in California as our modern day Mountain Meadows massacre? That will be the question of the ages.
In the latest press release from the LDS church, it recognizes that this election is merely the latest skirmish and does not mark "an end to the debate over same-sex marriage in this country." They state
We hope that now and in the future all parties involved in this issue will be well informed and act in a spirit of mutual respect and civility toward those with a different position. No one on any side of the question should be vilified, intimidated, harassed or subject to erroneous information.But, is this too little and too late? Has the membership of the LDS church even been practicing what the LDS church preaches? Some facts are indisputable
- There was some overzealousness on the part of some of the members and local church leaders in California.
- Organizing efforts to take to the streets (i.e. political actions) during church meetings
- Members being made to feel that "if you aren't with us then you are against us"
- Local leaders directly asking for donations to ProtectMarriage.com - some even tracking those donations using public records.
- Misrepresentations, half truths, and even outright lies were being spread around
- Spreading of ridiculous rumors, such as the church would be forced to close all of its temples in California if proposition 8 failed.
- Talks and lessons in church addressing how the evil gays are seeking to destroy the institution of marriage, and even society itself.
- Even some of the general authorities of the church were guilty
- Speaking to a group of young adults, and also distributed as a video on PreservingMarriage.org, Elder David A. Bednar, a member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles in the LDS church, said
You're going to have the possibility of the inevitable clashes between religious liberty and free speech; and, if your religious doctrine is such that you believe marriage between a man and a woman is the only definition of marriage then that smacks up against free speech; because if marriage is defined in a more broad way between members of the same gender - then you can't talk about that. [emphasis added]
But one thing is clear, there are individuals who have been deeply scarred by the actions of the LDS membership in California. Their lives having been forever altered, and not in a good way. Some of these scars may never heal.
While I am choosing to remain active in the church in the aftermath of proposition 8, I may never be able to look at my church and local leaders in the same way. My sense of awe has been diminished. For the first time in 34 years, since joining the church back when I was a teenager, the thought has entered my mind that irreconcilable differences could, one day, result in the church and I to parting ways - and that scares the hell out of me!
Thursday, November 6, 2008
My first
Yesterday ... for the very first time ... I met ... a real live in the flesh MoHo.
You guys really do exist, you aren't just figments of my imagination.
Beck's business brought him to Texas - and we were able to meet last night for a couple of hours to hug, to sit and talk, and to hug again as we parted ways.
I so wish other MoHo's lived closer.
I yearn for your company.
You guys really do exist, you aren't just figments of my imagination.
Beck's business brought him to Texas - and we were able to meet last night for a couple of hours to hug, to sit and talk, and to hug again as we parted ways.
I so wish other MoHo's lived closer.
I yearn for your company.
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
Food for thought
The following was posted on the Gay Christian Network today
I seriously doubt that a single soul would turn to Christ because of the campaign for Proposition 8. But I wonder how many people will now turn away from Christ because of this vile campaign.Note, normally GCN doesn't allow political discussions as they often become heated; but, they made a one time exception for discussion of proposition 8 since it affects so many of the members.
My thoughts on the election
The election is finally over! A new president was selected by the people. He isn't the man I voted for - but I will accept and support him as the president of my country. The people voted for change. Only time will tell if Obama will accomplish the changes he campaigned for - and if the people will be satisfied with the changes.
Initial results show that proposition 8 in California has passed by a narrow margin. For many in the GLBT community, proposition 8 has been more important than the presidential race. It has been particularly divisive here in the queerosphere - even though most of us didn't vote in California.
Many have been hurt by the involvement of the LDS church in the proposition 8 campaign - particularly those who live in California and were subjected to anti-gay rhetoric in their church meetings. Sadly, this probably did not end yesterday as it will likely be a subject of conversation for weeks to come with in-you-face smugness; but, it will, hopefully, die down with time.
Many of us in the queerosphere opposed this measure; and, while we may not be directly impacted by its passage - we are disappointed in our church leaders, and particularly in some of our brothers and sisters who live in California. There is no denying that there was some overzeleousness on the part of the membership and local leaders in California. On one hand, we can say that this probably wasn't the intent of the general church leadership; on the other hand, they didn't do anything to quell it either.
And, there are some in the queerosphere felt it their duty to heed the call of the church leadership and support proposition 8. There were some very hurtful things hurled at them because of their support for the measure.
My heart goes out for those who are directly impacted by this decision. Gay culture is seen by many as one of promiscuity, drugs, and a generally hedonistic lifestyle. But not all gays buy into this culture; in fact, many want to distance themselves and simply want what their heterosexual counterparts already have and take for granted - and now that has been taken away from them.
I have a new calling - I am the seminary teacher for the youth in my ward. My seminary lesson yesterday morning included a segment on diversity and tolerance which said
I was particularly struck by the comment in the lesson about those who seem to be sinners. There are some in the queerosphere who seem to be sinners - at least in regards to LDS doctrine and teachings. Others may feel that those of us who choose to remain in the church are misguided, perhaps even blinded. Regardless of where we stand with the church - we need to love and accept one another. While we may or may not agree with the choices made by some - we need to be tolerant of one another and celebrate the diversity we have in the queerosphere.
I have to confess, my testimony was shaken a bit by all of the rhetoric, misrepresentations, half truths, and outright lies being flung about regarding gay marriage by church leaders and members in California and elsewhere. Someone recently commented on an old post of mine and took me to task for my use of the term "Mormono-fascist". Yet that is exactly what we saw in California with father being set against son and brother against brother. I cannot predict the long term effect this may have on me as I'm not sure I will ever view my church leaders as I once did. But, for now, I choose to forgive them and move forward.
Initial results show that proposition 8 in California has passed by a narrow margin. For many in the GLBT community, proposition 8 has been more important than the presidential race. It has been particularly divisive here in the queerosphere - even though most of us didn't vote in California.
Many have been hurt by the involvement of the LDS church in the proposition 8 campaign - particularly those who live in California and were subjected to anti-gay rhetoric in their church meetings. Sadly, this probably did not end yesterday as it will likely be a subject of conversation for weeks to come with in-you-face smugness; but, it will, hopefully, die down with time.
Many of us in the queerosphere opposed this measure; and, while we may not be directly impacted by its passage - we are disappointed in our church leaders, and particularly in some of our brothers and sisters who live in California. There is no denying that there was some overzeleousness on the part of the membership and local leaders in California. On one hand, we can say that this probably wasn't the intent of the general church leadership; on the other hand, they didn't do anything to quell it either.
And, there are some in the queerosphere felt it their duty to heed the call of the church leadership and support proposition 8. There were some very hurtful things hurled at them because of their support for the measure.
My heart goes out for those who are directly impacted by this decision. Gay culture is seen by many as one of promiscuity, drugs, and a generally hedonistic lifestyle. But not all gays buy into this culture; in fact, many want to distance themselves and simply want what their heterosexual counterparts already have and take for granted - and now that has been taken away from them.
I have a new calling - I am the seminary teacher for the youth in my ward. My seminary lesson yesterday morning included a segment on diversity and tolerance which said
Invite students to think about their attitudes toward people of other religions or those who seem to be sinners. Ask the students to write down what they think the Savior might say if He were to talk to them about their attitude. Read the following statements or give them to the students as a handout.This is the church I believe in. These are the teachings I want to incorporate into my own life. What happened in California is an aberration - it's not my church.
President Gordon B. Hinckley taught: [emphasis added]“I plead with our people everywhere to live with respect and appreciation for those not of our faith. There is so great a need for civility and mutual respect among those of differing beliefs and philosophies. We must not be partisans of any doctrine of ethnic superiority. We live in a world of diversity. We can and must be respectful toward those with whose teachings we may not agree. We must be willing to defend the rights of others who may become the victims of bigotry.
(in Conference Report, Apr. 1995, 94–95; or Ensign, May 1995, 71).
I was particularly struck by the comment in the lesson about those who seem to be sinners. There are some in the queerosphere who seem to be sinners - at least in regards to LDS doctrine and teachings. Others may feel that those of us who choose to remain in the church are misguided, perhaps even blinded. Regardless of where we stand with the church - we need to love and accept one another. While we may or may not agree with the choices made by some - we need to be tolerant of one another and celebrate the diversity we have in the queerosphere.
I have to confess, my testimony was shaken a bit by all of the rhetoric, misrepresentations, half truths, and outright lies being flung about regarding gay marriage by church leaders and members in California and elsewhere. Someone recently commented on an old post of mine and took me to task for my use of the term "Mormono-fascist". Yet that is exactly what we saw in California with father being set against son and brother against brother. I cannot predict the long term effect this may have on me as I'm not sure I will ever view my church leaders as I once did. But, for now, I choose to forgive them and move forward.
Tuesday, November 4, 2008
How the Grinch Stole Marriage
by Mary Ann Horton, Lisa and Bill Koontz (with apologies to Dr. Seuss.)
Click to hear a reading by Blake Williams.
Every Gay down in Gayville liked Gay Marriage a lot......
But the Grinch, who lived just east of Gayville, did NOT!!
The Grinch hated happy Gays! The whole Marriage season!
Now, please don't ask why. No one quite knows the reason.
It could be his head wasn't screwed on just right.
It could be, perhaps, his Florsheims were too tight.
But I think the most likely reason of all was
His heart and brain were two sizes too small.
"And they're buying their tuxes!" he snarled with a sneer,
"Tomorrow's the first Gay Wedding! It's practically here!"
Then he growled, with his Grinch fingers nervously drumming,
"I MUST find some way to stop Gay Marriage from coming!"
For, tomorrow, he knew... All the Gay girls and boys
would wake bright and early. They'd rush for their vows!
And then! Oh, the Joys! Oh, the Joys!
And THEN they'd do something he liked least of all!
Every Gay down in Gayville the tall and the small,
would stand close together, all happy and blissing.
They'd stand hand-in-hand. And the Gays would start kissing!
"I MUST stop Gay Marriage from coming! ...But HOW?"
Then he got an idea! An awful idea!
THE GRINCH GOT A WONDERFUL, AWFUL IDEA!
"I know what to do!" The Grinch laughed in his throat.
And he went to his closet, grabbed his sheet and his hood.
And he chuckled, and clucked, with a great Grinchy word!
"With this beard and this cross, I look just like our Lord!"
"All I need is a Scripture..." The Grinch looked around.
But, true Scripture is scarce, there was none to be found.
Did that stop the old Grinch...? No! The Grinch simply said,
"With no Scripture on Marriage, I'll fake one instead!"
"It's one man and one woman," the Grinch falsely said.
Then he broke in the courthouse. A rather tight pinch.
But, if Georgie could do it, then so could the Grinch.
The little Gay benefits hung in a row.
"These bennies," he grinned, "are the first things to go!"
Then he slithered and slunk, with a smile most uncanny,
around the whole room, and he took every benny!
Health care for partners! Doctors for kiddies!
Tax rights! Adoptions! Pensions and Wills!
And he stuffed them in bags. Then the Grinch, with a chill,
Stuffed all the bags, one by one, in his bill.
Then he slunk to the kitchen, and stole Wedding Cake.
He cleaned out that icebox and made it look straight.
He took the Gay-bar keys! He took the Gay Flag.
Why, that Grinch even took their last Gay birdseed bag!
"And NOW!" grinned the Grinch, "I will pocket their Rings."
And the Grinch grabbed the Rings, and he started to shove
when he heard a small sound like the coo of a dove.
He turned around fast, and off flew his hood.
Little Lisa-Bi Gay behind him sadly stood.
The Grinch had been caught by small Lisa-Bi.
She stared at the Grinch and said, "My, oh, my, why?"
"Why are you taking our Wedding Rings? WHY?"
But, you know, that old Grinch was so smart and so slick
He thought up a lie, and he thought it up quick!
"Why, my sweet little tot," the fake Shepherd sneered,
"The judges are evil, the other states weird."
"I'll fix the rings there and I'll bring them back here."
It was quarter past dawn... All the Gays, still a-bed,
all the Gays still a-snooze when he packed up and fled.
"Pooh-Pooh to the Gays!" he was grinch-ish-ly humming.
"They're finding out now no Gay Marriage is coming!"
"Their mouths will hang open a minute or two
then the Gays down in Gayville will all cry Boo-Hoo!"
He stared down at Gayville! The Grinch popped his eyes!
Then he shook! What he saw was a shocking surprise!
Every Gay down in Gayville, the tall and the small,
was kissing! Without any bennies at all!
He HADN'T stopped Marriage from coming! IT CAME!
Somehow or other, it came just the same!
And the Grinch, with his grinch-feet ice-cold in the snow,
stood puzzling and puzzling: "How could it be so?"
"It came without lawyers, no papers to sort!"
"It came without licenses, came without courts!"
And he puzzled three hours, till his puzzler was sore.
Then the Grinch thought of something he hadn't before!
"Maybe Marriage," he thought, "doesn't come from the court.
Maybe Marriage...perhaps... comes right from the heart.
Maybe Marriage comes from all the words the Gays say.
Words like Husband, like Wedding, and Spouse who is Gay."
And what happened then...? Well...in Gayville they say
that the Grinch's small brain grew three sizes that day!
And the Gays had their Weddings. They promised for life.
They swore to be faithful, to Wife and her Wife.
The Husbands were happy, to each other they vowed
To be Out and be Honest, be Gay and be Proud.
They told all their neighbors and friends of their Spouse,
They told of their Marriage and sharing their house.
They said "We got Married." They shouted it loud.
Their marital status was "Married and Proud."
And the minute his heart didn't feel quite so tight,
He whizzed with his load through the bright morning light.
And he brought back the rings, cake and Gay birdseed bags!
And he... ...HE HIMSELF... hung the Gay Rainbow Flag!
...
The Lord looked down, at the proud and the tall,
and said "These are my children, and I love them all."
The moral of this story is that we don't need a piece of paper and the approval of the state to get married. We can just get married. Instead of having a commitment ceremony, we can have a wedding. Instead of partners, we can have husbands and wives. Instead of calling our relationship a Domestic Partnership or a Civil Union, we can call it a Marriage. Whether any government recognizes it is separate from what we call it. It's a free country and we can call ourselves what we like.
In 5 or 10 or 20 years, with plenty of visible same-sex married couples, the world won't see us as strange or scary, we're just the married couple down the street that happens to be gay. Eventually, the legal recognition of our marriages will follow.
If we allow ourselves to voluntarily sit in the back of the bus, we'll never make any progress. Rosa Parks had to sit in the front of the bus to make a difference. We must as well.
Copyright (c) 2004 by Mary Ann Horton. Permission granted to copy in whole, with attribution. This is a parody of "How the Grinch Stole Christmas."
Link
Click to hear a reading by Blake Williams.
Every Gay down in Gayville liked Gay Marriage a lot......
But the Grinch, who lived just east of Gayville, did NOT!!
The Grinch hated happy Gays! The whole Marriage season!
Now, please don't ask why. No one quite knows the reason.
It could be his head wasn't screwed on just right.
It could be, perhaps, his Florsheims were too tight.
But I think the most likely reason of all was
His heart and brain were two sizes too small.
"And they're buying their tuxes!" he snarled with a sneer,
"Tomorrow's the first Gay Wedding! It's practically here!"
Then he growled, with his Grinch fingers nervously drumming,
"I MUST find some way to stop Gay Marriage from coming!"
For, tomorrow, he knew... All the Gay girls and boys
would wake bright and early. They'd rush for their vows!
And then! Oh, the Joys! Oh, the Joys!
And THEN they'd do something he liked least of all!
Every Gay down in Gayville the tall and the small,
would stand close together, all happy and blissing.
They'd stand hand-in-hand. And the Gays would start kissing!
"I MUST stop Gay Marriage from coming! ...But HOW?"
Then he got an idea! An awful idea!
THE GRINCH GOT A WONDERFUL, AWFUL IDEA!
"I know what to do!" The Grinch laughed in his throat.
And he went to his closet, grabbed his sheet and his hood.
And he chuckled, and clucked, with a great Grinchy word!
"With this beard and this cross, I look just like our Lord!"
"All I need is a Scripture..." The Grinch looked around.
But, true Scripture is scarce, there was none to be found.
Did that stop the old Grinch...? No! The Grinch simply said,
"With no Scripture on Marriage, I'll fake one instead!"
"It's one man and one woman," the Grinch falsely said.
Then he broke in the courthouse. A rather tight pinch.
But, if Georgie could do it, then so could the Grinch.
The little Gay benefits hung in a row.
"These bennies," he grinned, "are the first things to go!"
Then he slithered and slunk, with a smile most uncanny,
around the whole room, and he took every benny!
Health care for partners! Doctors for kiddies!
Tax rights! Adoptions! Pensions and Wills!
And he stuffed them in bags. Then the Grinch, with a chill,
Stuffed all the bags, one by one, in his bill.
Then he slunk to the kitchen, and stole Wedding Cake.
He cleaned out that icebox and made it look straight.
He took the Gay-bar keys! He took the Gay Flag.
Why, that Grinch even took their last Gay birdseed bag!
"And NOW!" grinned the Grinch, "I will pocket their Rings."
And the Grinch grabbed the Rings, and he started to shove
when he heard a small sound like the coo of a dove.
He turned around fast, and off flew his hood.
Little Lisa-Bi Gay behind him sadly stood.
The Grinch had been caught by small Lisa-Bi.
She stared at the Grinch and said, "My, oh, my, why?"
"Why are you taking our Wedding Rings? WHY?"
But, you know, that old Grinch was so smart and so slick
He thought up a lie, and he thought it up quick!
"Why, my sweet little tot," the fake Shepherd sneered,
"The judges are evil, the other states weird."
"I'll fix the rings there and I'll bring them back here."
It was quarter past dawn... All the Gays, still a-bed,
all the Gays still a-snooze when he packed up and fled.
"Pooh-Pooh to the Gays!" he was grinch-ish-ly humming.
"They're finding out now no Gay Marriage is coming!"
"Their mouths will hang open a minute or two
then the Gays down in Gayville will all cry Boo-Hoo!"
He stared down at Gayville! The Grinch popped his eyes!
Then he shook! What he saw was a shocking surprise!
Every Gay down in Gayville, the tall and the small,
was kissing! Without any bennies at all!
He HADN'T stopped Marriage from coming! IT CAME!
Somehow or other, it came just the same!
And the Grinch, with his grinch-feet ice-cold in the snow,
stood puzzling and puzzling: "How could it be so?"
"It came without lawyers, no papers to sort!"
"It came without licenses, came without courts!"
And he puzzled three hours, till his puzzler was sore.
Then the Grinch thought of something he hadn't before!
"Maybe Marriage," he thought, "doesn't come from the court.
Maybe Marriage...perhaps... comes right from the heart.
Maybe Marriage comes from all the words the Gays say.
Words like Husband, like Wedding, and Spouse who is Gay."
And what happened then...? Well...in Gayville they say
that the Grinch's small brain grew three sizes that day!
And the Gays had their Weddings. They promised for life.
They swore to be faithful, to Wife and her Wife.
The Husbands were happy, to each other they vowed
To be Out and be Honest, be Gay and be Proud.
They told all their neighbors and friends of their Spouse,
They told of their Marriage and sharing their house.
They said "We got Married." They shouted it loud.
Their marital status was "Married and Proud."
And the minute his heart didn't feel quite so tight,
He whizzed with his load through the bright morning light.
And he brought back the rings, cake and Gay birdseed bags!
And he... ...HE HIMSELF... hung the Gay Rainbow Flag!
...
The Lord looked down, at the proud and the tall,
and said "These are my children, and I love them all."
The moral of this story is that we don't need a piece of paper and the approval of the state to get married. We can just get married. Instead of having a commitment ceremony, we can have a wedding. Instead of partners, we can have husbands and wives. Instead of calling our relationship a Domestic Partnership or a Civil Union, we can call it a Marriage. Whether any government recognizes it is separate from what we call it. It's a free country and we can call ourselves what we like.
In 5 or 10 or 20 years, with plenty of visible same-sex married couples, the world won't see us as strange or scary, we're just the married couple down the street that happens to be gay. Eventually, the legal recognition of our marriages will follow.
If we allow ourselves to voluntarily sit in the back of the bus, we'll never make any progress. Rosa Parks had to sit in the front of the bus to make a difference. We must as well.
Copyright (c) 2004 by Mary Ann Horton. Permission granted to copy in whole, with attribution. This is a parody of "How the Grinch Stole Christmas."
Link
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)