Maybe I’ve been neglectful of y’all, truth be told I’ve been having a great time and was just a tad busy to drop back by.  I tried to do a ComicCon post, but I think I’ll let the photos and their captions tell the story for me.  We had a great time and the photos prove it.

Since then there’s been lots of work.   And a new living room set, with photos forthcoming once the lamps arrive and the new print gets back from the framer.  And Randy starts school again next week, which has left me crashing on the website his kids use for homework and collaborative projects (their very own little child-safe wiki), bringing it up to spec from last year’s feedback and expanding into a few new areas.

Then today a very nice federal judge all the way up in San Francisco said some very nice things.  Lots of them actually, written down on 138 pages.  Hopefully that will lead to us being able to attend more fabulous gay weddings at some point in the future.  Everyone should have the right to be a Party B.

So yes, even though Randy’s up at UCLA for the week, Diego and I are doing the happy dance tonight.  We’re having a good life.

The traditional gift for the second anniversary of a marriage seems to be cotton. This year may be unique though with Judge Walker setting closing arguments in the Proposition 8 trial for June 16, one day before the second anniversary of hundreds (thousands?) of same-sex couples in California, and two days before our own anniversary.

Even though paper is supposed to be for the first anniversary, I’d overlook the faux pas if Judge Walker’s planning on issuing a favorable order for the big day.  Who would I be to say no?  Would I return it doesn’t come printed on something cottony, say big fluffy beach towels? No, that would be rude.  Not quite as rude as the people who tried to end our marriage, but rude none the less, and we couldn’t have that mar our celebrating.

If anyone else wants to help us celebrate, or drop a copy of the order by while wearing something cottony, we’ll be back at The Cliffs celebrating our anniversary.  Look for us poolside or follow the sounds of a fluffy little dog complaining he’s not getting enough attention.

‘Insurance’ to make sure there are no ‘misunderstandings.’ A protection racket to give the (mythical?) gay mafia a bit of a bite. Does a business that gives to the Human Rights Campaign buy themselves a get-out-of-jail-free card to use in their other endeavors?

That certainly seems to be what Garff Automotive’s John Garff is suggesting should be the case at the end of this article.  Californians Against Hate has called for a boycott against Garff Automotive in response to $100,000 in donations supporting Proposition 8 made by the wife of the Chairman and CEO of the dealership.  Included in Garff’s response is the claim that the dealership gave money to the Human Rights Campaign and offers a “favorable” benefits package to employees in same-sex partnerships.

I’m not much of a fan of the HRC, and I can easily see how a company could have believed that a donation to the HRC was enough to buy protection and escape scrutiny for the balance of their treatment of their neighbors.  Not too long ago a little gift to the Rainbow Don probably could have bought a lot of protection.

But not anymore.  If nothing else, the aftermath of the Proposition 8 defeat showed just how little Human Rights Campaign and the rest of the self-appointed gay leadership actually lead in the 21st century.  There are protests they don’t vet and spokespeople they don’t know.  There are thousands of websites that they absolutely can’t control, and maybe, hopefully, they’re finally realizing that their only real contribution in recent years was the ubiquitous yacht club decal for the car bumper that allowed us to identify one another in strange neighborhoods.

The boycott of Garff itself means little to me directly.  They have no local dealerships, and I’m not in the market for a car anyways.  That said, I hope it sticks, and I hope it hurts, because every dime they don’t earn is hopefully a few fewer pennies Katherine Garff can give in future battles for marriage equality.  But boycott list or not, I will not give money to people who will use that money to take away my rights and attack my family.  From the local gas station that proudly displayed their Yes on 8 signs and all the way up the economic food chain, when I have a choice about doing business with someone who will try and hurt me and my family, my business has to go elsewhere.  No matter how much protection’s been paid to the Rainbow Don.

The day after my 45th birthday, on the 260th day of my marriage, the California Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on the legal cases arising from Proposition 8.  That gives us a ruling by the first week of June.   Should be an interesting spring.

But U.S. District Judge Morrison England, after a one-hour hearing in Sacramento, said California’s $100 reporting requirement – adopted by the voters in 1974 – is a valid means of informing the public about the financing of ballot measure campaigns.

“If there ever needs to be sunshine on a particular issue, it’s a ballot measure,” England said, observing that initiatives are often sponsored by committees with misleading names. [S.F. Gate]

It’s been interesting seeing the supporters of Proposition 8 running for cover since the election. Privacy in the ballot box is one thing, but when it comes to political activity, whether it’s direct advocacy like advertising or spamming or blogging or planting yard signs, or financing the advocacy, the people have a right to know who’s behind these initiatives and what their motives are.

Poor Focus On The Family has hit financial straits and is being forced to lay off 202 employees, about 20% of their workforce. I probably should feel some sympathy, but not this time. They just spent $500,000 trying to take away my health insurance and other spousal benefits, not to mention make me a second-class citizen in my home state. I probably should be feeling sympathy and charity, because I was raised that way, but the word that keeps coming to mind is karma. Karma’s a wonderful concept. Maybe if you’d focussed more on your families, and kept your nose out of mine…

Five thousand words about last night’s No on 8 rally are over in the photo gallery. Maybe a few more than that if you count the captions.

Had a good conversation with some similarly situated folks at a Halloween party last night. Long and the short of it was a consensus that the battle over marriage equality won’t be ending Tuesday. If the Mormons lose, they’ll just come back in two years with more money. If the initiative passes, it just means years and years of litigation and uncertainty. Significant venting, even before the drinks kicked in, over the softness and group-hugginess of the No on Proposition 8 commercials that actually make it to the airwaves. Maybe it’s what the so-called marketing experts think is needed, but I think a lot of gays in the streets are getting really tired of being nice and polite while being called second-class citizens. Like their earlier video on marital “equipment checks“, Courage Campaign’s new video cuts to the chase about the 900-pound gorilla in the room in California’s battle over Proposition 8.

If they can do this to California, who will be next? You know they won’t stop here.

There’s a good article in the Union-Tribune on the new Field Poll released today on Proposition 8′s chances in November.  While the big numbers (55% opposed) are encouraging, the article has a rare but informative breakdown on the demographics of the two sides.

When the Field Poll is broken down into 18 political and demographic subgroups, majority support for Proposition 8 is evident in only four: voters who call themselves conservatives (72 percent), Republicans (66 percent), evangelical Christians (60 percent) and Protestants (52 percent).

Majority opposition appears among almost all the rest: self-described liberals (91 percent), Democrats (75 percent), people with no religious preference or a religious preference other than Protestant or Catholic (71 percent), people who have done some post-graduate work (68 percent), voters who consider themselves middle-of-the-road (58 percent), residents of coastal counties (57 percent), voters unaffiliated with either major political party (56 percent), Catholics (55 percent), women (55 percent) and men (54 percent).

There’s also a good discussion in the article on how responses varied depending on how the initiative was characterized.  Apparantly voters are less inclined to take away a right then to block a new one from coming into existence.  

Sometimes a little slapstick among “friends” is fun. Like when the Three Stooges turn on each other, or when Hillary and Barack take shots at each other, or the strippers start wrestling in Jello.   You know they’re going to make up in the end, or at least pretend to, but sitting on the sidelines and watching them fight is just, well, entertaining. 

So, as summarized by one of the other bystanders sitting at the virtual drool rail:

“There appears to be some disagreement between the two groups,” said Shannon Minter, legal director of the San Francisco-based National Center for Lesbian Rights, one of the groups that filed the lawsuit to challenge Prop 8.

“They realize the tide of history is against them,” he said. “They are becoming more desperate and shrill, and under those circumstances, divisions tend to emerge.”

Apparantly there are differences of opinion between the supporters of Propostion 8 over who has better shown their wacky views, and thus who can better represent them in court.  I’ve hated longer.  But my hate is deeper.  So, yes, this law.com article is lawyer geek stuff, but it’s fun to read.   Except it would be nice if both groups would just drown in the Jello.