Problematic Gay Rights Agenda...

Polls show that a large sector of American voters support progress in the area of gay rights. Yet the movement has suffered crippling defeats lately in key battles (ballot initiatives in California, Florida and an upcoming referendum on gay marriage in Maine). Even amongst sympathetic politicians, the gay rights movement has slowed. This week President Obama stalled talks on repealing "Don't ask, don't tell" and Barney Frank (an openly gay Senetor) called the upcoming equality march on D.C. a complete waste of time. What is the cause of this disconnect between public opinion and public support?

It seems to be an obvious case of unfocused, alienating, idealism. Here are two solutions I believe would greatly advance the cause:

1)Drop so-called Bisexual and Transgendered issues. What are these issues anyway? Many homosexuals have negative feelings for these groups in the first place. The idea that you can switch of between preferences runs quite counter to the main argument for equality. Also, the impulse to undergo extensive medical engineering to "become" what you were supposed to be is not shared by the gay community which prefers to think of their sexual preference as elemental and natural. Additionally, bisexuality and transgenerism seems to be a perfect poster child for the religious right's depiction of a sexually deviant and psychologically deranged queer. And yet, we can hardly hear any mention of gay rights without the mention of LGBT. The inclusion of these groups alienate straight (and gay) supporters who don't understand or believe in a BT movement. It muddies the message unnecessarily, since a victory for gay rights would be a victory for bisexual and transgendered rights.

2)Get the libertarian vote. Let's be honest, Marriage really is a religious institution. Across almost all cultures that perform marriages, we see marriage is historically a religious ordinance. Gay rights activists would be wise to organize a campaign to separate church and state. Force the supreme court to do what they should have done long ago and restrict the powers of the state to the performance of civil unions. Marriages are done in church, civil unions are done in city hall. Every person is entitled to a secular, state sanctioned civil union, but only members of a religious congregation are entitled that sect's marriage ceremony. The whole thrust of the right's campaign would be undermined. Many conservative libertarians, and religious liberals (like Obama) would suddenly tip the scale the other way. The best part is that it still accomplishes the objective of the gay marriage movement, that is, equality under the law.

Unfortunately I fear that, like most modern political movements, leaders lack the pragmatism and imagination required to unify a nation and achieve true equality. Just like the right-winged religious fundamentalist who oppose gay inclusion, leaders of the gay rights movement have proven to be hardened ideologues; bent on the utter destruction of their opponents.

Is there room for idealism in progressive politics?

I don't know the answer to this. Off the cuff, I say no. I recently heard an interview on This American Life with Brandon Darby of Common Ground fame. He cited one of the major problems with his anarchist-model organization in New Orleans was all the varying unfocused ideals. He gave one major example where many of the kitchen workers refused to serve meals containing meat, because they were vegan.

Universal health care is where I see the largest clash of idealism with progress. The fact is, the overwhelming majority of Americans want some form of government run or mandated health care access for EVERY citizen. This seems like a practical problem with presumably practical solutions. Yet I am still able to indulge my appetite for douche bag demagoguery by watching the Glenn Beck Show and hearing the President's plan will lead to euthanasia, socialism, and big brother government. The Obama plan, while clearly imperfect is a far cry from the type of Maoist rationing this particular ass wipe pundit is predicting.

I'm not opposing romanticism, I am simply wondering if it hinders progress. This might be why I like economists, engineers, scientists. They see problems, find efficient solution and pay no attention to what side of the political spectrum it falls on. They deal in parameters, scope, method, and results; dispassionate and careful.


(I love this guy, from Thai auto-erotic asphyxiation to eugenics...what a lunatic.)

Waltz with Bashir....

Watch it.

I broke my foot....

in Dubai of all places. It was a worksite injury as you might imagine. I wish I had a good story to go with it but I just tripped. The whole ordeal (ER, cast, crutches, drugs, x-rays etc) was only 1795 dirham. WET paid for it all.

I live in Dubai.....

My morning walk....

My office......

My shop...

My work clothes...

My tower....

My view....

Nihilist

The human species is destined to exercise its unprecedented ability to utterly destroy itself. Accept it. Realize that because annihilation is an unavoidable reality, there is a limited amount of enjoyment to be had by human beings. Enjoyment isn't some kind of hedonistic indulgence, in fact that's what has put us on a collision course with extinction. This is enjoyment, as pure as it comes:

To follow up...

with my post form yesterday, here is a little something that the Hubble telescope picked up in the sky recently:


That is a picture of an extrasolar planet revolving around the star, Fomalhaut. We can measure and detect around 350 extrasolar planets but this is the first visible evidence of such. Amazing!