I’m not really sure what to say about this.  However, I would like to thank the parents of these children for contributing to Idaho’s national reputation as being one of the most intolerant and racist areas of the country.  Way to go!

November 4th, 2008 was no doubt a historic day for our country. A new generation of Americans landed a devastating blow on the face of racism; and while we by no means knocked it out completely, cartoon birds could be spotted circling around its head.

However, while we may have written one of the final chapters in our country’s book on racial discrimination last week, we simultaneously took a major step back in the way we treat our homosexual brothers and sisters. The passage of Proposition 8 was a clear sign that while our country has made great strides in terms of shedding intolerance, we still have a long way to go.

A story that has generated a lot of interest since the polls closed in California last week is the role the LDS Church played in helping to pass the controversial proposition. Leaders of the Church heavily solicited support for the measure from their congregation, who responded by donating huge sums of money, accounting for over 70% of the total amount raised in the campaign to pass the proposition.

Because of this, the Mormon Church has received the vast majority of the finger pointing from those upset about the proposition’s success, and massive demonstrations have been held outside of LDS churches and temples all over the country, the largest taking place in San Francisco and Salt Lake City.

Many of us, myself included, will argue that it is wrong for any religion (or religious institutions as a whole for that matter) to hijack the idea of marriage as their own. Anyone who takes the time to research the history of marriage will understand that religion did not create it nor does it hold exclusive rights to defining it. In fact, many Christians may be surprised at the incredibly secular origins of an institution that they now hold sacred. The criticism the leaders of the LDS church are receiving is justified based on their refusal to recognize this alone.

However, it would be equally ignorant of those of us who are disappointed by the results of Proposition 8 to define every member of the LDS Church as intolerant. Plenty of us belong to a church with which we share many values, while at the same time leaving room for our own interpretation of the world as we see it. If you truly believe that all Catholics find birth control to be immoral, you are sorely mistaken. The same goes for members of the LDS Church. If you need proof of the fact that not all Mormons agree with the stance their church leaders took on Prop 8, simply browse through the links provided below:

Mormons for Marriage
San Francisco Gate
Mormon Democrats

Yes, the leaders of the LDS Church overstepped their bounds when they called for a massive assault on the rights of the LGBT members of our society. The consequence will likely be a serious inquiry in to whether or not they are able to retain their status as a tax-exempt institution. This is a consequence they have earned.

That said, every member of the LDS church deserves to be looked at as an individual, and not to be defined by the social or political views of their church officials. It’s no secret that we have a large number of church members here in the State of Idaho, many of which you might work with or call your friend. To simply assume that they are intolerant, based solely on the stance their church leaders take on this issue, would do little more than to perpetuate a culture of hate for which there is no room in our State, or our country.

I was checking my email this morning, and one the subject lines included “Obama.” Being a user of Gmail, the advertisement at the top of the page was tailored to such characteristics of my messages. Though, in general, I find this practice by Google distasteful, I’ve come to grips with it. Yet I was a little taken aback by what I saw this morning. The tag line reads: “’Impeach Obama’ Gear.” It’s a link to Café Press, an online retailer that allows it’s customers to personalize a variety of stickers, t-shirts, hats, buttons, etc. On this particular customer site is a barrage of anger-laden statements directed at Obama and his supporters, along the lines of “Don’t blame ME/ I voted for the/ HERO,” (backslashes indicate a line break) and displays of fear that America will become a socialist (what they mean is communist) state, like the one that proclaims “Welcome to 21^st Century America” and has a picture of the American flag, altered so that it has 50 white stars next to the sickle and hammer of the former USSR in red, on a black backdrop. Some have the ironic twist of incorporating items from Obama’s campaign, such as “Yes we can!/ Impeach Obama,” and some of these lack any semblance of meaning, i.e. the one which simply says “Zombies,” the only connection to Obama being the “O” is formatted like the one from his campaign, where the American flag is flowing across the bottom.

There are three of these which particularly bother me. First is the mock caution sign, which reads, “Lookout taxpayers/ Obama thinks you’re rich.” WE ARE RICH! I make $800 a month ($9,600 per year), far from the average, and I am LOADED in terms of global wealth. American’s constitute 5% of the world’s population, and we consume 25% of the world’s resources. If we’re getting 5 times our fair share of global resources, and that’s not even being spread out among the entirety of our population, maybe that means we have some extra money to pay in taxes. Just maybe. The second is one that reads “History was made./ Now it’s time to correct the mistake./ IMPEACH OBAMA.” This one bothers me in relation to the last one listed, “Dissent is not racism.” Well, it sure wouldn’t be, if the main knocks the “Right-wing Resistance members” had against Obama didn’t have anything to do with his perceived faith, his race, and misconceptions over what powers, exactly, the president can exercise, in terms of reconstituting the basis of our entire government. Ok, that last one has nothing to do with racism, and technically, neither does bias against his supposed Islamic beliefs (more faithism), but all three show profound levels of ignorance, which is dangerous, no matter the subject.

Once I finished reading these, and my head was on the verge of exploding at the knowledge that I had purchased from Café Press (t-shirt for Mustaches vs. Cancer, see earlier post), I found my saving grace. One the left hand side of the page were advertisements for other “Election ‘08” materials being sold by Café Press. The knowledge that many, if not all purchasers of the site’s specific goods would have to view these to ads, brought me back down out of the red. One, a t-shirt with Martin Luther King Jr. and Barrack Obama, which reads “Yes we will,” and the second, a shirt which reads “HOPE WON!” Beautiful.

It may no longer be a topic of much substance or meaning, however, I still find it tremendously amusing that Alaskan Governor Sarah Palin is incapable of responding to questions and that her team of aides continues to mount monumentally weak defenses. With the votes in and their campaigning finished, anonymous members of Arizona Senator John McCain’s team have been stepping forward, one after another to accuse Palin of a myriad of shortcoming, ranging from incompetence, to squandering money, to selfishness, lack of commitment to the campaign, etcetera, etcetera.

When is was revealed that the GOP wanted to have returned much of the over $150,000 dollars in clothing purchased for Palin and her family (much more than she was cleared to purchase), her staff tells us “the clothes got lost, whoopsie!” When McCain’s aides called her distant and more concerned with her future than McCain’s campaign, Palin tells us she won’t respond to anonymous comments. Well, that takes care of those problems, ignorance sure is bliss and took her and McCain straight to a resounding defeat, one he wouldn’t even allow her to comment on. I guess he wanted to hold onto a small measure of dignity in the end. When responding to claims that she was grossly uninformed of national policy, her staff called her “brilliant” and said she has a “photographic memory.” Does this sound like playground “nuh-uh” tactics to anyone else? I think they followed that up by saying Palin has put up a force field which keeps all insults from getting to her and that her dad could beat up their dads.

Although, her uncanny regurgitation of campaign rhetoric does smack of an ability to memorize exact phrases. “Now just give this to the American public, Sarah. Don’t ruin the campaign by actually introducing anything of substance from your own mind.” And then they say, “Oh crap, did she just claim she has foreign policy experience because she can see Russia from her backyard?” To which Palin responds, “Apple pie, Joe Six-Pack, hockey moms across America, Bill Ayers, maverick, I have a record, real America.” Sure is surprising a woman that well spoken couldn’t carry to victory, an already faulty campaign, one based on attacking their opponent and stirring up fear among the public.

Having followed this process closely from nomination to election, it warms my heart to have witnessed the defeat of Bush-Cheney politics and the reinforcement of America’s choice in the bickering of McCain and Palin’s staffs. Can you imagine what they would have been like sitting in the driver’s seat and shotgun of American politics? I think the next eight years might have looked something like Little Miss Sunshine, except it’d be McCain getting wrapped up in a bed sheet and thrown in the back of the van, and there wouldn’t be the happy coming together of a tragically dysfunctional family at the end. We’d all just be left standing next to a smoking, broken down van, looking to our mommy to get us home, only she can’t drive stick and grandpa’s remains are starting to stink.

To be honest, I think it would be ignorant of me to believe that I have anything of significance to say regarding last night’s historic election. There are thousands of individuals who have already spoken, and whose words are laced with everything from advanced knowledge of political history, to experience in the civil rights movement. An attempt to add anything relative to the conversation would simply fall short.

Perhaps this is because words don’t actually do this moment justice. I listened last night as some of our nation’s most prominent African American leaders struggled to summarize their feelings. I watched as those who sacrificed their time, energy, and financial security to help elect a candidate they believed in so fully, simply broke down in to tears. Words were not enough for any of them.

It is possible that one day I will be able to formulate something that adequately describes what transpired last night both in Chicago and inside my head. Until then, however, I won’t taint this moment with words.

My dad’s lifetime voting history:

1968 – Richard Nixon (R)
1972 – Richard Nixon (R)
1976 – Gerald Ford (R)
1980 – Ronald Regan (R)
1984 – Ronald Regan (R)
1988 – George H.W. Bush (R)
1992 – George H.W. Bush (R)
1996 – Bob Dole (R)
2000 – George W. Bush (R)
2004 – George W. Bush (R)
2008 – Barack Obama (D)

Hell yeah.

My emotions are incredibly hard to describe at the moment. My brain has served up a strange cocktail consisting of the excitement a five year old feels just before going to bed on Christmas Eve, and the anxiety a college student experiences before taking a final exam. One thing is for sure, regardless of how long it takes for the results to be finalized on Tuesday night (or Wednesday morning), it will not be until that moment that I am able to fall asleep.

I’ve often looked back on my parents’ generation with great admiration and thinly veiled jealousy. Here was a group of young people that didn’t just complain about the injustices they saw in their country, but stood up to say “enough is enough!” Enough with racial divisiveness! Enough with McCarthyism and the politics of fear! Enough with hegemony masquerading as tradition.

But somewhere along the way many of those folks lost that fire. Furthermore, many of their children never obtained it. The political action gene was never nurtured in generation X or generation Y. Many of us were raised to be apathetic. Why couldn’t our generation be like that of our parents? Where were our rallies? Where were our demonstrations? Where were our protests? Most importantly, why were we staying home on election night?

Tuesday we have a chance to regain our identity as a nation. Tuesday my parents’ generation will be given the opportunity to shed their apathy; to stand up once again and say, “ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!” Tuesday, my generation will have a chance to make their voices truly heard for the first time. Tuesday we have the chance to set our nation on a course where equal opportunity is not simply talked about, but valued and put in to practice. Tuesday we can finally issue an ultimatum to our own future.

And Tuesday…only God knows what can help us if we don’t…

One of the biggest fears of any coach is that their team will “play down” to the level of a weaker opponent. Last year, the high school team I coach failed to score the first goal against three teams that had no business taking a lead on us. While we won all of those games handily, those initial few minutes of uninspired play were nerve wracking. We had come to believe we were so much better than the other team, that the final score was a given, regardless of our effort. Obviously our opponents had other ideas, and we quickly realized that in order to secure a victory against anyone, we would have to show up strong.

Recently, some polls have come out showing that McCain is narrowing the gap that Obama has opened up over the last month. There are even some fringe polls showing a slight McCain lead. Subsequently, some Obama supporter are starting to freak out just a little bit.

But my question is this: Might a late McCain surge actually benefit Obama? Like the underdog who scores the first goal against a heavily favored opponent, will narrowing polls light a fire in some Obama supporters? I’ve personally been scared of complacency amongst the Democrats. Many are acting like this race is already over, and part of me believes that will lead some to forgo voting. Too much of this attitude might open the door for a McCain upset. However, if Obama’s supporters believe that their vote is necessary to help stave off a late rally by McCain, it might motivate some to make the extra effort to get to the polls.

A recent HuffPo article suggested that Obama supporters are much more optimistic than McCain supporters, and that will lead to a higher turnout amongst Democrats. They may be right, but I also believe that some people may need a little extra incentive to vote. The more vital you believe your vote is to an Obama victory, the more incentive you have to show up.

That said….VOTE!!!!

I saw a link to this ad on HuffPo, and couldn’t resist posting it up here. The creator of the iconic “Are you better off than you were four years ago?” Reagan ads is back at it. Only this time, he’s using Reagan’s words for the Dems.

First things first – I am an Idahoan. While I was born in California, my parents moved me to the Gem State before I could even crawl. Having gone to college in Caldwell, my dad believed that Idaho would be a better place for me to grow up, and luckily he was able to convince my mom of the same. So while I identify myself as being from Idaho, the vast majority of my extended family consider themselves to be Californians. Most grew up there, most raised their kids there, and most still live there. This is one of the many reasons I feel connected to the debate over the proposition 8 legislation that Californians will vote on in one week.

For those of you who have not been following the controversy that is proposition 8, let me give you a quick history lesson (If you do know the history, skip this paragraph). In May the California Supreme Court ruled that any two consenting adults could legally enter in to marriage. The California gay community celebrated the decision, and many same-sex partners immediately took advantage by legally tying the knot. As you might guess, this decision was met by harsh criticism from many social conservatives. They pointed to the passing of proposition 22, which in 2000 amended the “California Family Code” (whatever that is) to read that marriage consists of a union between one man and one woman. The result of this conflict is proposition 8, an initiative which, should it pass, would amend the California State Constitution to read “Only marriage between a man and woman is valid in the State of California.”

Supporters of proposition 8 have an arsenal of arguments that include everything from “same-sex marriages undermine the value of traditional marriage” to “the interests of children and families will no longer be taken in to consideration in our schools.”

One question: How? How do same-sex marriages have any effect on marriages between a man and a woman? The value of a marriage is determined by how much importance the two people involved place on it, period. My marriage to my wife is the most important thing in the world to me. Decisions made by others, whether they be gay or straight, have absolutely no relevance to our relationship.

Furthermore, does anybody really believe the that a drunken heterosexual marriage at a small Vegas chapel at 2 a.m. is more valid than that of a committed homosexual couple? Does anybody think a child awaiting adoption cares if their parents are gay or straight, or do you think they just want a family that loves them? Is a traditional marriage that ends in divorce a better environment for children than a loving home created by two married men or women? If we are truly trying to “protect marriage“, should we make divorce illegal as well?

I’ll stop short of confronting the religious arguments against same-sex marriages. Porter, our resident sociologist, is probably more qualified to take on that task. However, I encourage the Californian members of my family to respect the freedom of all individuals, regardless of sexual orientation, and help vote down this oppressive proposition.