That's right, you read it correctly.

In legal terms, there is no logical reason why two men or two women living together (indeed, committed to spending their lives together) shouldn't be afforded the same civil rights as a heterosexual couple who have similarly made the same commitment. It is not the government's place to decide who may or may not live together... It is the government's duty to fairly tax its citizens equally. This means having the same taxes and tax brackets for people regardless of gender. Does the IRS care about gender? I'd tend to think not. So why should the civil government care? It's not their business WHAT you are, it is there business THAT you are. Just as they are obligated to give the same rights to each individual, so they are obligated to give the same rights to each pair of individuals. I could write an algorithm here:

                      i => i + 1; where i = the rights afforded to an individual. by mathematical induction:

                       i  U  i;  (unity of i and i) whereby a pair of individuals has the total sum of the rights of each individual.

 

SO if homosexuals can find a church that will join them in marriage, the government must absolutely recognize it. Whether or not a church will officiate the ceremony is up to the church; after all, marriage is and always has been a RELIGIOUS thing.

Now, I would prefer that homosexual couples refrain from using the word 'marriage' since that is OUR word, and we already HAVE a definition for it. They need to come up with a new word, like, say, 'civil union' which is legally equivalent to marriage (marriage in the legal definition) but is at the same time NOT a marriage (in the religious sense).

 

To say that people ought to be deprived of their civil rights just because they cannot procreate does more than just the taking away of their rights as citizens of the country: it also says something negative about what marriage is. Is marriage about procreation? Ought we to ostracize couples who are married and DONt have sex, or couples who are unable to have children? Certainly not. The reason being that MARRIAGE is NOT about SEX. We ALL KNOW THAT. But we are saying just the opposite when we say that homosexual couples may not visit each other in the hospital, and must pay a combined higher total of taxes to the government. (and that IS what a legal ban on gay marriage would do).

 

Some will now bring up the issue of adoption of children by homosexual couples; I say the government's job is to do what is in the best interests of the people as long as it does not infringe on their rights. People do NOT have a right to have children to care for. Therefore the government is within its bounds to say 'no, that is not good for the child' and deny homosexual couples the ability to adopt. (And I believe that that is what they certainly ought to do).

 

--Your Host

Ingmar Berman films..... Interrelationship between science and Christianity as perceived by quantum theory..... Two things I wish I had more free time to explore... And that's just the top two on th list of things I want to know more about...

 

My history teacher has got me actually liking history... one of these weekends I may just trot down to the Historical Society... but I dont' have leisure to do such things lately. School keeps me too occupied. This may shape up to be quite the interesting summer.....

Naturally I'll try to spread my discoveries on to you, my loyal readers (I may flatter myself by thinking I HAVE loyal readers). Needless to say it will all be interesting, especially once I get down on paper how important quantum theory is in perceiving the world as it really works... interaction between spiritual and physical domains... Stuff we christians believe in but never really bother to think about...

 

ACH i wish I had the time to go into it.

 

-Your Host

 

 

 

Exactly how much and at what rate must the human body excrete testosterone in order to stimulate skin recycling and follicle growth to the point which would enable one to grow facial hair?

 

I've been wondering... how mathematical has biology gotten? Do we just know how stuff works, or do we know EXACTLY how it works... like, down to the exact chemical composition, which would enable us to manipulate and analyze living creatures to level of calculating exactly HOW MANY hairs there are on a human head. I'm sure it's doable... I'm just curious to know if anyone's even tried.

 

-Tim, Guy of the Batman Hat

Brace yourself, Effie:

 

1. Calculate the of what value your current ordered lifestyle is.

2. Determine the pertinent qualities you desire in a man/woman. By pertinent I mean that the potential partner MUST exhibit these qualities.

3. Determine how many optional qualities a man/woman must have in addition to the pertinent ones, in order to make being with him/her worth giving up your current lifestyle (as calculated in step 1).

 

This will result in a lower risk factor of falling head-over-heels for anyone.

It will completely eliminate the possibility of compromise, or going out with someone who is not suitable, or marriage material.

It will enable you to give up your single lifestyle without regret, because you know that it is worth it, because you have found a partner worth giving it up for.

 

Mathematics and Dating. Who would have thought they'd be able to work together?

Some of you nay-sayers may bring up the whole 'but love isn't logical' thing. But really... do you want to make your life-changing, irreversible decisions in life based on emotion? Emotion is not forever. Use your head, that's what it's there for. Don't throw yourself willy-nilly into a relationship because you're 'in love'. You will save yourself from difficult situations and a lot of heartache if you stop to think first. And by 'think' I mean go through the 3 steps outlines above. You'll thank me later.

 

-Your Host

Well now... I have quite the spring semester planned.

Monday, I have the evening off....

Tuesday, German 102 from 6:30-9:30pm

Wednesday, Discrete Mathematics from 7-10pm

Thursday, History of Early America 7-10pm

Friday, Upper Dublin Choristers practice

 

Yes, people, you read that correctly... I am in a choir, same one as my parents.

Speaking of which... everyone is invited to our performance of Bach's St. Matthew's Passion. It's unlike anything I've heard before, classical-wise... truly a magnificent piece (coming from someone who listens to rock music all the time)... and also way more difficult than anything my high school choir did. It'll be nice to hear when we get it all together.

 

Looks like all my homework this semester will be done on saturdays... wOOt.

 

And, naturally, my sundays will consist of double church and evening young peoples (alternating between BlueBell's and Trinity OPC's, since they meet opposite weeks).

 

-Your Host

For all you artistic types....: check out the new photo album titled "Escher".

It contains, oddly enough, some of my favorite works by Escher (one of my favorite artists, if only because he wasn't a painter....ok actually I like his stuff cuz it looks awesome and he does some funky stuff with perspective in some of them).

 

This is as art-oriented as i get....

 

- Your Host

I discovered something about myself the other day, something of great significance. They say that the first step towards resolving a problem is to realize you have one..... This is something I dont think anyone could ever realize about me without deep invasive research into years and years of my history. Everything I've ever wondered about myself makes sense now though... I've discovered the single greatest reason why I am the way I am.

 

I guess it all stems from something that I already knew: that I'm one who's not satisfied with not knowing the answer to something. I'm a very inquisitive, possibly over-curious person. The problem is how I react after I find the information. I stop searching. Once I reach a certain degree of familiarity with the subject, my laziness (my other driving factor) kicks in and I quit. I knew this was true in school and academics, I just hadn't realized that its true in social aspects as well. Once I get to know someone as much as I'd like to know them, I tend to lose interest. My longest friendships are with those who have not yet revealed to me all that I wish to know about them.

 

Is this true of other people? Do we lose interest once we have gained the knowledge we search for? Are we all too dependent on trying to find NEW stuff to learn, NEW people to hang out with, NEW ways to entertain ourselves... or is it just me?

 

I am a product of the late 20th and early 21st centuries.  I feel the need to constantly be entertained. I am desensitized to anything that I have seen or heard before. This is not good.

 

 

-Tim