Hard Stuff

I'm repeating this as new, cause it's.... relevant again.

The spirits hold me

when it hurts to see,

Drowning

is what I feel

when I’ve gotten a raw deal.

It

doesn’t really matter much

cause there’s no such

thing as having it

All.

The spirits know

when it’s time for me to go

Away.

Dearest Nightmare

Kindly fuck off! Okay... Thanks.




- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone

Domestic Partnerships for All

Face the Nation is talking about marriage equality this morning.  The statistics they shared is that the United States is split almost equally down the middle (with a little higher number on the support for gay marriage side).  And the statistics are in even higher support for same sex marriage when only people under 30 are polled.  This issue is highly divisive, as many people are confusing the legalities of "marriage" with religion.

This is my proposal, and I wonder if it will make all sides happy:  The states no longer issue marriage license to anyone; not even to a couple consisting of one man and one woman. The states will only issue a license for domestic partnerships.  The couple (traditional, or same sex) goes to the courthouse and request a domestic partnership license to be afforded the benefits the states offers. That is the extent of the states involvement.  The government is only involved on the business side of the union. 

If a couple wishes a wedding, and a marriage to celebrate their union with their God or without a God... they do that in their churches; defining marriage how they deem appropriate. So, if a couple wishes to define marriage as birthing children, raising those children, and fostering the union between the couple under the laws of Christianity; that's their choice, and is the business of that family, their church and their God.  However, if a man and a woman wish to join together, sharing their life together without having any children and they go to the Buddhist temple every Saturday; they will still be afforded the benefits the state offers to couples in domestic partnerships. --And of course, ditto for same sex couples.

This proposal separates the business side of marriage and the religious definition of marriage.  And then perhaps same sex couples will not be cast as the deviants in a society, and if they choose so, they can legally adopt children, and love those children that no one else wanted to love... and life will go on!  Everyone is treated equally under the eyes of the law; and everyone can define marriage the way they see fit within their religious establishments.  What do you think?

Tuesday's Thought...

If I could be loved as well as I am hated...  I'd be content.

messed up

she stands on the edge of space
holding a tissue full of lies;
time claims its victory, for now

unraveling

beneath the center of blackness,
where nothing begets her
parting ways;

before

delivering gifts of feathers
where we'll soar
over false shadows, but for

today

I'll leave you
like drying paint on native skin
burning in the sun.

until then,

I'll be in the branches,
until you're ready to climb; from
the settling dust.

Be, Do, Embrace, the Different

I find it interesting how, as human beings we are so scared of change.  But, the kind of change we are most afraid of is the kind of change that requires us to do something different.  We pray, hope, dream, wish, (whichever word works for you) for change every single day.
                            "I wish I could have that."
                            "I pray tomorrow will be better."
                            "I hope I find happiness someday."
                            "I dream of the day life is kinder to me."

And yet, when something, (or even someone) comes along that offers a resource to realize those changes... but it means that we have to do something different (change the way we act or think)... we close up tighter than Fort Knox.  We want change, but only if we get to keep living in our same world of denial.  It's a vicious cycle.  How do we grow to understand that in order to get the change we want, we have to do something different?  How do we get ourselves to eagerly embrace changing our point of view, or our way of doing things to foster the change that we are praying, hoping, dreaming, wishing for?  It's interesting how we look at "so and so" and think to ourselves, or HELL! --we might even say it out loud, "Look how happy they are! I wish I could be like them!"  But, we usually don't do what it is they do to be or do what they do. (wait... did that make sense???  HA!)  In other words, we just keep doing the same ol' shit over and over again... Why?  Because "My way is the best way! And if the universe really liked me, it would give me what I want because I want it without having to leave my comfort zone, DAMMIT!!!"  Albert Einstein said my most favorite quote of all time.  He said, "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results."

"We have to be the change we want to see in the world."  Yea, that doesn't mean exactly what I'm saying here, but it's still true.  If you like your life the way it is, keep on keepin' on.  But, if you find yourself lost in a state of perpetual hope for something different, then you gotta be different, do different, embrace different.  Stop bitchin' and change it up; it's as simple as that. -- I know what you're thinking. Since I'm on a quote roll, "it's easier said than done."  Yea, I get that, I'm living that right this second.  I said it for years (My wish, dream, hope, prayers to "save" the world --well, not really save the world, that's a different story for a different post. But, if you're a regular southern poetaster reader, you kinda know what I mean), but now I'm doing it!  And you know what?  I'm probably going to spend less time doing it than I spent saying it.  You just have to get started!  Now is as good a time as any!

Deafness

Wars break out,
I am convinced
when we do more talking
or shooting, or bombing, or blasting, or one upping
than listening...

How can anyone possibly hear a thing through all of the explosions???

Hard Cider

Too strong, for apple pie
and hard to swallow with its
bitter rush.  It hits
below the belt with a lie

of being something it never was
s'pose to be. But hell, I don't care
cause I wouldn't dare
miss this amazin' buzz....



                                                 for a minute.

It only takes one YES to erase a million No's!

Thoughts on the loose
won't wash down,
with even such things
as apple juice.
This is as lame
as Mother Goose,
I know;

but still, 
my thoughts won't.

Which wish I'll dream tonight
I've yet to weave;
But a heap of hope
will see me through...
Like a bit of blue sky
through clouds of rain.

G'nite moon and to you too.

the right to.... ?

I have been assigned to a debate on gun control in my human rights class.  I was given the pro side of government gun control.  I am working on my opening statement.  How does this sound?

We have seen, as American people that our precious, sacred constitution of these United States often times needs amending or ratifying to change with our ever changing morals and beliefs and to protect those who cannot protect themselves.  The original constitution did not create ALL men equal.  It declared all white men to be equal --leaving everyone else as a "lesser than."  All black men are created as equal as all white men.  All women are created as equal as all men.  We know this to be true that no document can be created that places the value of ones life above another; or one right above another.  The second amendment gives all the right to bear arms.  The first amendment gives to each and everyone of us the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.  Are we morally justified in supporting a document without amendments that puts more value on one particular right over another?  Are we morally justified to not hold all men accountable for the disgrace of a few?  Can we as a nation continue to allow one group of people to monopolize the rights of another?   The right to life.  So many souls around the globe have fought and died for this right.  Is the right to life any less valuable than the right to bear arms?

The 'Children's Defense Fund,' an NGO protecting the human rights of children filed a report on January 3, 2013.  It stated that more children and teens have died from guns every three days than died that horrible day since the Shady Hook massacre. One child or teen dies at the hands of a gun every three hours in the United States.

The report also stated that between 1979 and 2010; 119,079 children and teens have died from guns.  This is more child and teen deaths in 32 years then U.S. soldiers killed in action in the Vietnam, Korean, Afghanistan, and Iraq wars combined.

Between the years of 2000 and 2010, a total of 332,014 people of all ages have died from guns.  That is more people than the entire population of almost any county in any state!

Are we morally justified in not being held accountable for these deaths simply because the 2nd amendment states that we have a right to bear arms?  What about the right to life?