My friend Brittany was doing a give away on her blog for a cd from this guy. I won! I'm so excited.
You have got to give this guy a listen. Truly talented. Here's a JLR video link I took from Britt's blog - love this song!
Monday, September 29, 2008
Sunday, September 28, 2008
Thursday, September 25, 2008
Unbelievably this is from France. . .
My Dad forwarded this to me. Shocked (but pleased) to see something like this come from one of the most liberal societies in the West. This just adds more information and weight to the article I posted below.
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
Same Sex Marriage Article
From the Los Angeles Times - Opinion
By David Blankenhorn
September 19, 2008
I'm a liberal Democrat. And I do not favor same-sex marriage. Do those positions sound contradictory? To me, they fit together.
Many seem to believe that marriage is simply a private love relationship between two people. They accept this view, in part, because Americans have increasingly emphasized and come to value the intimate, emotional side of marriage, and in part because almost all opinion leaders today, from journalists to judges, strongly embrace this position. That's certainly the idea that underpinned the California Supreme Court's legalization of same-sex marriage.
But I spent a year studying the history and anthropology of marriage, and I've come to a different conclusion.
Marriage as a human institution is constantly evolving, and many of its features vary across groups and cultures. But there is one constant. In all societies, marriage shapes the rights and obligations of parenthood. Among us humans, the scholars report, marriage is not primarily a license to have sex. Nor is it primarily a license to receive benefits or social recognition. It is primarily a license to have children.
In this sense, marriage is a gift that society bestows on its next generation. Marriage (and only marriage) unites the three core dimensions of parenthood -- biological, social and legal -- into one pro-child form: the married couple. Marriage says to a child: The man and the woman whose sexual union made you will also be there to love and raise you. Marriage says to society as a whole: For every child born, there is a recognized mother and a father, accountable to the child and to each other.
These days, because of the gay marriage debate, one can be sent to bed without supper for saying such things. But until very recently, almost no one denied this core fact about marriage. Summing up the cross-cultural evidence, the anthropologist Helen Fisher in 1992 put it simply: "People wed primarily to reproduce." The philosopher and Nobel laureate Bertrand Russell, certainly no friend of conventional sexual morality, was only repeating the obvious a few decades earlier when he concluded that "it is through children alone that sexual relations become important to society, and worthy to be taken cognizance of by a legal institution."
Marriage is society's most pro-child institution. In 2002 -- just moments before it became highly unfashionable to say so -- a team of researchers from Child Trends, a nonpartisan research center, reported that "family structure clearly matters for children, and the family structure that helps children the most is a family headed by two biological parents in a low-conflict marriage."
All our scholarly instruments seem to agree: For healthy development, what a child needs more than anything else is the mother and father who together made the child, who love the child and love each other.
For these reasons, children have the right, insofar as society can make it possible, to know and to be cared for by the two parents who brought them into this world. The foundational human rights document in the world today regarding children, the 1989 U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child, specifically guarantees children this right. The last time I checked, liberals like me were supposed to be in favor of internationally recognized human rights, particularly concerning children, who are typically society's most voiceless and vulnerable group. Or have I now said something I shouldn't?
Every child being raised by gay or lesbian couples will be denied his birthright to both parents who made him. Every single one. Moreover, losing that right will not be a consequence of something that at least most of us view as tragic, such as a marriage that didn't last, or an unexpected pregnancy where the father-to-be has no intention of sticking around. On the contrary, in the case of same-sex marriage and the children of those unions, it will be explained to everyone, including the children, that something wonderful has happened!
For me, what we are encouraged or permitted to say, or not say, to one another about what our society owes its children is crucially important in the debate over initiatives like California's Proposition 8, which would reinstate marriage's customary man-woman form. Do you think that every child deserves his mother and father, with adoption available for those children whose natural parents cannot care for them? Do you suspect that fathers and mothers are different from one another? Do you imagine that biological ties matter to children? How many parents per child is best? Do you think that "two" is a better answer than one, three, four or whatever? If you do, be careful. In making the case for same-sex marriage, more than a few grown-ups will be quite willing to question your integrity and goodwill. Children, of course, are rarely consulted.
The liberal philosopher Isaiah Berlin famously argued that, in many cases, the real conflict we face is not good versus bad but good versus good. Reducing homophobia is good. Protecting the birthright of the child is good. How should we reason together as a society when these two good things conflict?
Here is my reasoning. I reject homophobia and believe in the equal dignity of gay and lesbian love. Because I also believe with all my heart in the right of the child to the mother and father who made her, I believe that we as a society should seek to maintain and to strengthen the only human institution -- marriage -- that is specifically intended to safeguard that right and make it real for our children.
Legalized same-sex marriage almost certainly benefits those same-sex couples who choose to marry, as well as the children being raised in those homes. But changing the meaning of marriage to accommodate homosexual orientation further and perhaps definitively undermines for all of us the very thing -- the gift, the birthright -- that is marriage's most distinctive contribution to human society. That's a change that, in the final analysis, I cannot support.
By David Blankenhorn
September 19, 2008
I'm a liberal Democrat. And I do not favor same-sex marriage. Do those positions sound contradictory? To me, they fit together.
Many seem to believe that marriage is simply a private love relationship between two people. They accept this view, in part, because Americans have increasingly emphasized and come to value the intimate, emotional side of marriage, and in part because almost all opinion leaders today, from journalists to judges, strongly embrace this position. That's certainly the idea that underpinned the California Supreme Court's legalization of same-sex marriage.
But I spent a year studying the history and anthropology of marriage, and I've come to a different conclusion.
Marriage as a human institution is constantly evolving, and many of its features vary across groups and cultures. But there is one constant. In all societies, marriage shapes the rights and obligations of parenthood. Among us humans, the scholars report, marriage is not primarily a license to have sex. Nor is it primarily a license to receive benefits or social recognition. It is primarily a license to have children.
In this sense, marriage is a gift that society bestows on its next generation. Marriage (and only marriage) unites the three core dimensions of parenthood -- biological, social and legal -- into one pro-child form: the married couple. Marriage says to a child: The man and the woman whose sexual union made you will also be there to love and raise you. Marriage says to society as a whole: For every child born, there is a recognized mother and a father, accountable to the child and to each other.
These days, because of the gay marriage debate, one can be sent to bed without supper for saying such things. But until very recently, almost no one denied this core fact about marriage. Summing up the cross-cultural evidence, the anthropologist Helen Fisher in 1992 put it simply: "People wed primarily to reproduce." The philosopher and Nobel laureate Bertrand Russell, certainly no friend of conventional sexual morality, was only repeating the obvious a few decades earlier when he concluded that "it is through children alone that sexual relations become important to society, and worthy to be taken cognizance of by a legal institution."
Marriage is society's most pro-child institution. In 2002 -- just moments before it became highly unfashionable to say so -- a team of researchers from Child Trends, a nonpartisan research center, reported that "family structure clearly matters for children, and the family structure that helps children the most is a family headed by two biological parents in a low-conflict marriage."
All our scholarly instruments seem to agree: For healthy development, what a child needs more than anything else is the mother and father who together made the child, who love the child and love each other.
For these reasons, children have the right, insofar as society can make it possible, to know and to be cared for by the two parents who brought them into this world. The foundational human rights document in the world today regarding children, the 1989 U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child, specifically guarantees children this right. The last time I checked, liberals like me were supposed to be in favor of internationally recognized human rights, particularly concerning children, who are typically society's most voiceless and vulnerable group. Or have I now said something I shouldn't?
Every child being raised by gay or lesbian couples will be denied his birthright to both parents who made him. Every single one. Moreover, losing that right will not be a consequence of something that at least most of us view as tragic, such as a marriage that didn't last, or an unexpected pregnancy where the father-to-be has no intention of sticking around. On the contrary, in the case of same-sex marriage and the children of those unions, it will be explained to everyone, including the children, that something wonderful has happened!
For me, what we are encouraged or permitted to say, or not say, to one another about what our society owes its children is crucially important in the debate over initiatives like California's Proposition 8, which would reinstate marriage's customary man-woman form. Do you think that every child deserves his mother and father, with adoption available for those children whose natural parents cannot care for them? Do you suspect that fathers and mothers are different from one another? Do you imagine that biological ties matter to children? How many parents per child is best? Do you think that "two" is a better answer than one, three, four or whatever? If you do, be careful. In making the case for same-sex marriage, more than a few grown-ups will be quite willing to question your integrity and goodwill. Children, of course, are rarely consulted.
The liberal philosopher Isaiah Berlin famously argued that, in many cases, the real conflict we face is not good versus bad but good versus good. Reducing homophobia is good. Protecting the birthright of the child is good. How should we reason together as a society when these two good things conflict?
Here is my reasoning. I reject homophobia and believe in the equal dignity of gay and lesbian love. Because I also believe with all my heart in the right of the child to the mother and father who made her, I believe that we as a society should seek to maintain and to strengthen the only human institution -- marriage -- that is specifically intended to safeguard that right and make it real for our children.
Legalized same-sex marriage almost certainly benefits those same-sex couples who choose to marry, as well as the children being raised in those homes. But changing the meaning of marriage to accommodate homosexual orientation further and perhaps definitively undermines for all of us the very thing -- the gift, the birthright -- that is marriage's most distinctive contribution to human society. That's a change that, in the final analysis, I cannot support.
Cabinets and floor are in!
Here are the latest pics. Cabinets and flooring are in. Appliances come tomorrow and then countertop next week! Our lights came in the mail yesterday and I LOVE them. Can't wait to install them. And I can wait for it to be done!!
Sunday, September 14, 2008
Preschool Drama - Need Advice.
So preschool seems to be causing some attachment issues for Nikolai. For background info, he is supposed to go 3 days/week for 4 hours/day. Last week was the first week. By the 3rd day he was crying and begging not to go.
Today, we took Nikolai to nursery at church. He has been going to nursery since he was 18 months old and has never had a problem going. Well today, he screamed bloody murder for the first ten minutes until his teachers had to go get Steve. He ended up in primary sitting next to me and watching sharing time. I leaned over to ask him if he wanted to go back to nursery yet. His response:
"No, if I went back to nursery you would miss me. And mommy, you need someone to take care of you."
He told us later he was worried that we wouldn't come back and pick him up. When have we ever forgotten to pick him up? He has also started sleeping with his door open since preschool started. He says he wants to be able to hear us. We'll hear him sneak out once or twice so that he can come peek over the banister and make sure we're still home, and then he goes and gets back in bed. How does 3 days of preschool do this? Is it reversible? Anyone else ever had a kid struggle so much? Do I take him out and wait till next year? HELP!!
Today, we took Nikolai to nursery at church. He has been going to nursery since he was 18 months old and has never had a problem going. Well today, he screamed bloody murder for the first ten minutes until his teachers had to go get Steve. He ended up in primary sitting next to me and watching sharing time. I leaned over to ask him if he wanted to go back to nursery yet. His response:
"No, if I went back to nursery you would miss me. And mommy, you need someone to take care of you."
He told us later he was worried that we wouldn't come back and pick him up. When have we ever forgotten to pick him up? He has also started sleeping with his door open since preschool started. He says he wants to be able to hear us. We'll hear him sneak out once or twice so that he can come peek over the banister and make sure we're still home, and then he goes and gets back in bed. How does 3 days of preschool do this? Is it reversible? Anyone else ever had a kid struggle so much? Do I take him out and wait till next year? HELP!!
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
2nd Day of Preschool
Today on the way home from his 2nd day of preschool Nikolai says:
"Mom, how can I get little again so I can stay with you and not go to preschool?"
Oh break my heart.
"Mom, how can I get little again so I can stay with you and not go to preschool?"
Oh break my heart.
Go Cougs! and other political ramblings
This is a great article. My mom has been saying for years that the Democratic leadership's problem is their disdain for the people they want to help - and she used to be a Dem. I also really enjoyed this article that my friend Kristin recommended to her sister Shauri. It made me marginally less afraid of Obama, and gave me a greater respect for the way he makes decisions. But, I still don't agree with him on most of those decisions :).
I suppose the root of my opposition to the Democratic party is that I don't want someone doing for me what I can do for myself - you can ask my mother, it started early. And I also don't want to be doing for someone else what they should be doing for themselves. If you can't do something yourself, than that's a different story -- but I think that is the exception rather than the rule. Don't take away my freedom to fail and I won't take away your freedom to succeed.
The extreme Democratic position is a lot like socialism. I love the idea of zero homelessness, but if it comes at the cost of my right to fail, then no way. Take away my right to fail, and you have also taken away my right to build my life into something better with my own two hands. No, I would not trade 100% employment for my dignity or the right to chart my own path. Perhaps that seems extreme. Most likely that is not the end goal of the Dems but I worry that is where the path leads nonetheless. The Libertarian in me revolts.
All I know is, I don't want to end up like the Russian people. Steve reminded me of a famous Russian movie that shows a man who leaves his apartment to go to work but then goes home to a completely different apartment but continues to live his life like nothing has changed. The point being that it didn't really matter because everyone's life was exactly the same. It was mocking the Russian system and it's lack of variety and ingenuity - the cost of perfect equality.
Failures and bad choices can strengthen and define us, as we overcome them. America has never promised everyone a perfectly equal result just because you live here. It does however promise everyone the equal opportunity to pursue happiness. And by equal opportunity I don't mean equal resources and means. I mean, you have freedom. Some people are born into humbler and harder circumstances than others. That is a part of life. But in America you have the choice to work as hard as you can to try to improve your circumstances. Freedom to work hard no matter where you are placed and no matter what your critics say. Those who have chosen to overcome the odds (immigrants, people from humble circumstance) inspire me. Partially because I know I have that same choice everyday, to pursue a path toward happiness, including all the bumps of failure and flights of success on the way. But it is my choice, my hard work or lack thereof, that earns my reward at the end of the day - not some handout from some bureaucrat. In most cases I would say free handouts take away the dignity of the one receiving it (especially if they know they could have done something to earn it) and handouts don't even begin to engender in the receiver any abiding love for the giver - in fact just the opposite seems to be true in many cases. There is often a deep sense of bitterness that accompanies such freebies. But that's for a different post.
On top of everything I just wrote please add my deep misgivings about Obama's social policies. Steve is telling me that I've already written too much, so to be continued . . . Goodnight.
Tuesday, September 9, 2008
First Day of PreSchool and wrestling with Luke
1) Nikolai had been mostly excited about going until we got there this morning and he realized I wasn't staying. He whimpered a little but then he went and started playing playdoh with Miss Michelle and that was that.
2) They are all boy!
2) They are all boy!
Wednesday, September 3, 2008
Convention Talk - Forgive Me
My husband says the conventions are 'theatre.' I agree and I love it :).
1) Favorite button of the night: "Sarah Palin - Hottest VP from the Coldest State."
2) Favorite Speech: Rudy G. -- Just listen to it or read it here. He dropped the hammer. Still laughing. And Palin wasn't too shabby either.
3) Favorite Quote by Palin: "I guess a small time mayor is like a community organizer. . except that you have actual responsibilities."
And best quote by Huckabee: He said the media's coverage of the Palin family was, "tackier than a costume change at a Madonna concert."
Okay, and one more because I can't resist (Rudy):
1) Favorite button of the night: "Sarah Palin - Hottest VP from the Coldest State."
2) Favorite Speech: Rudy G. -- Just listen to it or read it here. He dropped the hammer. Still laughing. And Palin wasn't too shabby either.
3) Favorite Quote by Palin: "I guess a small time mayor is like a community organizer. . except that you have actual responsibilities."
And best quote by Huckabee: He said the media's coverage of the Palin family was, "tackier than a costume change at a Madonna concert."
Okay, and one more because I can't resist (Rudy):
"When Russia rolled over Georgia, John McCain knew exactly how to respond.
Having been to that part of the world many times and having developed a clear worldview over many years, John knew where he stood. Within hours, he established a very strong, informed position that let the world know exactly how he'll respond as President. At exactly the right time, John McCain said, "We're all Georgians."
Obama's first instinct was to create a moral equivalency - that "both sides" should "show restraint." The same moral equivalency that he has displayed in discussing the Palestinian Authority and the State of Israel.
Later, after discussing it with his 300 foreign policy advisors, he changed his position and suggested that the "the UN Security Council," could find a solution. Apparently, none of his 300 advisors told him that Russia has a veto on any UN action. Finally Obama put out a statement that looked ...well, it looked a lot like John McCain's.
Here's some free advice: Sen. Obama, next time just call John McCain."
You gotta love the conventions. Kind of mean but pure comedy. I have to admit this convention just brings up the question again in my mind "How did Obama get where he is?" Not to say that he isn't educated and isn't a smart man, because he is. But really, that's all he is, educated. . . he hasn't done anything noteworthy or just anything, so how did he get to be the Democratic nominee? Please, someone tell me. . (without being rude). Charisma isn't enough to recommend someone for the highest office in the United States of America.Tuesday, September 2, 2008
Go Blue!
Just got back from a trip to Michigan to visit our friends the Ellises. We miss you so much!! Here are highlight pics from the trips (these can also be seen on Kristin's Blog and other fabulous pics taken by Kristin's Sister Shauri can be seen here).
1) The drive to Michigan at night while the boys slept -- why did it take us so long to figure out traveling like that is the way to go:
2) So happy together:
3) The best hostess ever (and Abram the best host but I don't have a pic of him). As beautiful on the outside as she is on the inside. Still mourning their move but glad to know it isn't too far away:
4) The game:
5) Getting to know you:
6) Sleepovers. Let's just say, softy babysitters. The first sleepover never turned into sleep. We found them giggling and jumping on the bed. The second one turned into furious cries when we tried to move them to separate beds:
7) Fun on the town. The second pic is because Kristin said all we have are pictures of us all eating together (so instead we have one with Shauri's head growing out of my neck). And BTW, the Prickly Pear rocks!!
9) Awesome pics by Shauri - THANK YOU!!
8) Saying goodbye. Everytime I told Nikolai we were going to have to leave he would say, "No, cause mom, I'm going to miss Max sooo much." Max woke up this morning and told Kris "I don't want my friends to leave." I'm so glad my boy has such great friends:
We can't wait to see you all again! Thank you for your amazing hospitality this last weekend. Sure do love you guys!
1) The drive to Michigan at night while the boys slept -- why did it take us so long to figure out traveling like that is the way to go:
2) So happy together:
3) The best hostess ever (and Abram the best host but I don't have a pic of him). As beautiful on the outside as she is on the inside. Still mourning their move but glad to know it isn't too far away:
4) The game:
5) Getting to know you:
6) Sleepovers. Let's just say, softy babysitters. The first sleepover never turned into sleep. We found them giggling and jumping on the bed. The second one turned into furious cries when we tried to move them to separate beds:
7) Fun on the town. The second pic is because Kristin said all we have are pictures of us all eating together (so instead we have one with Shauri's head growing out of my neck). And BTW, the Prickly Pear rocks!!
9) Awesome pics by Shauri - THANK YOU!!
8) Saying goodbye. Everytime I told Nikolai we were going to have to leave he would say, "No, cause mom, I'm going to miss Max sooo much." Max woke up this morning and told Kris "I don't want my friends to leave." I'm so glad my boy has such great friends:
We can't wait to see you all again! Thank you for your amazing hospitality this last weekend. Sure do love you guys!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
