Gratitude Project #2

I missed Tuesday, so I'll make it up with two things today - my cats, Sylvester and Frank, for being (mostly) little furry stress relievers and mattress warmers.

And, because the Internet is for cats, here are Frank and Sylvester, in order:

Well, I'll be ...

A U.S. district judge has ruled that California's Prop 8 ban on gay marriage is unconstitutional. You can read the Reuters article here.

Thanks to kyburg for linking to the copy of the order online. I particularly enjoyed this bit:

In the absence of a rational basis, what remains of proponents’ case is an inference, amply supported by evidence in the record, that Proposition 8 was premised on the belief that same-sex couples simply are not as good as opposite-sex couples. FF 78-80. Whether that belief is based on moral disapproval of homosexuality, animus towards gays and lesbians or simply a belief that a relationship between a man and a woman is inherently better than a relationship between two men or two women, this belief is not a proper basis on which to legislate.

YOU CANNOT MAKE LAWS FOR EVERYBODY BASED ON THE MYTHOLOGY YOU CHOOSE TO LIVE YOUR OWN LIFE BY.

It's that simple. There is nothing in banning or punishing same-sex marriage that "protects" society. It's not murder. It's not rape. It's not child molestation (though I know people who believe all gays can't be trusted around children simply because they're gay. It boggles the mind. Because you know there are NO straight pedophiles). It's not stealing or armed robbery, or terrorism. It's two adults doing whatever else they please and creating a legal contract to do so, AND IT'S NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS. OR MINE.

Or look at it this way: If I can legally fly out to Vegas tomorrow and marry Taylor Lautner, a boy half my age whom I don't even know - and he agrees to it - then what legal argument can you possibly advance against the due consideration of any two adults who have been together for a length of time, no matter their gender?