good night and good luck

the rocky mountain news is closing its doors today after 150 years. it was denver’s oldest business. it’s sad to lose a piece of denver’s identity and it’s sad that all of those talented folks are losing their jobs. this is big for denver, and it’s not good.

Technology Crybabies

After reading the article Authors irked by text-to-speech on Kindle 2 about Kindle’s new beta ability to transform ebooks into audio books, I couldn’t help but think: crybabies!

Look, audio book people, technology advances. That’s the whole point. If you don’t embrace it, you will be left behind. For example, do you remember when newspapers started hitting that wacky World Wide Web in the later 1990s? There were a scant few articles and you had to pay to read them. Newspapers were playing not to lose, as opposed to playing to win. What has happened to those papers? RIP, baby. The savvy ones embraced the technology, figured out that they could make revenue by advertising online and offered their news for free. Now I can even subscribe to feeds from newspapers from my home town, over 1000 miles away, without a ridiculous delivery fee. Hoorah!

What would have happened to Kodak if in 2002 when the 1 megapixel, $60 camera hit the US market, and their CEO had insisted that digital photography was a threat that needed to be fought? They’d be out of business. Hands down. Honestly, what family of 4 wants to buy film, take pictures they can’t see, be limited to 36 on a roll, risk melting the film in a hot car, pay to process it, and pay for prints? Oh, and then buy doubles or more to mail to grandmas and aunts? Instead, Kodak joined the digital world and in addition, offered a whole new level of photo printing services.  How awesome is it that you can put together a hardback book full of photos for $30? Or print your kids’ faces on a tie for Father’s Day? (okay it’s more tacky than awesome, but so are Taz t-shirts and people still wear them)  Not to mention the easy sharing methods of email, Facebook, Flikr, etc. Thank you, digital photography folks.  Now I have a mug emblazened with pitcures of my cat. Yes, tacky, but not Taz tacky.

What about the music industry? Oh Napster. You were so cool before you were illegal. But why? Because you gave us what we wanted: individual songs, for free. Why deal with the expense of clunky packaging and 14 songs you don’t like just to get that one hit? You might recall all of the moaning that bands (eh hem, Metallica) did over this music trading. This trading was then called theft after a few short years (as if we hadn’t been making and trading mix tapes  for years). Then finally, it occurred to music folks that 1 mp3 is an entirely different product than a cd with a case and 15 songs. Now we can buy that product as we choose. Download 1 song, 3 songs, a whole album. Hello iPod. See? We’re buying music again, just like we wanted to all along. Was trying to hang on to precious cds and all of their eco-ugly packaging worth suing little Timmy?

Which brings me to the point of this rant: hey audio book people! get with the program! I like audio books. I love when people read to me. And if I were visually impaired, I’d really love, and depend on, audio books. If Amazon.com’s Kindle offers a smart text reader function as a bonus to a regular ebook, all the better! The ball is in your court, audio book industry. You’ve got to play to win, not play to not lose.

Let’s be honest here, Kindle’s beta text reader is crap! It’s robotic and weird, but the idea is solid gold. Fusing the rich voice tones of James Earl Jones into a volume of Grimm’s fairytales would be amazing! And could you imagine hearing David Sedaris’ Santaland Diaries by something as robotic as Dr. Sbaitso? puh-leeease. If I’ve got a long flight, sometimes I just can’t muster the energy to read a book. If i had an ebook that I could read, then switch to audio, oh man! I’d be totally stoked! Send me back to South Dakota because this flight’s going to be awesome.  Don’t make me suffer any longer! Make this happen. Audio book folks, you  need to work with and not against Kindle developers to get the technology to work well.  The change is coming. You’ve got to play to win. Oh, and I’ll totally buy it when you do. Totally.

OMG Christ was Gay!

okay, i really just made that up. scandalous, isn’t it? but i ask you this: why is is scandalous?

since i’m feeling feisty and just read a friend’s blog about her conversation about gay marriage with a person making church law-based arguments, i’m going to indulge in a little psychology hypothesis:  the church is a mental crutch people use to protect themselves (specifically but not exclusively) in the case of homosexuality. oooh. i told you i’m feeling feisty.

i think a lot of people (myself included) have found themselves at times with very little direction. SO when we face challenges such as losing loved ones, struggling with crap jobs (or unemployment), struggling to provide for ourselves or families, or dealing with people we don’t like, we look for answers. we try to solve problems. we work to protect our egos and our assets (studies show that people will lie to protect their egos even if it means our top priorities food/shelter/companionship will be compromised). the church (and i mean all churches with “Book”s and inflexible “Word”s on how to live) straight out GIVES specific answers. it is much easier to follow than to lead. so if you are feeling challenged, use an existing set of rules to defend yourself. eh?

what i’m getting at here is anti-gay folks feel threatened in one way or another by gay folks. what are some of these ways?

1. for some men, it’s a primal urge to ward off other men, as you can’t pass your genetic code to another man. notice how lots of men have male friends, but as soon as the concept of sex comes to play, other men are gross? protection of procreation. male lions eat baby lions–an act which instantly puts the mother back in heat. go on, try to convince me that male lion’s reason for eating its own species was because he was hungry. because most species cannibalize regularly. right.
2. note that the topic of gay sex is heated over male gay sex and rather dismissing over female gay sex. perhaps because the male is the penetrator, the doer. if you are not doing the doing, you are being done. in the case of sex, we’re born with chemical and physical equipment that tells us that we either do or get done (considering humans have over-populated the earth, more folks should be cropping up with non-breeding chemical signals as time goes on). in some people that message is so strong that the idea of getting done by someone (if you’re a doer) is horrifying. and if it’s horrifying for you, it must be wrong for everyone. after all, it’s horrifying. obviously the logic of “what’s right for me is right for you” doesn’t work. if it did, we’d have one political party, no war, and a utopia where everyone shares.
3. talking about sex is awkward for a lot of folks. did all of that penetration talk above make you uncomfortable? OR, did the langauge above threaten your feeling of comfort? what could possibly be more uncomfortable than talking about sex (uncomfortable!) if it is weird gay sex (ahh! extra uncomfortable!)? [must initialize sequence of ways to protect comfort level. now. maybe a little "whoa i'm not like THEM" talk will do the trick.]
4. it is hard work to think through the things that challenge you. who am i? why do i feel the way i do? how should i behave? what is the best way to live? if i don’t like things about a person, how can i be sure that we are different enough so that i don’t have to deal with not liking things about myself? the bible is the yellowpages of tough life questions. need to order a pizza? you know how to look that up. need to justify your discomfort around gay people? you know how to look that up too. what happens when your phone book’s out of date? you call for pizza and the number’s been disconnected. what happens when your bible’s out of date?
5. additionally, humans are hard-wired to differentiate. we can look out to the horizon and differentiate the one lion from the herd of gazelles. we differentiate to determine danger. we are born to classify and stereotype for our own safety. sometimes safety means not getting mugged. sometimes safety means not challenging our beliefs. again, if we differentiate ourselves from folks we don’t like, we don’t have to deal with not liking ourselves, bringing us back to rule #1 – protect the ego.

so those are some ways in which homosexuals threaten heterosexuals. but let’s get back to the church.

for some folks, the church said it is wrong (whatever it may be), so it must be. it is easy to use the church’s teachings as a way to avoid thinking about what challenges you. if there’s already an answer in place, use it. gay = wrong. said and done. keep in mind, some churches have been around for a couple thousand years. they have developed infrastructures that needs to be maintained and protected. ask yourself  to define the point at which the actions of the church stop serving the people and start serving the infrastructure of the church.

the largest suspension bridge was built not long ago in japan. this bridge is the largest possible of it’s kind. it is so large that 90% of the structure is in place simply to support the structure. this leaves only 10% of the structure to support the flow of traffic from island to island. in essence, a mere 10% is dedicated to the whole point of having a bridge. just like humans, the church is very interested in self-preservation.  many churches were the governing bodies in early civilizations. many were replaced by civic versions, but not without a fight (very bloody, high-death toll, wars in which many believers died, to be more precise). in what ways do our current governing bodies make sacrifices to protect themselves? think about the british government’s response to the sinking of the Lusitania in WWI.

1. in an effort to keep secret the fact that they were intercepting german intelligence, they did not warn the cruise liner (with 2,000 civilians on board) of nearby U-boat presence, and having the Lusitania change course would seem suspicious to germans. a U-boat sunk the massive liner with, shockingly, only one torpedo,
2. because there were government-authorized munitions secretly stowed on board which caused secondary explosions. when the investigation was concluded, the records stated that
3. the british government tried many times and successfully communicated a change of course to the boat’s captain. the captain, due to weather issues, was unable to comply, and the boat was hit.

if word got out that the british government was sacrificing a ship full of civilians to protect military assets, the british government would have a lot more to worry about than german u-boats. ah, self-preservation. remember the organizations we humans create, are indeed human creations, and therefore behave like humans.

so, what does all of this mean? if you are willing to put all of your faith in a higher power, or organization, be aware that it might not always behave in your best interests, but rather in its. american culture shuns the idea of letting one person make all of the decisions for another person with “personal freedom!” as the battle cry. likewise, perhaps this creed should be extended to include organizations. it is not wise to let an organization or set of organizations do all of your thinking for you.

stop to think, regularly.

think about the people you work with, your neighbors, your family. if half of them tell you right now that they’re gay, does knowing this detail change your relationship? afterall, you knew and liked this person before. what has changed? take away the scaffolding of your church’s rules. are these people suddenly ne’er–do–wells? are they really that lion in a field of gazelles?

innovation

I’ve spent the past couple of days compiling lists of innovations and major events that have shaped our human experience, and more specifically, our human experience in the US. So many times, we learn about innovations without context.

For example,

• Eli Whitney invented the Cotton Gin in 1794.
• A cotton harvester prototype was built in 1920.

It took nearly 130 years to complete the automation of cotton production. So why did this take so long?

Slave labor was still readily and legally available for 40 years after Whitney’s invention, so labor cost wasn’t an issue.  Once slave labor evaporated (1833), indentured servants (still very cheap labor) took up the work. However, the demand for cotton was growing rapidly, and plantations couldn’t keep up regardless of the blisters, beatings, and strains on labor.  Eighty years later, World War I broke out and cotton production had to be innovated. The first cotton harvesters (1920) replaced the work of 40 people picking cotton by hand. By the end of World War II, machines could now (1950) produce 6 times the cotton as the 1920s’ models in the same amount of time.

Why is this relevant today? Because people innovate only when they have to. When we are comfortable, we tend not to change our surroundings. If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. Right? It wasn’t until gas prices reached nearly $5/gallon this summer that people started driving less and turning to other modes of transportation.

Unfortunately, due to the current sinking state of our economy, lots of people are uncomfortable. The folks who scraped to get by are now drowning and the people who thought they were doing okay are now scraping to get by. Unemployment is spiking and the availability of jobs is plummeting. Interestingly enough, the people who hold the most money, make financial decision that affect the people who hold the least amount of money. And these people, who were quite comfortable are still comfortable, and don’t see the need for change. Are these the same people that would eat every last grain of food themselves, saving none for the people who produce the grain, then wonder where to get more grain after the producers are gone? It’s worth considering.

Enter innovation. Looking at the numbers of people in financial crisis versus those who are comfortable, the Presidential candidate Barack Obama saw that lots of people needed a change in their lives. Plenty of people need a positive change in their financial situation, but also, plenty of people need a positive change in their lives, period. For those not feeling the financial crunch as vividly as others, perhaps that change is escaping a bad relationship or a dead-end career. He chose the message of Change coupled with the inspiration of Hope, and he shouted it from every form of media his audience would see. Then he shouted it from every form of media his opponent’s audience would see.

A Presidential race is not comfortable. It requires agility, planning, a consistent message, and a constant message. In this campaign, Change and Hope went viral. By facilitating supporters to reach millions, through social media connections, Barack Obama innovated the way campaigns communicate. Support flair on Facebook, update tweets on Twitter, and community-made wearable art on CafePress enabled supporters to become a part of the campaign without knocking on doors and placing signage all over town.

It worked. Today, an hour ago, Barack Obama was sworn in as the 44th President of our great country. His message has not changed, but his political status has (I wonder what his Facebook status says…). Today he shouted Change and Hope for the first time as the President (read the transcript of his speech). I followed a link from Twitter and watched the ceremony online.

Being the President is not comfortable. It requires agility, planning, a consistent message, and a constant message. Given the way in which Barack Obama ran his campaign, I feel confident he will run his office and the items within his power with as much integrity and innovation.

Here’s to innovation: let us keep moving forward; let us keep creating; let us keep working towards better lives for all of mankind.

Play-Doh, Pronouns, and Yinzers

I finally let them go. After years of shaking my fist at news reporters and looking down my nose at peers who couldn’t differentiate subject pronouns from object pronouns–an elementary school skill–I’ve moved on. I get it now. Language is always evolving. If it didn’t, we wouldn’t have the tools we need to communicate. So, deep breath, exhale, let the pronouns go.

Raising their children in a place as colloquially rich and grammatically challenged as Southwestern Pennsylvania, my parents used to make up ways to praise us for using correct grammar. After an elementary school performance where we kids recited various poems and songs, my parents told me how proud they were of me for using the right “which/witch” during the Pledge of Allegiance.

Obviously, their compliment didn’t even make sense, but it made me feel smart and well-versed in my own language. It was very important to speak properly.

It has become more and more evident as I grow older that language is malleable. Like squeezing Play-Doh through a press and marveling at the new shapes, twisting language into effective and interesting communication is ever evolving. I used to keep my Play-Doh in separate colored jars, horrified how my neighbors let their blue contaminate their yellow. But you see, they had new shades of green that didn’t come in a jar. And their Play-Doh grass looked so much more like that yellow-green grass of spring that was growing in the yard at the time.

As I set the emotions of a language lover aside, I consider: what gap in communication occurs when subject and object pronouns are flip-flopped?

1) “Me and her went to the mall.”
2) “She and I went to the mall.”

Dare I say none?
Aside from it sounding like a cross between a caveman and a valley girl, the first example and the second example communicate the exact same information. Since language was developed for the purpose of communicating, I argue that it has done its job in the first example.

Of course, more than just a short story has been communicated in those examples above. One communicates linguistic ignorance, or clumsiness, while the other communicates an educated speaker. But again, I question, who cares? As long as a message is successfully communicated, why should the misuse redundant pronouns be a social barrier? Perhaps the streamlining of pronouns is the mark of a more efficient communicator.

Recently, language authorities have begun the process of accepting the use of “they” as a gender-neutral, singular pronoun. At first, it was seen as clumsy and uneducated, but now it seems to be the patch for the hole that our language kept tripping in.

Yes, there is the gender-neutral, singular pronoun, “one,” but its matching possessive forms are awkwardly repetitive. For example, “one should never shake hands with one’s friends after blowing one’s nose.” I think we can all agree “you should never shake hands with your friends after blowing your nose” feels much less stilted (and is actually, quite sound advice). In addition, “one” doesn’t solve the he/she problem.

“All surgeons must report to the lounge at 3:00 today. If he or she is in surgery, he or she must send a representative from his or her team.”

So what’s the problem?  Simply, it’s bulky. Originally, the male pronoun was to function as gender-neutral too; however, this only served to add confusion.

“All surgeons must report to the lounge at 3:00 today. If he is in surgery, he must send a representative from his team.”

Is the person a man or any person? Why not use a neutral pronoun when the subject is neutral? Does the example above mean to communicate that this meeting is only for male surgeons? Frankly it should, but it doesn’t.

“All surgeons must report to the lounge at 3:00 today. If they are in surgery, they must send a representative from their team.”

It’s not a perfect solution, but I still vote for using “they.”

Likewise, “yinz,” “youse,” and “y’all” are excellent plural forms of “you.” Think of how many times you have addressed a group and needed to differentiate between addressing one person and addressing every member of the group. Why on earth do we only have one word for that set of pronouns? So just as simply as “me” and “I” are redundant, “you” and “yinz” are separate and both needed. Furthermore, use “yinz” and people will know the yellow Play-Doh of your language will most likely have some other interesting blue and green spots in it.

Now don’t get me wrong, I don’t want to see our American English language running willy-nilly, shirking responsibility and dodging usefulness at every bend. Rather, I challenge us as purveyors of words to use them effectively and creatively. Break the rules that no longer apply and open new paths to new, colorful, interesting communication.

Buy Local Week, Nov. 28 – Dec. 5

if you can buy something in a local store and a national or international chain and you feel lured by the cost savings of the chain think about long term money.

if you buy a cd at best buy at the super dooper big sticker sale price of $19.99 instead of the regular price of $24 at local denver store, for example twist & shout, how much are you saving? $4? or is it more like $3 after factoring in gas to the suburbs. Maybe more like $2 after you consider the local tax revenue impacts. or perhaps $0 when twist & shout’s doors close like their neighbor just did (neighborhood flix, independent movie theater), your ability to choose where you shop is gone and the chain store raises prices.

if you love your city, vote for it with your dollars. there’s only room for one winner in an election. make sure you put your money where you want it to be.

more info: http://milehighbusinessalliance.org/node/372

Dad’s Pocket Knife and the Infamous Impromptu Dental Work

Baby teeth come and go. And usually both processes are physically painful. Add in a little public humiliation, or the questionable application of a pocket knife, and it becomes the stuff of legend.

Impromptu Dental Work Part I:
It started as a regular evening at Rax, a short-lived roast beef fast food restaurant that featured a large talking alligator as its mascot. My little brother, Tom, my dad, and I had stood in the tethered line and ordered our dinners: a couple of roast beef sandwiches with spicy curly fries for Dad and a set of Uncle Alligator Kids’ Meals for Tom and me. Kids’ Meal Bonus: Jello in a plastic cup and a chocolate chip cookie on the side. Ohh yeah.

As excited as he was at the prospect of devouring his curly fries, two bites in, little Tom just couldn’t take it any more. That loose baby tooth kept jabbing his tender gums and had to come out.

“Go on, Tom, just pull it out,” says Dad.

But this was his first loose tooth. This was uncharted waters. He didn’t know if his tooth was really ready to come out or even how hard to pull. Was it going to hurt even more when it came out? Try as he might, he just couldn’t get a good grip. Even though he used a napkin embossed with the red Rax logo to absorb the slippery drool, his tiny wedge-shaped tooth eluded him. Luckily for him, Dad was armed with his pocket knife.

“Come here son, let me take a look at that. Just tip your head back a little…”

And with the quick flick of the knife, Tom’s tiny tooth popped out onto the floor. Once he located it amidst the crumbs and various other mystery bits, people clapped. At last, Tom now held his once troublesome tooth in his hand. This would certainly get him at least a quarter from the Tooth Fairy that night.

Impromptu Dental Work Part II:
As the blue 1985 minivan sped along I-95 in the annual voyage to the Outer Banks of North Carolina, something went wrong.

“Ray, pull over. Now.”

And that was that. The command had come from the navigator, our mother, to bring our journey to a halt at the closest rest stop. Mom had been to the dentist the day before where she received a temporary filling. That filling was supposed to last until her custom crown was ready for installation. Needless to say, it did not.

Here we were, more than 1/2 way to our seaside destination, a mere 3 hours left in our drive, and pressure had built up under the filling, so much so that it had to come out. Now.

Naturally, the prospect of putting anything near one’s mouth after leaving a rest stop conjures fantasies about massive, breeding germ colonies and the horrors that go with them. And now this? These rest stop germs, the very worst kind of germ, could potentially go directly into her mouth–into her aching, freshly-drilled tooth. There was only one solution.

Dad marched into the Men’s Room, Tom quick stepping behind him. It was Tom’s job to do the touching. He touched doors, faucets, paper towel dispensers, and more doors. Yes, he was touching the germs, but his hand could be sacrificed for the greater good. He knew his role and did it well.

Much to the amusement of my sister and me (and to the pained impatience of our mother), we watched as they returned from the restroom. Tom walking in front, Dad following with this bare hands held up in a surgeon’s post-scrub position, as to not contaminate them during transport. Tom opened the passenger door of the minivan and stepped aside. His job was done.

“Come here dear, let me take a look at that. Just tip your head back a little…”

And with a quick flick of the knife, Mom’s temporary filling popped out. People clapped. And Mom breathed a sign of instant relief. This would certainly deem prudent a long-distance call to the dentist later that night.

Nearly two decades later, as I recollect these childhood moments I ask myself what lessons I have learned from these experiences. Simply put: a steady hand and a ready pocket knife can solve most crises.

Of course this does not stand without the corollary: if your tooth hurts, don’t say a peep around my father or you run the risk of being involved in your own harrowing tale of impromptu dentistry.

The Night Zucchini Man Scared Grandma Too

One year, and I’m guessing it was about 1986 here, Margaret and I got to drive down to the beach early with Grandma & Grandpa. Though Mom and Dad would join us in a couple of days, this somehow seemed like a crazy what-happens-in-Nags-Head-stays-in-Nags-Head kind of windfall.

After playing in the sun all day, I woke up soaking wet and freezing cold in the middle of the night absolutely positive the disembodied head of the evil Zucchini Man was floating above my bed. Grandma came running to my screams and comforted me in the light of the kitchen where all was safe and soft like Grandma. As she struggled to understand my jumbled explanation of this monster (which looked a bit like a Sesame Street character with a fat green oval head) I turned to her, pointed to the ceiling, and calmly said, “well look Grandma, he’s right there.” At which point, Grandma was quite certain the heat radiating from my body was more fever than sunburn.

The official family diagnosis became “sun sickness” from getting too much sun the day before, but it was probably from the peyote we had for dinner. Like I said, what happens in Nags Head, stays in Nags Head.

Taking the Greeting out of the Season

I read an interesting string of arguments today about Focus on the Family’s list of retailers that use “Merry Christmas” and those that use other phrases like “Seasons Greetings.”

When the list was released, some folks were offended because the “Seasons Greetings” list was published basically as a blacklist. And shopping at the “Merry Christmas” list was encouraged by FOF.

I know religion is a very personal topic, that’s why is stirs so many deep emotions, and oftentimes, big frothy reactions from people. So listen up.

“Seasons Greetings” is not a politically-correct euphemism for “Merry Christmas.” No one’s trampling anyone’s religion here.

When people say “Seasons Greetings” they’re not trying to take Christmas away from anyone, but rather, quite the contrary. It is a simple way to show that you are not assuming the person you are greeting shares your religious beliefs. Which, in turn, is freeing you linguistically and socially to celebrate a Christ-full Christmas, Hanukkah –or whatever you may celebrate–or not celebrate. This is a greeting meant to pass on the excitement of first snowfalls, twinkle lights, roaring fireplaces, outdoor ice skating, and hot chocolate. It is in no way a castration of any “true meaning” of the season.

During the season in question, our country celebrates Thanksgiving and the New Year. Also, lots of individuals and families celebrate their personal religious holidays with their personal traditions. The biggie and most commercialized in our country at the moment is Christmas.

Now here comes the argument that saying “Seasons Greetings” is contributing to Christ being lost from Christmas. This argument leaves me asking, what? did someone shove him in the wrong box in the attic when they put him away last January? Only those Christians who allowed themselves to get caught up in the commercial side, forgetting their own spiritual side, are experiencing this self-induced loss. Plenty of folks keep Christ on the tops of their minds every day, including Christmas. Blaming others’ cheery winter greetings for your own feelings that the meaning has been extracted from your holiday is simply not logical. Do a little soul searching. You’ll probably find that missing meaning in there somewhere rattling around in a mislabeled box.

Many retail stores and companies choose to say “Seasons Greetings” for the reason illustrated above: it is not exclusive. Enjoying shopping at stores on the “Merry Christmas” list may be a great way to share in the spiritual side of Christmas with fellow Christians (and what an insult to the religion if these stores turned out not to be Christian-run). Likewise, for Christians to boycott companies that choose to open their doors to other religions seems a little ugly, and dare i say, exclusive, to me.

So please, let’s not over think this thing. Set aside those lists and infuse our economy with a little extra holiday cash. And more importantly, let’s embrace the long tradition of excitement that this season brings, and pass good will onto your neighbors regardless of how, or even if, they decorate their mantles.

The Passing of Prop 8 is a Slippery, Slippery Slope

Don’t punish others because you feel uncomfortable, or be careful what you wish for. The passing of Prop 8 is a slippery slope endangering the rights of all Americans.

If you are uncomfortable around people who are gay, that is your problem to deal with. For example, I am uncomfortable around people who make racist remarks. This language is offensive to me. I can choose to either avoid spending time with people who use this language, or work on getting over it.

The fact of the matter is, there are racist people in my country.

I can choose to yell at them. I can choose to call them names. What I cannot choose to do is take away these people’s rights to use this language. It is their constitutional right that is the foundation of the freedom in our country. In fact, this is #1 on the Bill of Rights.

What if I started a movement to take that right away? What if I now decided what language was appropriate and what was not?

Likewise, to amend the Constitution, as Proposition 8 has in the state of California, has done just that. It is thrusting a group of people’s discomfort onto other people in the form of laws. And this is simply not right.

At this time, I’d like to point our 2 weaknesses inherent to the metaphor of my example above.
1. People are not born racist or speaking in racist language. People are born gay.
2. Using racist language hurts people. Being gay does not hurt people.

For these reasons, it is even more crucial that gay people (or any group of people) are not singled out and stripped of rights they used to have. They have committed no crime; they have not changed the status of their citizenship; and in addition, they were born gay.

What logical, legal reason is there to make this group of people lower class citizens? In a country where we are afforded the gift, privilege, and right to the pursuit of happiness, how can we take this away from our fellow citizens? If we can do this, what rights can other groups of people take away from you?

This is a slippery and ugly slope, my friends.