Wednesday, December 31, 2008

New Year's Eve

I neglected to mention that Sun was my 4 year blogiversary! Hard to believe, but its true. What kind of gift does one give for the 4th year? According to this website its flowers, fruit, and appliances. Any and all virtual gifts will be warmly received and appreciated!

Well, its New Year's Eve and I am tempted to make a few resolutions. Most people speak disparagingly about New Year's resolutions, since most are not resolutions at all, but rather, wishful intentions that are forgotten within a week.

Here are the top 10 most frequent New Year's resolutions:

  1. Diet
  2. Quit smoking
  3. Exercise
  4. Quit drinking
  5. Quit procrastinating
  6. Save money
  7. Go to church
  8. Wake up early
  9. Quit cursing
  10. Read the newspaper

I, on the other hand, like to make a few resolutions each year that I really work to achieve. I also make sure my resolutions are measurable so I will know for sure I have accomplished them. "Stop procrastinating" is not a good resolution, as there is no real way to measure whether or not you've done this.

One year my resolution was to entertain on a regular basis. Spouse & I picked a weekend in every month and invited friends over for dinner both Fri and Sat nights. We did it, too, and had a LOT of fun. The dinners were often simple, and we ate casually in the kitchen instead of the formal dining room. It also forced us to do a really good/deep housecleaning once a month.

Another year my resolution was to sort, throw away, organize and file several bags/boxes of paperwork (ie: bank statements, paystubs, real estate documents, insurance documents, etc.) we had accumulated over several years. We did this, too, and will never again let our paperwork get out of hand. It was so frustrating to KNOW we had our car titles and birth certificates SOMEWHERE, but not be able to find them when we needed them.

This year my resolution is to enrich other peoples' lives (and my own) by doing something unexpected and nice for them, at least once a month for the entire year. Such random acts of kindness could include sending a friend a funny e-card for no special reason, sending Spouse flowers to his office for no special occasion, making cookies or brownies for a neighbor, donating to a charity, you get the picture.

Tonight Spouse & I are going to a New Year's Eve party at a friend's house, but I think we will sneak out at 11:30. Why would we leave a New Year's Eve party before midnight? Well, a neighbor told me that a neighbor on a nearby street rigs up his very own 'dropping of the ball' at midnight, and I want to see it! Apparently neighbors gather shortly before midnight to watch and enjoy this miniature replica of the famous Times Square event.

Whatever your plans tonight, I wish you a SAFE and FUN New Year's Eve celebration, and a...

I leave you with this.

Crush du Jour: Anton Antipov

Tuesday, December 30, 2008

Scare

Our dog Jordan gave us a bit of a scare.

On Sun we noticed that her right eye seemed to be rolled up in her head. We could only see 1/2 of the colored area and a lot of white area below it. The other eye seemed normal.

My 1st thought was that her retina may have become detached. Dogs that shake their heads a lot can literally shake their retina loose. Our friends Kerry & Hugh's dog Chopper had to have emergency eye surgery to reattach his retina last year. Not only was it highly inconvenient for them to have to take off work and drive Chopper from VA to Chicago for the operation, it was extremely expensive. I knew retina issues have a definite 'shelf life'. You can't just put them off a little while like other surgeries.

Normally I'm the type of person who will 'give it a few days' to see if symptoms go away on their own. But because we thought there might be a problem with her retina, we felt time was of the essence, so we made the decision to call the vet 1st thing Mon morning.

Fortunately, Jordan's eye seemed better (less rolled up in her head) than the day before, but not back to normal yet. Although her eye appeared to be fixing itself, we took her to the vet anyway, just to be on the safe side.

Happily the vet's examination determined she did not have a detached retina or glaucoma or a scratched lens. The vet wasn't absolutely positive, but believed the eye got irritated by something, although there was no discharge or excess tearing. The vet also offered the possible explanation of an irritated nerve in her face that could also cause the eye to roll back.

We were given a small bottle of eye drops and instructions to give Jordan 1 drop 3 times a day. The vet felt confident it would soothe the irritation. Already her eye seems to be closer to normal than yesterday, so we're relieved.

The great thing is that there is no eye discharge, no excessive tearing, and she's not rubbing her eye area with her paw at all. In fact, she doesn't appear to have any idea there is/was a problem, which is the best!

Crush du Jour: Lior Ashkenazi

Monday, December 29, 2008

Can anyone explain this?

6 months ago...

3 days ago...
Can anyone explain why gas is now just 1/3 the price it was 6 months ago? I mean, I'm happy that gas has returned to a reasonable price, but how did it get so high back in the summer? I feel a bit manipulated.
I'm also concerned that low gas prices will make short-sighted consumers less concerned about pressing our government to insist on alternative energy sources. Certainly history tells us these low prices won't last.

Crush du Jour: Paul Francis

Sunday, December 28, 2008

Christmas highlights

We arrived at Spouse's mom's house Tues at 9pm, and as usual her house was like an oven. Rather than heeding my advice, given to him in the car on our way to her house, that Spouse not argue with her about the thermostat but simply lower it when she wasn't looking, he argued with her. Fortunately, they don't hold grudges so 10 minutes after the argument they'd both all but forgotten it. (FYI - Spouse's mom keeps the door to our bedroom closed so the heat doesn't go in, and we close the heat vent and cover it with a large telephone book. This keeps our bedroom at a comfortable temperature.)

Wed evening, Christmas eve, we went to Spouse's sister's house to celebrate their mom's 79th birthday. Spouse's brothers Frank, Paul, and Louis were also there with their families. We had a very nice time eating and talking. We gave Spouse's mom a ring and earrings set that she loved. I had brought all the left over cookies, pies, and dessert squares from our party, so they were placed on the dining table with pies and cookies brought or given by others. We also had a birthday cake.

Thurs, Christmas day, I picked up my aunt Mary and brought her to Spouse's mom's house and we exchanged gifts with her. A little later we all went to Spouse's sister's house for Christmas dinner, which consisted of stuffed shells, gnocchi, meatballs, hot and sweet sausages in tomato sauce, salad, garlic bread, and orange sherbet/jello mold. For dessert we had more of the left over desserts I'd brought. After dinner we played 'Rock Band' on their Wii, which was a lot of fun.

Fri was supposed to be the day Spouse & I would visit my friend Lisa, with whom we stayed in NYC, followed by a visit with my cousin and her husband. Unfortunately both had to be cancelled because I woke up with a vagus nerve flare up. For some people overstimulation of the vagus nerve results in fainting. For me it results in extreme dizziness and vomiting. There is no "cure", and the only treatment that works for me is to lie down until it goes away. This usually takes 8-10 hours for me, which is why we had to cancel our visits. Bummer. I was finally able to sit upright at around 6pm so Spouse, his mom and I ate dinner and watched TV the rest of the night. Spouse's sister, brother-in-law, and their kids came over for a while, which was nice.

Sat morning Spouse, his mom, and I met his sister for breakfast at Silver Diner, then packed up the car and came home. It was a nice holiday, but I was quite happy to get home. As usual, our dog Jordan was a pain in the neck at Spouse's mom's house, spitting up and peeing several times in the house, which she rarely does at home. I swear, that dog gives us a fit when we take her to Spouse's mom's.

It was so warm yesterday that I went for a walk around town with no jacket. Someone said it was 70 degrees. Spouse & I tried a new Italian restaurant for dinner but didn't like it, then I went to the Purple Parrot to sing karaoke. My friend Tony was there so we sat together. I also saw Danny and Dougie, Russ, and Mark.

Today was another very warm day. We went for a walk on the boardwalk and saw people in shorts and flip flops - on December 28th! We also saw people driving with their convertible tops down. This must be what its like to spend Christmas in the FL or southern CA.

Crush du Jour: Bernardo Melo Berneto

Saturday, December 27, 2008

Home Sweet Home

Ah, home at last.

We had a great Christmas with the family, but I am quite happy to be back home. Details tomorrow.

Crush du Jour: Patrick Warburton

Wednesday, December 24, 2008

Words to live by

Merry Christmas eve! Spouse & I are visiting with his mom today, and will be getting together with the rest of the family this evening to celebrate her birthday and Christmas eve. But I'm thinking of you all and created this post in advance.

A friend sent this to me in an email. I found a lot of wisdom in these words so I want to share them with you. Print them and hang them in a conspicuous place. Copy and paste them into an email and share them with those you love. Enjoy!



  1. Take a 10-30 minute walk every day. And while you walk, smile. It is the ultimate anti-depressant.
  2. Sit in silence for at least 10 minutes each day. Talk to God about what is going on in your life. Buy a lock for the door if you have to.
  3. When you wake up in the morning complete the following statement "My purpose is to __________ today. I am thankful for______________."
  4. Eat more food that grows on trees and plants, and eat less food that is manufactured in plants.
  5. Drink green tea and plenty of water. Eat blueberries, wild Alaskan salmon, broccoli, almonds and walnuts.
  6. Try to make at least three people smile each day.
  7. Don't waste your precious energy on gossip, energy vampires, issues of the past, negative thoughts or things you cannot control. Instead invest your energy in the positive present moment.
  8. Eat breakfast like a king, lunch like a prince and dinner like a college kid with a maxed out charge card.
  9. Life isn't fair, but it's still good.
  10. Life is too short to waste time hating anyone.
  11. Don't take yourself so seriously. No one else does.
  12. You are not so important that you have to win every argument. Agree to disagree.
  13. Make peace with your past so it won't spoil the present.
  14. Don't compare your life to others. You have no idea what their journey is all about.
  15. No one is in charge of your happiness except you.
  16. Frame every so-called disaster with these words: "In five years, will this really matter?"
  17. Forgive everyone for everything.
  18. What other people think of you is none of your business.
  19. GOD heals everything - but you have to ask Him.
  20. However good or bad a situation is, it will change.
  21. Your job won't take care of you when you are sick. Your friends will. Stay in touch!!!
  22. Envy is a waste of time. You already have all you need.
  23. Each night before you go to bed complete the following statements: "Today I am thankful for __________. Today I accomplished _________."
  24. Remember that you are too blessed to be stressed.
  25. When you are feeling down, start listing your many blessings. You'll be smiling before you know it.

Crush du Jour: Ryan Lochte

Tuesday, December 23, 2008

Merry Christmas, Darlings

I got my Christmas present today: the garage called and said Big Ella was ready to come home!

Yes, she's been in the shop for over a month, getting a tune up, brakes replaced, a new exhaust, and assorted other little things. The hold up was the exhaust, which was fabricated and shipped from Ohio. Spouse took today off so he was available when they called to drive me to the garage to pick up my baby. I only drove her back home, since she has no tags yet. Next week I'll drive her to the DMV for her inspection and tags. I'm so excited! Christmas miracles really do come true!

After I finish work today I'm going to deliver the gift baskets I made for our neighbors, which contain Christmas coffee mugs, flavored coffees, gourmet cocoa, 2 small ornaments, some Reese's peanut butter cups, and a candy cane. Then we'll load up the CRV and head to Spouse's mom's house for the next 3 1/2 days.

Spouse's mom doesn't own a computer and I'm not taking my laptop from work. Honestly, I am not so addicted that I can't be without internet access for a couple of days. But although I will be out of touch during that time, it doesn't mean you don't need to comment! I will eagerly await our return home on Sat so I can read all of your comments. And I've prepared some posts for the next couple of days that I hope you'll enjoy.

So, tonight we'll hang out with Spouse's mom. Tomorrow Spouse will make home made pasta with his sister and her kids (a Christmas eve tradition) so I will probably just hang out there with them. When they go to church Spouse & I will hang out at his mom's. (Spouse will probably take a nap.) Then around 6pm we'll reconvene at Spouse's sister's house to celebrate their mom's birthday. Yep, her birthday is on Christmas eve. She'll be 79.

On Christmas day we'll hang out at Spouse's mom's until about 2pm, then go over to his sister's again for Christmas dinner and gift opening for the kids. (The adults aren't exchanging gifts this year.)

On Fri Spouse & I are meeting up with my school friend Lisa, whom we visited in Oct on our trip to NYC. That evening we're meeting up with my cousin Nez and her husband Steve for dinner. We're heading home on Sat.

I'm now reminded of the lyrics to my favorite Carpenters Christmas song "Merry Christmas, Darling":
"Greeting cards have all been sent. The Christmas rush is through.
But I still have one wish to make, a special one for you.
Merry Christmas, Darling. We're apart, that's true.
But I can dream, and in my dreams I'm Christmasing with you.
Holidays are joyful, there's always something new.
Every day's a holiday, when I'm with you.
The lights on my tree, I wish you could see, I wish it everyday.
Logs on the fire fill me with desire to see you and to say,
that I wish you Merry Christmas. Happy New Year, too.
I've just one wish on this Christmas eve: I wish I were with you.
I wish I were with you."

Yes my dear blogger friends, I wish you Merry Christmas, Darlings. I wish I were with you!

Crush du Jour: Luke MacFarlane

Monday, December 22, 2008

The party

The party was a smashing success!

Fri I took off work and baked all day long. Literally, I started at 9:30 and took the last stuff out of the oven at 4:30. But making everything the day before was definitely the right thing to do.

Sat Spouse & I cleaned the house from top to bottom, all 3,770 square feet. Then I finished distributing the candles and other decorations around the living room, powder room, foyer, dining room, kitchen, family room, and bathroom on the main level where most guests would be.

I was lamenting what to do about the stack of Christmas cards we'd received. I'd tossed them into a large glass bowl after Spouse & I read each one, but didn't think that looked very nice. Then it hit me. I grabbed some wide plaid Christmas ribbon ribbon, cut it into 4 equal lengths, and stapled the cards to the ribbon. Then I used push pins to hang the ribbons on the wall in the foyer. They looked like this:
The cards were pretty to begin with, but by hanging them on the pretty ribbon they became lovely decorations too! Although I didn't invent this idea, I did pat myself on the back for thinking of it.

After putting the gold table cloths on the dining room and breakfast room tables, I got out all the platters, cake pedestals, cookie trees, punch bowl, coffee pots, and various serving pieces I thought we might need. Basically everything was set up except the food.

Spouse & I both showered, then went to a lovely birthday party for our friend Bill, hosted by his partner Dean at their house nearby. We had a good time, and it was nice to stop thinking/worrying/obsessing about the details of our party for a while and just enjoy talking and being with folks.

When we returned home we sliced all the desserts and placed them on the various serving pieces, started the coffee pots, made the punch, poured the eggnog in the pitcher, lowered the lights with the new dimmers, and started lighting all the candles as the 1st 2 guests arrived. All our hard work paid off; everything was ready and the house looked great. We had a total of 40 friends and neighbors attend. Unfortunately 6 more had to cancel due to being sick.

We had a great time! I heard friends recommending certain items they liked to others trying to decide was to eat. Spouse & I mingled among our friends and tried to have short conversations with everyone, although we were rarely together. We feel its best to split up so one can keep an eye on the food/drinks and refill when needed while the other greets people near the door and visits with those not near the food. It works well for us.

Several friends brought us ornaments, wine, and goodies to eat later, which was so kind!

After the last guests left, Spouse & I sat in the living room with our coffee and gazed at the fireplace and Christmas tree for a few minutes before 'comparing notes'. I told him about the conversations I'd had and he told me about his as we recapped the party. Then we put away the left over food and went to bed.

What a wonderful way to enjoy and spread holiday cheer!

Crush du Jour: Jeremy Santucci

Saturday, December 20, 2008

Bad move, Obama!

Gay leaders furious with Obama

Barack Obama’s choice of a prominent evangelical minister to deliver the invocation at his inauguration is a conciliatory gesture toward social conservatives who opposed him in November, but it is drawing fierce challenges from a gay rights movement that — in the wake of a gay marriage ban in California — is looking for a fight.

Rick Warren, the senior pastor of Saddleback Church in Southern California, opposes abortion rights but has taken more liberal stances on the government's role in fighting poverty, and backed away from other evangelicals’ staunch support for economic conservatism. But it’s his support for the California constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage that drew the most heated criticism from Democrats Wednesday.

“Your invitation to Reverend Rick Warren to deliver the invocation at your inauguration is a genuine blow to LGBT Americans,” the president of Human Rights Campaign, Joe Solomonese, wrote to Obama Wednesday. “[W]e feel a deep level of disrespect when one of architects and promoters of an anti-gay agenda is given the prominence and the pulpit of your historic nomination.

The rapid, angry reaction from a range of gay activists comes as the gay rights movement looks for an opportunity to flex its political muscle. Last summer gay groups complained, but were rebuffed by Obama, when an “ex-gay” singer led Obama’s rallies in South Carolina. And many were shocked last month when voters approved the California ban.

“There is a lot of energy and there’s a lot of anger and I think people are wanting to direct it somewhere,” Solomonese told Politico. The selection of Warren to preside at the inauguration is not a surprise move, but it is a mirror image of President Bill Clinton’s early struggles with gay rights issues. Obama has worked, and at times succeeded, to bridge the gap between Democrats and evangelical Christians, who form a solid section of the Republican base. Obama opposes same-sex marriage, but also opposed the California constitutional amendment Warren backed. In selecting Warren, he is choosing to reach out to conservatives on a hot-button social issue, at the cost of antagonizing gay voters who overwhelmingly supported him.

Clinton, by contrast, drew early praise from gay rights activists by pressing to allow openly gay soldiers to serve, only to retreat into the “don’t ask, don’t tell” compromise that pleased few.
The reaction Wednesday in gay rights circles was universally negative. “It’s a huge mistake,” said California gay rights activist Rick Jacobs, who chairs the state’s Courage Campaign. “He’s really the wrong person to lead the president into office.

Can you imagine if he had a man of God doing the invocation who had deliberately said that Jews are not going to be saved and therefore should be excluded from what’s going on in America? People would be up in arms,” he said.

The editor of the Washington Blade, Kevin Naff, called the choice “Obama’s first big mistake.”

“His presence on the inauguration stand is a slap in the faces of the millions of GLBT voters who so enthusiastically supported him,” Naff wrote, referring to gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered people. “This tone-deafness to our concerns must not be tolerated. We have just endured eight years of endless assaults on our dignity and equality from a president beholden to bigoted conservative Christians. The election was supposed to have ended that era. It appears otherwise.”

Other liberal groups chimed in. “Rick Warren gets plenty of attention through his books and media appearances. He doesn’t need or deserve this position of honor,” said the president of People for the American Way, Kathryn Kolbert, who described Warren as “someone who has in recent weeks actively promoted legalized discrimination and denigrated the lives and relationships of millions of Americans.”

Warren’s spokeswoman did not respond to a message seeking comment, but he has tried to blend personal tolerance with doctrinal disapproval of homosexuality. “I have many gay friends. I’ve eaten dinner in gay homes. No church has probably done more for people with AIDS than Saddleback Church,” he said in a recent interview with BeliefNet. In the same interview, he compared the “redefiniton of a marrige” to include gay marriage to legitimizing incest, child abuse, and polygamy.

Obama’s move may deepen some apparent distance between him among gays and lesbians, one of the very few core Democratic groups among whom his performance was worse than John Kerry’s in 2004. Exit polls suggested that John McCain won 27 percent of the gay vote in November, up four points from Bush’s 2004 tally - even as almost all other voters slid toward Obama.

But despite the symbolism of picking Warren, Obama is likely to shift several substantive policy areas in directions that will please gay voters and their political leaders, including a pledge to end “don’t ask, don’t tell” in military service. And some gay activists were holding out hope that they would either persuade Obama to dump Warren or Warren to change his mind.

Rick Warren did a real disservice to gay families in California and across the country by casually supporting our continued exclusion from marriage,” said the founder of the pro-same sex marriage Freedom to Marry, Evan Wolfson. “I hope in the spirit of the new era that’s dawning, he will open his heart and speak to all Americans about inclusion and our country’s commitment to equality.”
------------------

In a related note, The Associated Press reports that Obama's inauguration will feature a performance by singer Aretha Franklin. Let us all pray to the diety of one's choice that:
1. Obama changes his mind about having Warren give the invocation
2. Aretha wears a dress that covers her gigantic, saggy arms


Crush du Jour: Xavier Samuel

Friday, December 19, 2008

Preparations

Happy Friday, everyone! As I mentioned last week, I took off work today in order to prepare for our holiday open house tomorrow night.

Today has been (and still is) all about baking. Thank you to those who sent the recipes! Today I made a batch of chocolate chip pecan cookies, a batch of cranberry oatmeal walnut cookies, 2 'holiday' pumpkin pies, and a big pan of sweet potato shuffle.

I still have yet to make the coconut cheesecake squares, the butterscotch cheesecake squares, the chocolate chip brownies, and the peanut butter chip brownies. I ran out of eggs, so I'm off to the grocery now.

If the evite responses are to be believed, we'll have about 45 friends and neighbors here for the party tomorrow night. I'm excited!

Tonight we're having dinner with 'the usual suspects', and tomorrow will be all about the housecleaning. Then we're off to a birthday party tomorrow from 2-5, then back home to set up for our party at 7:30.

Remember, its not too late to submit your Christmas tree photos!

Crush du Jour: Matus Valent

Thursday, December 18, 2008

Butch sissy?

Last night after dinner I installed 2 dimmer switches. I used a power tool.

Now, don't sound so shocked! Just because the name of this blog is 'Tales of the Sissy' doesn't mean I can't assert my (admittedly rusty) butch side now and then.

Stop laughing!!!

As my blogger profile states: 'Tales of the Sissy' is a play on words related to Armistead Maupin's novel 'Tales of the City' which chronicles the daily lives of several seemingly unrelated people. Since my blog will chronicle my daily life (although I am not promising to post daily) and I am gay (hence the stereotype 'sissy'), I decided to call my blog 'Tales of the Sissy'.

Four years ago this month when I started this blog I decided to 'take back' the term 'sissy'. By 'claiming' that word I prevent anyone who uses it toward me from being able to hurt me with it. Yes, I 'own' my sissy-ality!!!

In fact, there are some gay men who desire sissies. I once met a sissy and his long-term partner at a Christmas party, but that's a whole 'nother blog entry.

That being said, nobody's called me a sissy since 3rd grade. But the concept still holds true.

Those of you who know me in 'real life' in addition to my cyber portrayal of myself here know that I'm not a sissy all the time. Sure, I can be limp-wristed and catty and dish the dirt with the best of the sissies, but that's not who I am most of the time. I simply reserve the right to show my sissy-ality now and then, and without shame.

But most of the time I'm just a regular guy. I can't arrange flowers or do hair, although I admire those who can. And occasionally I use power tools, like my Ryobi cordless drill/screw driver.

Man, that thing is awesome! I use it on almost every project.

I was quite pleased with myself after successfully installing the dimmer switches last night without electrocuting myself. Actually its quite easy, just be sure to turn the circuit breaker off first, and then follow the directions on the dimmer package.

On Sat night when we have our holiday open house we'll be able to have just the right amount of light coming from the dining room chandelier and the living room ceiling fixture.

And as every good sissy knows, proper lighting isn't just important - its EVERYTHING!

Crush du Jour: Matt Riddlehoover

Wednesday, December 17, 2008

Christmas survey

Here's a cute little Christmas survey a friend sent me. I've answered each question so you can get to know a little more about my Christmas preferences, and included a few photos (from the internet). As always, your comments are welcomed! Feel free to do this on your blog, too!

1. Wrapping paper or gift bags?
Usually wrapping paper. I really enjoy wrapping gifts, but I occasionally use gift bags for bulky items and gifts with no box.
2. Natural tree or artificial?
We used to get natural trees because Spouse likes their smell and irregular shape so your tree doesn't look the same every year. But they seemed to get more expensive every year so we bought an artificial tree, which I find SO much easier to decorate.

3. When do you put up the tree?
Either the weekend after Thanksgiving or the 1st weekend in Dec.

4. When do you take the tree down?
The 1st or 2nd weekend in Jan.

5. Do you like eggnog?
I love it, but Spouse does not, so I get to drink the entire carton myself.
6. Favorite gift received as a child?
I was raised in the Jehovah's Witnesses religion so we did not celebrate Christmas. My 1st Christmas was the year I turned 30.

7. Hardest person to buy for?
Spouse's brother and sister-in-law because they have EVERYTHING!

8. Easiest person to buy for?
Spouse's mom. She loves and wears a lot of different jewelry so its always easy to find something she'll like.

9. Do you have a nativity scene?
Spouse had one when we met, but we don't put it up. Its pretty cheesy looking and we have plenty of gorgeous decorations, so the nativity scene doesn't usually get unpacked.

10. Mail or email Christmas cards?
I use a combination of methods. For neighbors I hand deliver. For people for whom I have a physical address, I mail them. For people for whom I do not have a physical address I email.
11. Worst Christmas gift you ever received?
A pad of post-it notes.

12. Favorite Christmas Movie?
I don't really have one, although we always seem to watch 'The Poseidon Adventure' sometime during the Christmas season. It takes place on New Years Eve, but they still have the Christmas decorations up on the ship.

13. When do you start shopping for Christmas?
I try to pick up things all through the year, as I see things that remind me of each person. But our real, earnest shopping usually begins around Thanksgiving.

14. Have you ever recycled a Christmas present?
Yes. It was a shirt I didn't like. I gave it to a nephew 3-4 years later. He got other things from us that year, too. The re-gifted shirt was more of a 'bonus'.

15. Favorite thing to eat at Christmas?
Cookies, pies, cakes, rum balls, dark chocolate covered cherries, anything sweet.

16. White or colored lights on the tree?
Although Spouse prefers the multi-color lights, I prefer the white lights.

17. Favorite Christmas song?
'The Christmas Song' (Chestnuts Roasting on an Open Fire) and 'Merry Christmas, Darling, as sung by the Carpenters.

18. Travel at Christmas or stay home?
Travel, but just 2 1/2 hours back to VA where our family lives.

19. Can you name all of Santa’s reindeer?
Yes, thanks to the Christmas carol 'Rudolph the Red-nose Reindeer': Dasher, Dancer, Prancer, Vixen, Comet, Cupid, Donner, Blitzen, and Rudolph.

20. Angel on the tree top or a star?
Neither, we have a shiny red topper with glitter on it.

21. Open presents Christmas Eve or morning?
Christmas afternoon

22. Most annoying thing about this time of the year?
Right-wing religious nutcases who get mad at businesses for not using the word 'Christmas', but using the word 'Holidays' instead.

23. Favorite ornament theme or color?
I like them all, but the brighter, more sparkly, more glittery the better!

24. Favorite for Christmas dinner?
Home made pasta. Spouse and his sister and her kids usually make home made pasta on Christmas eve, which we eat for Christmas dinner the next day.

25. What do you want for Christmas this year?
Peace, and for Big Ella's new exhaust to finally be delivered to the garage.

26. Will you bake any cookies?
Yes, we're having a holiday open house this coming Sat so I will be baking cookies and other scrumptious goodies (recipes from fellow bloggers) on Fri.



Crush du Jour: Bernardo Velasco

Tuesday, December 16, 2008

Good judgement

This is NOT the way to keep from getting busted for sleeping in class! Dude, try some coffee or Jolt cola.

Umm, I think you can stop dieting now, Karen.



Okay, I'm pretty sure this photo is fake, but if its not, this is just creepy. Don't allow anyone to take your picture while doing this.

Just buy another iPhone, for Chrissakes!

Goodyear called. They want their
zeppelins back.

Now, I have no problem with men who like to dress up in women's clothes. I just don't want it forced down my throat. Keep it in the bedroom where it belongs, Mister!

What? Mariah Carey lost 10 lbs???

When you send a bogus photo to someone with whom you want to hook up, don't you think they're gonna notice when they meet you in person?

For the life of me, I can't figure out from the venue or attire what the 'celebration' is for.

Very crafty, but I see it more as a 'hostess outfit' rather than than subway attire. But that's just me.

Why even bother with the strings? Why not just walk around completely naked? Oh, and that large, winding tatoo does NOT make your ass look gigantic at all.

I have a feeling we'll be reading about these guys in the next 'Darwin Awards'.

I bet she was popular with the boys in high school.

I read that neon fishnet is making a comeback. This lady obviously keeps up with the fashion trends.

You know its true love when he cares enough to hold your stomach in for photos.

Now, this is just nasty.

"All the turnips in the house say 'Hey'..."

People, I'm not asking for much, just that you use some good judgement, especially when you leave your house. Thank you in advance.

Crush du Jour: John Gidding

Monday, December 15, 2008

Weekend highlights

I'm sick. I started getting a scratchy throat on Thurs. Fri morning I woke up very congested so I took Claritan-D and went about my task of writing and addressing my Christmas cards. Sat I felt and sounded worse, but I could feel the 24-hour Claritan-D kicking in on its wonderful, time-release schedule. Sun I sort felt like I was in a fog, but didn't let it stop me from what I wanted to do.

Sat afternoon we went to our friends' George & Steve's for their annual Christmas tree trimming party. They had a tall natural tree in their family room and a shorter artificial tree in their living room. They hauled down what seemed like an endless chain of plastic storage containers full of ornaments, old and new, from their attic and we unpacked them and hung them on the trees. Of course there was food and drinks, Christmas music, and friends to chat with. This is our 3rd year going, and we always have a nice time.

Spouse had made a beef stew in the crock pot before we left for the tree trimming party, so dinner was done when we got home. Rick & Nick came over for dinner, which was nice, simple, and easy. They noticed our crystal chandelier still in the box in the dining room and asked why we hadn't put it up yet. Spouse & I looked at each other and he said "We've been busy" while I simultaneously said "We've been lazy." We all laughed, and Nick volunteered to hang it for us so we said "Sure!". It was done in less than 5 minutes, which really made us feel stupid that we'd put it off. However, I'm sure if we had attempted it multiple things would have gone wrong and it would have taken us 3 hours.

Sun we did some light housecleaning, hand delivered Christmas cards to some neighbors, then made a trip to Lowes for more ornament hooks (we had about 8 ornaments still waiting to be hung) and two dimmer switches. When the chandelier was installed it seemed rather 'bright', so we are going to put it and the living room light on dimmers before our holiday party on Sat.

From Lowes we met Rick & Nick at Deb Appleby's glass blowing studio for 'Delaware by Hand', a collection of artists who show and sell their art/jewelry/pottery/glass/etc. We went to this lat year, too. We bought a beautiful vase from Deb's imperfect collection. From there the 4 of us went to Millsboro to the grand opening of BJ's Wholesale Club. It was fun to look around but we decided not to join, as we felt we can often do as good or sometimes better on prices by shopping the weekly sales at the grocery stores without having to purchase a membership.

When we got home I put up the last of the ornaments and unpacked Joe's Christmas cookie jar collection. We ate dinner and watched "The Poseidon Adventure" on cable. We love that movie! It was a great way to wrap up the weekend.

Crush du Jour: Matt Bushell

Sunday, December 14, 2008

Recipes and Christmas tree photos

...to send me your dessert recipes and Christmas tree photos!

Crush du Jour: David Boreanaz

Saturday, December 13, 2008

The Bible and gay marriage

This is a REALLY good article about marriage that appeared in Newsweek. Its a bit long, but very well presented and definitely worth reading!

Our Mutual Joy
Let's try for a minute to take the religious conservatives at their word and define marriage as the Bible does.

Shall we look to Abraham, the great patriarch, who slept with his servant when he discovered his beloved wife Sarah was infertile? Or to Jacob, who fathered children with four different women (two sisters and their servants)? Abraham, Jacob, David, Solomon and the kings of Judah and Israel—all these fathers and heroes were polygamists.


The New Testament model of marriage is hardly better. Jesus himself was single and preached an indifference to earthly attachments—especially family. The apostle Paul (also single) regarded marriage as an act of last resort for those unable to contain their animal lust. "It is better to marry than to burn with passion," says the apostle, in one of the most lukewarm endorsements of a treasured institution ever uttered. Would any contemporary heterosexual married couple—who likely woke up on their wedding day harboring some optimistic and newfangled ideas about gender equality and romantic love—turn to the Bible as a how-to script? Of course not, yet the religious opponents of gay marriage would have it be so.


The battle over gay marriage has been waged for more than a decade, but within the last six months—since California legalized gay marriage and then, with a ballot initiative in November, amended its Constitution to prohibit it—the debate has grown into a full-scale war, with religious-rhetoric slinging to match. Not since 1860, when the country's pulpits were full of preachers pronouncing on slavery, pro and con, has one of our basic social (and economic) institutions been so subject to biblical scrutiny.


But whereas in the Civil War the traditionalists had their James Henley Thornwell—and the advocates for change, their Henry Ward Beecher—this time the sides are unevenly matched. All the religious rhetoric, it seems, has been on the side of the gay-marriage opponents, who use Scripture as the foundation for their objections.


The argument goes something like this statement, which the Rev. Richard A. Hunter, a United Methodist minister, gave to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution in June: "The Bible and Jesus define marriage as between one man and one woman. The church cannot condone or bless same-sex marriages because this stands in opposition to Scripture and our tradition."


To which there are two obvious responses: First, while the Bible and Jesus say many important things about love and family, neither explicitly defines marriage as between one man and one woman. And second, as the examples above illustrate, no sensible modern person wants marriage—theirs or anyone else's —to look in its particulars anything like what the Bible describes.


"Marriage" in America refers to two separate things, a religious institution and a civil one, though it is most often enacted as a messy conflation of the two. As a civil institution, marriage offers practical benefits to both partners: contractual rights having to do with taxes; insurance; the care and custody of children; visitation rights; and inheritance. As a religious institution, marriage offers something else: a commitment of both partners before God to love, honor and cherish each other—in sickness and in health, for richer and poorer—in accordance with God's will. In a religious marriage, two people promise to take care of each other, profoundly, the way they believe God cares for them. Biblical literalists will disagree, but the Bible is a living document, powerful for more than 2,000 years because its truths speak to us even as we change through history. In that light, Scripture gives us no good reason why gays and lesbians should not be (civilly and religiously) married—and a number of excellent reasons why they should.
In the Old Testament, the concept of family is fundamental, but examples of what social conservatives would call "the traditional family" are scarcely to be found. Marriage was critical to the passing along of tradition and history, as well as to maintaining the Jews' precious and fragile monotheism. But as the Barnard University Bible scholar Alan Segal puts it, the arrangement was between "one man and as many women as he could pay for."


Social conservatives point to Adam and Eve as evidence for their one man, one woman argument—in particular, this verse from Genesis: "Therefore shall a man leave his mother and father, and shall cleave unto his wife, and they shall be one flesh." But as Segal says, if you believe that the Bible was written by men and not handed down in its leather bindings by God, then that verse was written by people for whom polygamy was the way of the world. (The fact that homosexual couples cannot procreate has also been raised as a biblical objection, for didn't God say, "Be fruitful and multiply"? But the Bible authors could never have imagined the brave new world of international adoption and assisted reproductive technology—and besides, heterosexuals who are infertile or past the age of reproducing get married all the time.)


Ozzie and Harriet are nowhere in the New Testament either. The biblical Jesus was—in spite of recent efforts of novelists to paint him otherwise—emphatically unmarried. He preached a radical kind of family, a caring community of believers, whose bond in God superseded all blood ties. Leave your families and follow me, Jesus says in the gospels. There will be no marriage in heaven, he says in Matthew. Jesus never mentions homosexuality, but he roundly condemns divorce (leaving a loophole in some cases for the husbands of unfaithful women).


The apostle Paul echoed the Christian Lord's lack of interest in matters of the flesh. For him, celibacy was the Christian ideal, but family stability was the best alternative. Marry if you must, he told his audiences, but do not get divorced. "To the married I give this command (not I, but the Lord): a wife must not separate from her husband." It probably goes without saying that the phrase "gay marriage" does not appear in the Bible at all.


If the bible doesn't give abundant examples of traditional marriage, then what are the gay-marriage opponents really exercised about? Well, homosexuality, of course—specifically sex between men. Sex between women has never, even in biblical times, raised as much ire. In its entry on "Homosexual Practices," the Anchor Bible Dictionary notes that nowhere in the Bible do its authors refer to sex between women, "possibly because it did not result in true physical 'union' (by male entry)." The Bible does condemn gay male sex in a handful of passages. Twice Leviticus refers to sex between men as "an abomination" (King James version), but these are throwaway lines in a peculiar text given over to codes for living in the ancient Jewish world, a text that devotes verse after verse to treatments for leprosy, cleanliness rituals for menstruating women and the correct way to sacrifice a goat—or a lamb or a turtle dove. Most of us no longer heed Leviticus on haircuts or blood sacrifices; our modern understanding of the world has surpassed its prescriptions. Why would we regard its condemnation of homosexuality with more seriousness than we regard its advice, which is far lengthier, on the best price to pay for a slave?


Paul was tough on homosexuality, though recently progressive scholars have argued that his condemnation of men who "were inflamed with lust for one another" (which he calls "a perversion") is really a critique of the worst kind of wickedness: self-delusion, violence, promiscuity and debauchery. In his book "The Arrogance of Nations," the scholar Neil Elliott argues that Paul is referring in this famous passage to the depravity of the Roman emperors, the craven habits of Nero and Caligula, a reference his audience would have grasped instantly. "Paul is not talking about what we call homosexuality at all," Elliott says. "He's talking about a certain group of people who have done everything in this list. We're not dealing with anything like gay love or gay marriage. We're talking about really, really violent people who meet their end and are judged by God." In any case, one might add, Paul argued more strenuously against divorce—and at least half of the Christians in America disregard that teaching.


Religious objections to gay marriage are rooted not in the Bible at all, then, but in custom and tradition (and, to talk turkey for a minute, a personal discomfort with gay sex that transcends theological argument). Common prayers and rituals reflect our common practice: the Episcopal Book of Common Prayer describes the participants in a marriage as "the man and the woman." But common practice changes—and for the better, as the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. said, "The arc of history is long, but it bends toward justice." The Bible endorses slavery, a practice that Americans now universally consider shameful and barbaric. It recommends the death penalty for adulterers (and in Leviticus, for men who have sex with men, for that matter). It provides conceptual shelter for anti-Semites. A mature view of scriptural authority requires us, as we have in the past, to move beyond literalism.


The Bible was written for a world so unlike our own, it's impossible to apply its rules, at face value, to ours. Marriage, specifically, has evolved so as to be unrecognizable to the wives of Abraham and Jacob. Monogamy became the norm in the Christian world in the sixth century; husbands' frequent enjoyment of mistresses and prostitutes became taboo by the beginning of the 20th. (In the NEWSWEEK POLL, 55 percent of respondents said that married heterosexuals who have sex with someone other than their spouses are more morally objectionable than a gay couple in a committed sexual relationship.) By the mid-19th century, U.S. courts were siding with wives who were the victims of domestic violence, and by the 1970s most states had gotten rid of their "head and master" laws, which gave husbands the right to decide where a family would live and whether a wife would be able to take a job. Today's vision of marriage as a union of equal partners, joined in a relationship both romantic and pragmatic, is, by very recent standards, radical, says Stephanie Coontz, author of "Marriage, a History."


Religious wedding ceremonies have already changed to reflect new conceptions of marriage. Remember when we used to say "man and wife" instead of "husband and wife"? Remember when we stopped using the word "obey"? Even Miss Manners, the voice of tradition and reason, approved in 1997 of that change. "It seems," she wrote, "that dropping 'obey' was a sensible editing of a service that made assumptions about marriage that the society no longer holds."


We cannot look to the Bible as a marriage manual, but we can read it for universal truths as we struggle toward a more just future. The Bible offers inspiration and warning on the subjects of love, marriage, family and community. It speaks eloquently of the crucial role of families in a fair society and the risks we incur to ourselves and our children should we cease trying to bind ourselves together in loving pairs. Gay men like to point to the story of passionate King David and his friend Jonathan, with whom he was "one spirit" and whom he "loved as he loved himself." Conservatives say this is a story about a platonic friendship, but it is also a story about two men who stand up for each other in turbulent times, through violent war and the disapproval of a powerful parent. David rends his clothes at Jonathan's death and, in grieving, writes a song: I grieve for you, Jonathan my brother; You were very dear to me. Your love for me was wonderful, More wonderful than that of women. Here, the Bible praises enduring love between men. What Jonathan and David did or did not do in privacy is perhaps best left to history and our own imaginations.


In addition to its praise of friendship and its condemnation of divorce, the Bible gives many examples of marriages that defy convention yet benefit the greater community. The Torah discouraged the ancient Hebrews from marrying outside the tribe, yet Moses himself is married to a foreigner, Zipporah. Queen Esther is married to a non-Jew and, according to legend, saves the Jewish people. Rabbi Arthur Waskow, of the Shalom Center in Philadelphia, believes that Judaism thrives through diversity and inclusion. "I don't think Judaism should or ought to want to leave any portion of the human population outside the religious process," he says. "We should not want to leave [homosexuals] outside the sacred tent." The marriage of Joseph and Mary is also unorthodox (to say the least), a case of an unconventional arrangement accepted by society for the common good. The boy needed two human parents, after all.

In the Christian story, the message of acceptance for all is codified. Jesus reaches out to everyone, especially those on the margins, and brings the whole Christian community into his embrace. The Rev. James Martin, a Jesuit priest and author, cites the story of Jesus revealing himself to the woman at the well— no matter that she had five former husbands and a current boyfriend—as evidence of Christ's all-encompassing love.


The great Bible scholar Walter Brueggemann, emeritus professor at Columbia Theological Seminary, quotes the apostle Paul when he looks for biblical support of gay marriage: "There is neither Greek nor Jew, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Jesus Christ." The religious argument for gay marriage, he adds, "is not generally made with reference to particular texts, but with the general conviction that the Bible is bent toward inclusiveness." The practice of inclusion, even in defiance of social convention, the reaching out to outcasts, the emphasis on togetherness and community over and against chaos, depravity, indifference—all these biblical values argue for gay marriage.


If one is for racial equality and the common nature of humanity, then the values of stability, monogamy and family necessarily follow. Terry Davis is the pastor of First Presbyterian Church in Hartford, Conn., and has been presiding over "holy unions" since 1992. "I'm against promiscuity—love ought to be expressed in committed relationships, not through casual sex, and I think the church should recognize the validity of committed same-sex relationships," he says.


Still, very few Jewish or Christian denominations do officially endorse gay marriage, even in the states where it is legal. The practice varies by region, by church or synagogue, even by cleric. More progressive denominations—the United Church of Christ, for example—have agreed to support gay marriage. Other denominations and dioceses will do "holy union" or "blessing" ceremonies, but shy away from the word "marriage" because it is politically explosive.


So the frustrating, semantic question remains: should gay people be married in the same, sacramental sense that straight people are? I would argue that they should. If we are all God's children, made in his likeness and image, then to deny access to any sacrament based on sexuality is exactly the same thing as denying it based on skin color—and no serious (or even semiserious) person would argue that.


People get married "for their mutual joy," explains the Rev. Chloe Breyer, executive director of the Interfaith Center in New York, quoting the Episcopal marriage ceremony. That's what religious people do: care for each other in spite of difficulty, she adds. In marriage, couples grow closer to God: "Being with one another in community is how you love God. That's what marriage is about."


More basic than theology, though, is human need. We want, as Abraham did, to grow old surrounded by friends and family and to be buried at last peacefully among them. We want, as Jesus taught, to love one another for our own good—and, not to be too grandiose about it, for the good of the world. We want our children to grow up in stable homes. What happens in the bedroom, really, has nothing to do with any of this.


My friend the priest James Martin says his favorite Scripture relating to the question of homosexuality is Psalm 139, a song that praises the beauty and imperfection in all of us and that glorifies God's knowledge of our most secret selves: "I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made." And then he adds that in his heart he believes that if Jesus were alive today, he would reach out especially to the gays and lesbians among us, for "Jesus does not want people to be lonely and sad." Let the priest's prayer be our own.


Crush du Jour: VJ Logan






Let's try for a minute to take the religious conservatives at their word and define marriage as the Bible does.






Shall we look to Abraham, the great patriarch, who slept with his servant when he discovered his beloved wife Sarah was infertile? Or to Jacob, who fathered children with four different women (two sisters and their servants)? Abraham, Jacob, David, Solomon and the kings of Judah and Israel—all these fathers and heroes were polygamists.






The New Testament model of marriage is hardly better. Jesus himself was single and preached an indifference to earthly attachments—especially family. The apostle Paul (also single) regarded marriage as an act of last resort for those unable to contain their animal lust. "It is better to marry than to burn with passion," says the apostle, in one of the most lukewarm endorsements of a treasured institution ever uttered. Would any contemporary heterosexual married couple—who likely woke up on their wedding day harboring some optimistic and newfangled ideas about gender equality and romantic love—turn to the Bible as a how-to script? Of course not, yet the religious opponents of gay marriage would have it be so.




The battle over gay marriage has been waged for more than a decade, but within the last six months—since California legalized gay marriage and then, with a ballot initiative in November, amended its Constitution to prohibit it—the debate has grown into a full-scale war, with religious-rhetoric slinging to match. Not since 1860, when the country's pulpits were full of preachers pronouncing on slavery, pro and con, has one of our basic social (and economic) institutions been so subject to biblical scrutiny.






But whereas in the Civil War the traditionalists had their James Henley Thornwell—and the advocates for change, their Henry Ward Beecher—this time the sides are unevenly matched. All the religious rhetoric, it seems, has been on the side of the gay-marriage opponents, who use Scripture as the foundation for their objections.




The argument goes something like this statement, which the Rev. Richard A. Hunter, a United Methodist minister, gave to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution in June: "The Bible and Jesus define marriage as between one man and one woman. The church cannot condone or bless same-sex marriages because this stands in opposition to Scripture and our tradition."




To which there are two obvious responses: First, while the Bible and Jesus say many important things about love and family, neither explicitly defines marriage as between one man and one woman. And second, as the examples above illustrate, no sensible modern person wants marriage—theirs or anyone else's —to look in its particulars anything like what the Bible describes.





"Marriage" in America refers to two separate things, a religious institution and a civil one, though it is most often enacted as a messy conflation of the two. As a civil institution, marriage offers practical benefits to both partners: contractual rights having to do with taxes; insurance; the care and custody of children; visitation rights; and inheritance. As a religious institution, marriage offers something else: a commitment of both partners before God to love, honor and cherish each other—in sickness and in health, for richer and poorer—in accordance with God's will. In a religious marriage, two people promise to take care of each other, profoundly, the way they believe God cares for them. Biblical literalists will disagree, but the Bible is a living document, powerful for more than 2,000 years because its truths speak to us even as we change through history. In that light, Scripture gives us no good reason why gays and lesbians should not be (civilly and religiously) married—and a number of excellent reasons why they should.



In the Old Testament, the concept of family is fundamental, but examples of what social conservatives would call "the traditional family" are scarcely to be found. Marriage was critical to the passing along of tradition and history, as well as to maintaining the Jews' precious and fragile monotheism. But as the Barnard University Bible scholar Alan Segal puts it, the arrangement was between "one man and as many women as he could pay for."






Social conservatives point to Adam and Eve as evidence for their one man, one woman argument—in particular, this verse from Genesis: "Therefore shall a man leave his mother and father, and shall cleave unto his wife, and they shall be one flesh." But as Segal says, if you believe that the Bible was written by men and not handed down in its leather bindings by God, then that verse was written by people for whom polygamy was the way of the world. (The fact that homosexual couples cannot procreate has also been raised as a biblical objection, for didn't God say, "Be fruitful and multiply"? But the Bible authors could never have imagined the brave new world of international adoption and assisted reproductive technology—and besides, heterosexuals who are infertile or past the age of reproducing get married all the time.)



Ozzie and Harriet are nowhere in the New Testament either. The biblical Jesus was—in spite of recent efforts of novelists to paint him otherwise—emphatically unmarried. He preached a radical kind of family, a caring community of believers, whose bond in God superseded all blood ties. Leave your families and follow me, Jesus says in the gospels. There will be no marriage in heaven, he says in Matthew. Jesus never mentions homosexuality, but he roundly condemns divorce (leaving a loophole in some cases for the husbands of unfaithful women).



The apostle Paul echoed the Christian Lord's lack of interest in matters of the flesh. For him, celibacy was the Christian ideal, but family stability was the best alternative. Marry if you must, he told his audiences, but do not get divorced. "To the married I give this command (not I, but the Lord): a wife must not separate from her husband." It probably goes without saying that the phrase "gay marriage" does not appear in the Bible at all.




If the bible doesn't give abundant examples of traditional marriage, then what are the gay-marriage opponents really exercised about? Well, homosexuality, of course—specifically sex between men. Sex between women has never, even in biblical times, raised as much ire. In its entry on "Homosexual Practices," the Anchor Bible Dictionary notes that nowhere in the Bible do its authors refer to sex between women, "possibly because it did not result in true physical 'union' (by male entry)." The Bible does condemn gay male sex in a handful of passages. Twice Leviticus refers to sex between men as "an abomination" (King James version), but these are throwaway lines in a peculiar text given over to codes for living in the ancient Jewish world, a text that devotes verse after verse to treatments for leprosy, cleanliness rituals for menstruating women and the correct way to sacrifice a goat—or a lamb or a turtle dove. Most of us no longer heed Leviticus on haircuts or blood sacrifices; our modern understanding of the world has surpassed its prescriptions. Why would we regard its condemnation of homosexuality with more seriousness than we regard its advice, which is far lengthier, on the best price to pay for a slave?



Paul was tough on homosexuality, though recently progressive scholars have argued that his condemnation of men who "were inflamed with lust for one another" (which he calls "a perversion") is really a critique of the worst kind of wickedness: self-delusion, violence, promiscuity and debauchery. In his book "The Arrogance of Nations," the scholar Neil Elliott argues that Paul is referring in this famous passage to the depravity of the Roman emperors, the craven habits of Nero and Caligula, a reference his audience would have grasped instantly. "Paul is not talking about what we call homosexuality at all," Elliott says. "He's talking about a certain group of people who have done everything in this list. We're not dealing with anything like gay love or gay marriage. We're talking about really, really violent people who meet their end and are judged by God." In any case, one might add, Paul argued more strenuously against divorce—and at least half of the Christians in America disregard that teaching.




Religious objections to gay marriage are rooted not in the Bible at all, then, but in custom and tradition (and, to talk turkey for a minute, a personal discomfort with gay sex that transcends theological argument). Common prayers and rituals reflect our common practice: the Episcopal Book of Common Prayer describes the participants in a marriage as "the man and the woman." But common practice changes—and for the better, as the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. said, "The arc of history is long, but it bends toward justice." The Bible endorses slavery, a practice that Americans now universally consider shameful and barbaric. It recommends the death penalty for adulterers (and in Leviticus, for men who have sex with men, for that matter). It provides conceptual shelter for anti-Semites. A mature view of scriptural authority requires us, as we have in the past, to move beyond literalism. The Bible was written for a world so unlike our own, it's impossible to apply its rules, at face value, to ours.
placeAd2(commercialNode,'bigbox',false,'')
dcmaxversion = 9
dcminversion = 9
Do
On Error Resume Next
plugin = (IsObject(CreateObject("ShockwaveFlash.ShockwaveFlash." & dcmaxversion & "")))
If plugin = true Then Exit Do
dcmaxversion = dcmaxversion - 1
Loop While dcmaxversion >= dcminversion

Marriage, specifically, has evolved so as to be unrecognizable to the wives of Abraham and Jacob. Monogamy became the norm in the Christian world in the sixth century; husbands' frequent enjoyment of mistresses and prostitutes became taboo by the beginning of the 20th. (In the NEWSWEEK POLL, 55 percent of respondents said that married heterosexuals who have sex with someone other than their spouses are more morally objectionable than a gay couple in a committed sexual relationship.) By the mid-19th century, U.S. courts were siding with wives who were the victims of domestic violence, and by the 1970s most states had gotten rid of their "head and master" laws, which gave husbands the right to decide where a family would live and whether a wife would be able to take a job. Today's vision of marriage as a union of equal partners, joined in a relationship both romantic and pragmatic, is, by very recent standards, radical, says Stephanie Coontz, author of "Marriage, a History."
Religious wedding ceremonies have already changed to reflect new conceptions of marriage. Remember when we used to say "man and wife" instead of "husband and wife"? Remember when we stopped using the word "obey"? Even Miss Manners, the voice of tradition and reason, approved in 1997 of that change. "It seems," she wrote, "that dropping 'obey' was a sensible editing of a service that made assumptions about marriage that the society no longer holds."
We cannot look to the Bible as a marriage manual, but we can read it for universal truths as we struggle toward a more just future. The Bible offers inspiration and warning on the subjects of love, marriage, family and community. It speaks eloquently of the crucial role of families in a fair society and the risks we incur to ourselves and our children should we cease trying to bind ourselves together in loving pairs. Gay men like to point to the story of passionate King David and his friend Jonathan, with whom he was "one spirit" and whom he "loved as he loved himself." Conservatives say this is a story about a platonic friendship, but it is also a story about two men who stand up for each other in turbulent times, through violent war and the disapproval of a powerful parent. David rends his clothes at Jonathan's death and, in grieving, writes a song:
I grieve for you, Jonathan my brother;You were very dear to me.Your love for me was wonderful,More wonderful than that of women.
Here, the Bible praises enduring love between men. What Jonathan and David did or did not do in privacy is perhaps best left to history and our own imaginations.
In addition to its praise of friendship and its condemnation of divorce, the Bible gives many examples of marriages that defy convention yet benefit the greater community. The Torah discouraged the ancient Hebrews from marrying outside the tribe, yet Moses himself is married to a foreigner, Zipporah. Queen Esther is married to a non-Jew and, according to legend, saves the Jewish people. Rabbi Arthur Waskow, of the Shalom Center in Philadelphia, believes that Judaism thrives through diversity and inclusion. "I don't think Judaism should or ought to want to leave any portion of the human population outside the religious process," he says. "We should not want to leave [homosexuals] outside the sacred tent." The marriage of Joseph and Mary is also unorthodox (to say the least), a case of an unconventional arrangement accepted by society for the common good. The boy needed two human parents, after all.




In the Christian story, the message of acceptance for all is codified. Jesus reaches out to everyone, especially those on the margins, and brings the whole Christian community into his embrace. The Rev. James Martin, a Jesuit priest and author, cites the story of Jesus revealing himself to the woman at the well— no matter that she had five former husbands and a current boyfriend—as evidence of Christ's all-encompassing love. The great Bible scholar Walter Brueggemann, emeritus professor at Columbia Theological Seminary, quotes the apostle Paul when he looks for biblical support of gay marriage: "There is neither Greek nor Jew, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Jesus Christ." The religious argument for gay marriage, he adds, "is not generally made with reference to particular texts, but with the general conviction that the Bible is bent toward inclusiveness."
The practice of inclusion, even in defiance of social convention, the reaching out to outcasts, the emphasis on togetherness and community over and against chaos, depravity, indifference—all these biblical values argue for gay marriage. If one is for racial equality and the common nature of humanity, then the values of stability, monogamy and family necessarily follow. Terry Davis is the pastor of First Presbyterian Church in Hartford, Conn., and has been presiding over "holy unions" since 1992. "I'm against promiscuity—love ought to be expressed in committed relationships, not through casual sex, and I think the church should recognize the validity of committed same-sex relationships," he says.
Still, very few Jewish or Christian denominations do officially endorse gay marriage, even in the states where it is legal. The practice varies by region, by church or synagogue, even by cleric. More progressive denominations—the United Church of Christ, for example—have agreed to support gay marriage. Other denominations and dioceses will do "holy union" or "blessing" ceremonies, but shy away from the word "marriage" because it is politically explosive. So the frustrating, semantic question remains: should gay people be married in the same, sacramental sense that straight people are? I would argue that they should. If we are all God's children, made in his likeness and image, then to deny access to any sacrament based on sexuality is exactly the same thing as denying it based on skin color—and no serious (or even semiserious) person would argue that. People get married "for their mutual joy," explains the Rev. Chloe Breyer, executive director of the Interfaith Center in New York, quoting the Episcopal marriage ceremony. That's what religious people do: care for each other in spite of difficulty, she adds. In marriage, couples grow closer to God: "Being with one another in community is how you love God. That's what marriage is about."
placeAd2(commercialNode,'bigbox',false,'')

More basic than theology, though, is human need. We want, as Abraham did, to grow old surrounded by friends and family and to be buried at last peacefully among them. We want, as Jesus taught, to love one another for our own good—and, not to be too grandiose about it, for the good of the world. We want our children to grow up in stable homes. What happens in the bedroom, really, has nothing to do with any of this. My friend the priest James Martin says his favorite Scripture relating to the question of homosexuality is Psalm 139, a song that praises the beauty and imperfection in all of us and that glorifies God's knowledge of our most secret selves: "I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made." And then he adds that in his heart he believes that if Jesus were alive today, he would reach out especially to the gays and lesbians among us, for "Jesus does not want people to be lonely and sad." Let the priest's prayer be our own.