I am dead-like.
I would really like to just remove myself from the having-stuff-to-do sphere and just chill for a few days. Mehs. Get some sleep at least. I'm moaning again. Surprise surprise. Oh well. I should be doing an essay right now. That explains it.
It's about offenders and whether there is a typical one. Which there isn't. There just isn't.
I wish people would stop making em write essays about stuff which I can answer in one sentence. A paragraph at most. Muh. Motivation. If only.
Anyway. This prop 8 stuff.. I still don't get it. Haven't got around to asking Mr. Family Law about it yet. But anyway. Ok, so. Prop 8 defines marriage in Cali as 'between a man and a woman'. Which is... well not fair enough exactly.. but yeah. The problem here is, between the Supreme Court of California's decision and this prop 8 vote, quite a few gays have got hitched. The depraved sickos. Now, prop 8 can't be retro-active. They've said that it won't be retro-active. So what exactly is going to happen to these homos who happen to have lightning fast reactions? They are married. They have to be recognised as married.. because their marriages won't be void.. That's against the rule of law AND what has been promised.
Someone [generally smarter than me] pointed out that instead of being retro-active it could be futuristic.. So instead of 'you aren't married and never were' it's going to be 'you were married but from this moment on, you aint'.. Which would be incredibly devious. And still doesn't really deal with the issue of the status of those who are married and all of the associated nightmareish documentation.. Or how something which was ruled as unconstitutional can suddenly become fine. Rule of law! C'mon! Just stick to it guys..
Right. Now for offenders I guess.
Tonight should be a good one though. Still not decided on what the plan is.. Hum.
Snow Patrol - How To Be Dead
Ian Brown - F.E.A.R
Foals - Olympic Airways
Emily Haines - Freak
Donora - The Chorus
1 comment:
He can't be THAT much cleverer than you, because by saying 'you were married but ain't now' they ARE operating retro-actively. That IS ending the marriage, which WOULD be legislating retroactively.
He fundamentally misunderstands that marriage must be intended as 'permanent'. In this respect, to go and declare these marriages invalid would be a much more fundamental challenge to marriage than any same-sex marriage could ever be. Not even one twist McCain and Bush....ewwwwww....maybe we ought to make that illegal...
-FWL
Post a Comment