The real "threat" of gay marriage.

Well, same-sex partners who are legally married are eligibloe for federal benefits in the same way as heterosexual couples. It is a real no brainer for people who believe in equal protection under the laws of the United States of America. After all, the First Amendment in the Bill of Rights states "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."  The Defense of Marriage Act of 1996 clearly established a bias against same-sex/homosexual couples. "Section 2. Powers reserved to the states. No State, territory, or possession of the United States, or Indian tribe, shall be required to give effect to any public act, record, or judicial proceeding of any other State, territory, possession, or tribe respecting a relationship between persons of the same sex that is treated as a marriage under the laws of such other State, territory, possession, or tribe, or a right or claim arising from such relationship.Section 3. Definition of marriage In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States, the word 'marriage' means only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife, and the word 'spouse' refers only to a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife." 

The definition of marriage in DOMA singles out one type of marriage union, that of a man and woman. The union of a man and woman is also the only natural biological way people can reproduce. It takes a man's "stuff" and a woman's "stuff" to conceive a child. It is also the sexual behavior encouraged by majority religions. However not all religions solely recognize men & women. Other religions have vague definitions of appropriate sexuality or address "proper sexual behavior" head on. These are religions that focus on the spirit rather than the organization of the religious congregants. It is the classic "spirituality religion" versus "organized religion" clash. 

This spiritual church versus organizational church clash is where it bigotry in religion falls apart. While not everyone fits in to nice neat spiritual boxes, the organizational church wants people to fit in to their rules. Even those that admonish that "God works in mysterious ways" look for people to act and behave within their organizational rules. It makes "running the church" easier for those who can't, or chose not to, acknowledge conflicts arising from the spiritual teachings and maintaining an orderly organization. 

This definition of marriage in DOMA establishes a respect for the "organized religion" while prohibiting the free exercise of "spiritual religion." Period.

The antagonistic alarmists love to raise questions about what else might be covered as "free exercise of religion", but all I hear is people who want to keep their behaviors in line with what an organization has told them.The antagonists are looking for proper ways to behave and can't fathom how other people can go through their church and come up with different answers. They want to stick their noses in other peoples' business and then try to force those people back in line with the organization religion. They don't consider the spiritual pain or anguish they inflict on  others just to keep their organization religion in their sense of order. 

This need to control the behavior of others is the threat. Going beyond my understanding of what God, or however I define a greater power than myself, and defining how I should behave according to someone else's definition of God. Placing the outside influences on myself above my own understanding derived from my experiences, thoughts and understandings. 

Antagonistic alarmists are afraid that their attempt to force heterosexual marriage on unconvinced groups of people will result in a backlash. Since they used force to try to achieve their goals, they are afraid that they will be forced to engage in homosexual behaviors regardless of their beliefs. They are afraid that they will have to take their own "medicine" as it were. 

In summation, the real threat of Gay Marriage isn't people of the same sex being involved in a committed relationship. The real threat is that people will be emotionally and thoughtfully assaulted to change their beliefs and actions; people will be bullied to change and further bullied if they don't conform to the changes. 

The Quest For Hyperviolence. A review of Man of Steel.

The Story of Superman is, I would venture, a very well known one. For those who aren't familiar the next two paragraphs will give an executive summary.

Kal-El is sent to Earth, as an infant, by his his parents, Jor-El and Lara, to save him from the impending destruction of their planet, Krypton. Krypton is a planet populated with technologically advanced inhabitants whose technology cannot prevent its' ultimate demise. Kal-El's ship crash lands in a field in Kansas where he is found by a barren farm couple, Jonathan and Martha Kent. The Kents rename him as Clark Kent and raise him as their own child.

It is while he grows up in Smallvile, Kansas with the Kents that Clark learns many virtuous lessons about human behavior. Most notably he learns about fairness, justice, modesty and protecting loved ones. It is also the time where his abilities or powers from his Kryptonian physiology begin to develop and his Kryptonian heritage is revealed to him. His ship from Krypton has been saved by the Kents and Clark is able to begin learning about Krypton's cultures and way of life. Eventually, Clark outgrows Smallville life and moves to the "big city" of Metropolis, where he lands a job as reporter at a major metropolitan newspaper, The Daily Planet. He becomes Superman while saving a large group of people from a disaster. Covering this event is Lois Lane, star reporter, who then wants to find out all she can about the intriguing and powerful man.

Man of Steel as a movie is another reintroduction to this origin. The movie adds many elements to the Krypton legend. Most notably that Kal-El is the first naturally born Kryptonian child in a millenia. It also introduces us to Zod, a Kryptonian general whose army of followers try to stage a coup under the guise of saving Krypton from destruction. Caught in the chaos of the coup Jor-El winds up at odds with Zod. With all this additional Kryptonian drama, Kal-El is still sent to Earth with his Kryptonian father's advanced knowledge and Krypton still blows up. (If this is a shock to you, then you must have been surprised that the luxury liner sank in Titanic.)

Then the movie cuts to a man, who we must assume is Kal-El/Clark Kent on a fishing vessel in rough seas. Crisis comes about and our hero is forced to take action to save people on a burning oil rig and risk revealing himself to the world. He does this despite his memories of his foster father spouting a platitude about not using his powers in public and making people afraid of him.  He then goes off looking for another place to be anonymous and winds up saving Lois Lane, while figuring out that he has been essentially wearing an Kryptonian USB drive, which just happens to fit in a socket in a mysterious building and allows him to access the knowledge of his birth father.

In an effort to move the plot forward we are treated to the Kryptonian army of Zod makes itself known and demands that Kal-El turn himself in. To figure out what to do our hero he visits his foster mother on the family farm. While there he shares memories about his foster father's advice/platitudes that amount to little more than "don't open a jar of peanut butter at the peanut-free allergy table" and his mother helps him find his fighting duds from Krypton.

From this point on, it is all about fighting, generating epic damage and proving to the Armed Forces who is the threat. It gets there by advice from USB Jor-El, Lois Lane defying the Kryptonian army and memories of the final sacrifice made by Jonathan Kent so that his son will not have to use his powers publicly.

The movie climaxes with a carnage porn battle in which Superman and Zod face off, mano y mano. This battle gets resolved but, whether you agree with it or not, it is done with all the grace and style of someone opening a jar of peanut butter.

This movie has a lot of sparkle and dazzle, but ultimately lands with a thud. It disrespects several of the core values and lessons from fathers while degrading mother's contributions all to get the muscle bound protagonist in to action. This movie ultimately emasculates both the 'super' and the 'man' in attempting to give us a more modern (read dark and gritty) version of Superman.

..... um, yeah......

I have seen the human soul,
Its' intentions and motivations
Both warm and cold.

The fabric of the cosmos
Shaped in human form
Light and dark given mass.

I have seen holes torn
in your soul and mine
Whose edges are tattered and ragged
Or meticulously sharp and fine.

As if damaged by carelessness
and happenstance, while others have
Been assaulted by malice most  precise.

Burdens borne with dignity and strength casting light on those
crushed with embarrassment and shame.

The voices raised shouting
"You know you're just like me!"
over the raspy whispers of "NEVER AGAIN."

Approaching the reflective apex.

"The unexamined life is not worth living." - Socrates

People reach an age where reflecting on their lives, their past, holds a benefit not only for themselves but for others. Too often introspection, examining your past, is the purview of the "important" people, the decision makers, the rulers, the celebrities, troublemakers or the moralists. These people find it necessary justify in writing, to the world, their actions. As if this will absolve them of any harm, oppression, injury or evil caused by them and their behavior.

But what about the common people? What about the people who rode the ripples caused by these so-called leaders? Do they ever need to voice their reflections, their reactions? Could they be the true leaders because of their instinctive adaptation to changes in their lives?

Perhaps everyone should have a blog. Not a blog for rambling about "your issues" rather an essay blog where an issue, question or event can be addressed en masse by individual participants and observers. It could be like a societal response portal. Everyone would log in to it to respond and give their opinions. Then it would close to any further responses to that specific issue, while other topics are opened up for discussion.

I realize it sounds like a mandatory web forum, but I am trying to figure our a way to get the broadest input from as many individual members of society as possible. Imagine what insights could be found if a larger number of people were able to speak their minds at the beginning of the Industrial Revolution or during the height of the Black Plague.