/joke

See you Saturday.

I do agree though, that people and governments should try to be consistent with their chosen philosophy when it comes to regulating or not regulating so-called “personal freedoms.” Lots of folks who say they believe in “personal freedom” have no problem with governments telling women that they have no freedom to have an abortion, even though the only rationale seems to be a religious view held by a minority of people that life begins at conception.

What strikes me about this post is that the writer of the post implies that no one who reads Metblogs is gay, which is insulting enough, and at the same time she assumes that some of the readers’ best friends are gay. Where am I and what year is it again?

And that a commentor here doesn’t have any gay friends strikes me as just plain freakish. I want to help. Meet me for coffee sometime. We’ll talk. I’ll bring along one of my straight best friends.

If these two well intentioned people (both of whom I’m sure are wonderful and please don’t hit me at the garage sale) are that oblivious and nonchalantly insensitive to people who they *think* are different from them, then it isn’t too much of a stretch to assume that Prop 8 will succeed.

By the way, some of my best friends smoke, use plastic shopping bags and are gay.

You can’t pick and choose what you’re going to ban and what you’re going to be ok with.

I’m just irked, and this is mainly Pasadena’s fault, that so many people are rallying behind one thing, using the “government needs to mind their own business” mantra…while also rallying behind something that is completely government interference (banning smoking in my own apartment, for example…)

I normally would vote in favor of gay marriage…like I said, I’m all fine and dandy with it. It’s none of my business who people want to marry.

On the same token, I’m pissed that a state that is pro-gay marriage and pro-marijuana wants me to carry some PBS-sized tote bag to the grocery store every week.

I understand Aaron’s point to a degree. I liked his ps regarding government shouldn’t have involvement. I think the only involvement that was needed was the court ruling earlier this year saying a ban was unconstitutional.

I however find it more of an issue of special interest groups trying to get legislation to support only their life style choices. I have a problem with any one group trying to manipulate the constitution to fit their narrow, often one sided view on how society should look and act.

The irony in it all is so many of the proponents profess themselves to be forgiving “christians” yet they have zero tolerance for any ideas different than their own. It is just a smack down if you look at the preachings regarding tolerance, forgiveness and a host of other things they profess to be.

When this issue was last on the ballot we (my wife and I) would always ask those in favor one question. “How does a gay couple getting married affect your marriage?”. None could ever answer. A few neighbors quit talking to us because we favored allowing gay marriage. We were fine with that as that sort of narrow mindedness isn’t something we want our kids exposed to or in our lives.

The courts ruled we can’t ban. At that point it should have been dropped. If an individual church doesn’t want to recognize gay marriage based on their dogma let them. They are a private group and entitled to do so. Just don’t force your opinions with legislation on all of us.

After I commented last night I pulled some info. Both my wife and I are probably going to have a few more people not talk to us. Whatever.

Now I have to find a way to get the locals here to understand the cities amendment to ban medical marijuana shops is stupid on their part.