o hai

Check out what I cooked today on Flickr - there's a whole photoset of the duck and this awesome gravy I made.

(psst, this is on my real blog, come comment there. And click on the ads.)

I need to start this off by saying that I did, in fact, vote against Proposition 8. A great many of my friends are gay, I support them with all of my heart, and fully understand why this means so much to them. But I feel like I didn't really stick to my moral compass by voting against it.



I consider myself a libertarian, somewhat of a radical one in theory, though real world practice doesn't fit in with those ideals. From that point of view, I have to ask "What the hell does government have to do with marriage in the first place?"

The question, to me, shouldn't be "why can't gay people get married?" but rather, "why does the government have anything at all to do with marriage?" Marriage is ultimately a religious institution.

I can certainly see the value to the public of the government being in the business of registering and managing romantic partnerships - though the ultimate utility is in providing a registry for potential reproduction, a shortcut way to establish heredity or the plausible explanation of same (e.g. secret adoptions, illegitimate children, etc, which are far more common than one is led to believe), which just isn't possible for a gay couple (yet!). It isn't possible for an infertile couple either, but to a casual observer, they have plausible deniability for a child, whether adopted or fathered by some party other than the husband of the pair.

But marriage? Why does it have to be called marriage? How is that the government's business? I'm against gay marriage, because I don't see what the government has to do with marriage, and why in heavens name should we give them MORE power? It's bad enough that the State has its nose in heterosexual partnerships; do gay people want to invite government into their bedroom?

Let's take another tack: historical precedent. There are very few examples of legitimized same-sex unions in the history of any culture on earth. There are some examples in China, Japan, ancient Rome & Greece, etc., but they are the exception rather than the rule.

On the other hand, polygamous relationships have been common to nearly EVERY culture at one time or another - and are still quite common in some parts of the world. Please note that plural marriages still provide that official stamp of heredity, whether actual or spurious.

Given that cultural context, why has same-sex marriage become a political hot-button, while plural marriage has been given the short shrift? Until a few weeks ago in this state, I could marry a man or a woman, but only one partner.

(just curious - does anyone know what happens when someone from a polygamous country emigrates to the US with their spouses? Do they have to pick one?)

The argument has been made that Proposition 8 is a form of discrimination, with television ads comparing it to the Holocaust, or at least the internment of the Japanese. I reply, somewhat tongue in cheek, "That's ridiculous: a lesbian has the same right to marry a man as a straight woman!" But it's true, Prop 8 doesn't propose different rights for different people at all! Prop 8 forbids a straight man from marrying another straight man just as much as it prevents a gay couple from marrying!

Gay marriage opens the system up to further abuse in contexts such as taxes and immigration - not that straight marriage doesn't sometimes already abuse the system, but this is yet another avenue. If these "marriage benefits" are so valuable, I'm certain we'll see straight men and women engaging in gay marriages for the financial benefits, without the fear of their parter becoming attached and trying to make the union "real."

I have a very dear friend who is an illegal alien in this country, who I've blogged about before in "regarding immigration". If same sex marriage conferred the same citizenship benefits as conventional marriage (it doesn't, I checked), I would marry "Juan" in a minute to get him a green card. That's abuse.

The problem isn't that gay people can't marry one another - the problem is that the government gives any favors at all to married couples.

The solution as I see it is a far more radical one than legalizing gay marriage... I think the political institution of marriage should be dissolved entirely. If there is some legitimate need for partner benefits, the government can continue to officiate unions of any number of consenting partners, un pain, un vin, et une bourse. Better yet, just let people execute the legal aspects of marriage as a business contract. That's what it is anyway - a business contract with boilerplate text that is embedded in our legal and social code. There can be a standard marriage contract - available wherever business forms are sold, like leases, wills and divorces, as a book or software - and those that want to go beyond that can hire a lawyer to write it up any way they want. This is already in practice for some polyamorous families. I expect it doesn't work any better or worse than traditional marriage.

Let the church be the arbiter of "marriage" in whatever form makes sense to the participants, whether it's a man and a woman, two men, or three women, four men, and a mountain goat. Let's keep the government out of our bedrooms and personal business.

I'll continue to support and vote for gay marriage - I realize that the secular institution of marriage isn't going anywhere soon. Gay marriage is the most practical way of providing equality and a level playing field.

But it's not the best way, or the right way.

congratulations, cgthree, you've got ganja

obligatory link

In the interest of saving money, breaking the cycle of eating fast food twice a day, and cleaning the detritus from my pantry, a couple of weeks ago, I decided to trim my grocery budget to ZERO and commit to eating whatever I had in the house until it runs out. I had bought a bunch of 50% off stuff from an Albertson's closing down a month or two ago, and my cupboards had been overflowing since then anyway. I'm just buying staples, which for me is milk and Coca-Cola.

Two weeks later, I'm just barely beginning to get to the good stuff. Bear in mind I'm quite clueless about cooking, though I've been watching Alton Brown a lot and dreaming. I came up with this from only stuff I've had around for a while.




* 1 package of Farmhouse Long Grain & Wild Rice. No idea when I got it. Prepared according to directions.

* 2 italian sausages - first bought in a six pack in February for making pizza and frozen since then - started thawing them yesterday with no clue what I was going to do with it. Googled what to do with them, decided to cut off the casings and fry them up in:

* olive oil from one of the 3 or 4 unfinished bottles floating around. Just a little bit - my first chance to try this awesome cast iron pan - part of a whole set I bought from a thrift store for $50 a while back. While that was cooking, I got the idea to try something I had heard of, but wasn't sure what it was: deglazing. Huh, says you can use water, but wine is best. I drank all that... except

* A mini bottle of Delicato White Zinfandel - 187 ml, a four pack of crappy wine my ex-gf bought and drank only one of. Perfect!!! I spent like 5-10 minutes pouring that in and scraping while the rice finished cooking, and even added a little teeny bit of:

* flour - left over from my bread machine experiments. Ooh, this is working, I've got a sort of tasty little sauce going on here! WTF! WWAD? (What Would Alton Do)

* Kosher salt. I have no idea if this did anything useful, but I put some in. Alton puts it in everything. OK, one more item, something to pretend I'm being semi-healthy. Aha!

* A can of peas, drained. Again, no clue where I got this or how long it had been on the shelf. It might've come back from Burning Man. I threw the rice back into the deglazed pan, threw back in the sausage (which I had drained), and put in the peas. I heated the whole mixture up in a pan, and am eating it from a bowl, and it's pretty yummy.

Did I do this "right"? I have no clue, but it's edible and totally from what I already had in the house. I'm pretty proud of myself!

Honest, it's been two weeks, I've only eaten outside food maybe three times, and I've still got 2 packages of tuna, 2 salmon steak, 1 crab, some sea scallops, 2 more sausages, chicken wings, frozen burgers, bread machine mix, frozen potatoes, soups, rice, noodles, etc. Amazing the amount of stuff I've accumulated.

So I'm thinking I can go another two weeks of zero food budget, which is going to save me an insane amount compared to what I usually spend on restaurants, frozen meals and the like. Seems healthier.

I've even got at least one or two more servings of this stuff!

Not sure if anyone is still reading here, but I thought I'd mention that my (grand)father passed away a couple of hours ago.

It's not a terrible shock - he's been declining for, years, really. For a long time he's been asking "why won't jesus take me?" and wanting to die. The past few weeks were getting really difficult.

I'll probably be in Chicago within the next week.

I got called for jury duty this week, got released yesterday, here's the description I wrote for my boss:

I got potentially picked for a jury, gang member with face tattoos, two counts (1) felony possession of firearm, (2) possession of marijuana with intent to sell. 36 brought in, 12 needed, 18 interviewed in the first pass. Defense burned witnesses like crazy, I got brought up the last of 6 more. I would have wound up an alternate for the 6-7 day trial, but...

I said I couldn't convict a guy for possession of marijuana, that I've enjoyed it for 25 years and had a prescription, believed in jury nullification and that the law was without merit. That if it was another drug, like meth, I could be fair, or if it was the gun charge alone. "What about selling it?" "Well, my best friend got through college like that. Look, this guy maybe had a gun, he's obviously not the most friendly salesman in the world, but still, the law is wrong."

The judge threatened me "well, then we'll have to find you a civil case" - with the implication that if I wanted to act like that, he'd damn well find me a six month boring money case. I had to report back to the selection room after lunch. Lovely. Eh, I figured even it went a day or two longer than the last one, it would be better for my safety if this gangbanger didn't see my face for a week - I can tell by his tattoos he was a "Lennox 13" from Van Nuys.

But then, before I could even sit down, I got called back up and handed my certification, I was done. Nice! So, I'm all done. I feel sort of bad that I kinda weaseled out of it, but I stuck to my moral compass and got rewarded :)

a shout out to absent audients

speculation solicited as to the allegory herein

Whoever is out there reading:

Did you know you can send mail TO Black Rock City? Send me a letter or something! My address for the next week is:

Cheruborg
Destiny Lounge
2:00 Portal (near the plaza)
c/o BRCPO
Burning Man
Gerlach, NV 89142

If I've got the postage, I'll even write you back! I'd send it by Wednesday if I were you, though, or else it'll likely bounce.

I'm just about done getting set up to set off tomorrow, arriving at Home on Monday AM.

http://www.blackrockcitypostoffice.org/

Current Location: bakersfield

It's official! I've signed on with Destiny Lounge, practically on the Esplanade at 3:00 - I'd guess you'd call it "3:00 Portal".

Come on by and enjoy lemonade and iced tea, try our games, Fling Of Destiny and Rock Your Balls, and enjoy music by Spirit Fire.

Can't wait to see you all out there!

I remember seeing this live - I recorded the audio on a tape cassette by holding my recorder near the TV and listened to it over and over.

I had planned this tattoo for over a year. Once I decided I wanted the Burning Man logo, I started hunting for the "correct" version, only to find out there wasn't one.

So, I designed this one - my idea of the "ur-logo" - and uploaded it to Wikipedia. I put it on the Burning Man article, and it has been there for well over a year.

Well, I guess it's "official" now! Others have included it in their own Wikipedia efforts, so now it's as close to definitive as something can be, at least in that one semi-important corner of the universe.

I've been putting it off forever, but decided I had to get it before this year's burn, in time to be healed before I get to the playa. Jake at Zap Tattoos on Melrose seemed like the right guy for the right price...

So, here we go!

While I confess to enjoying recreational drugs from time to time, aside from pot (which is, after all, legal medicine :) I use them only rarely and with a great deal of consideration and respect. This includes alcohol, quite possibly the worst of the lot in many ways.

I've really grown quite sick in recent months of being around them constantly. I'm decided to forbid in my apartment, until further notice, any drugs aside from pot and alcohol without advance approval. Perhaps I'll do some when I'm elsewhere ( )'( ?), perhaps I'll change my mind (shrooms?)

But I'm tired of them at the moment, and particularly tired of people who put getting high first on their to-do list, and equally tired of drug dealers. I do like drugs, but I like life better.

Awwww, fuck, that's nice. Do want!

OMFG this is hilarious!

n = 1000
seive = (1..n).to_a
2.upto(Math.sqrt(n)) { |i| (i*2).step(n,i) { |x| seive[x] = nil } }
p seive.compact

see also

wow looks like this guy has me beat
(2..1000).inject((2..1000).to_a) {|res, i| res.select{|n|n==i||n%i!=0} }

Cleaning and test

tasty!

I Am A: Chaotic Neutral Halfling Wizard (6th Level)


Ability Scores:

Strength-12

Dexterity-14

Constitution-16

Intelligence-18

Wisdom-13

Charisma-15


Alignment:
Chaotic Neutral A chaotic neutral character follows his whims. He is an individualist first and last. He values his own liberty but doesn't strive to protect others' freedom. He avoids authority, resents restrictions, and challenges traditions. A chaotic neutral character does not intentionally disrupt organizations as part of a campaign of anarchy. To do so, he would have to be motivated either by good (and a desire to liberate others) or evil (and a desire to make those different from himself suffer). A chaotic neutral character may be unpredictable, but his behavior is not totally random. He is not as likely to jump off a bridge as to cross it. Chaotic neutral is the best alignment you can be because it represents true freedom from both society's restrictions and a do-gooder's zeal. However, chaotic neutral can be a dangerous alignment because it seeks to eliminate all authority, harmony, and order in society.


Race:
Halflings are clever, capable and resourceful survivors. They are notoriously curious and show a daring that many larger people can't match. They can be lured by wealth but tend to spend rather than hoard. They prefer practical clothing and would rather wear a comfortable shirt than jewelry. Halflings stand about 3 feet tall and commonly live to see 150.


Class:
Wizards are arcane spellcasters who depend on intensive study to create their magic. To wizards, magic is not a talent but a difficult, rewarding art. When they are prepared for battle, wizards can use their spells to devastating effect. When caught by surprise, they are vulnerable. The wizard's strength is her spells, everything else is secondary. She learns new spells as she experiments and grows in experience, and she can also learn them from other wizards. In addition, over time a wizard learns to manipulate her spells so they go farther, work better, or are improved in some other way. A wizard can call a familiar- a small, magical, animal companion that serves her. With a high Intelligence, wizards are capable of casting very high levels of spells.


Find out What Kind of Dungeons and Dragons Character Would You Be?, courtesy of Easydamus (e-mail)

Current Music: Howling - Morcheeba