Sunday Thoughts

As much as I love basketball, I am completely bored with the NBA.  I read the headlines, see where people are drafted, and keep a minimal eye on the Bulls.  I have never been a huge NBA fan so I guess this isn't a huge surprise.  I just wonder if people who used to follow the sport are also bored with it.

Sad news that the New Orleans Times-Picayune will only publish a newspaper three days a week and lay off a large number of staff. In a city that has 36% of its population without Internet access, I wonder how this is supposed to meet the needs of the community.  It is also distressing since this is a great newspaper that does an excellent job covering city and state government. I know that I am starting to become the odd person out when it comes to reading and subscribing to a newspaper but it is comforting to read reports that others are equally upset with this news.  I admit...I read The Oregonian online.  I used to subscribe but there wasn't a whole lot of content to support. They do a poor job of covering local government.  I would not be as upset if The Oregonian decided to cut back to three days a week. The Portland metro area probably has a higher Internet access rate.  New Orleans?  Different case.

The confession in the Etan Patz case seems anti-climatic. I wonder if it is true or not. I was a few years older than Etan when he disappeared. It was definitely a case that scared me as a kid.

I hope the jury in the John Edwards case finds him guilty.  The Times didn't have to struggle too hard to find pictures of him looking smarmy as he headed into the courtroom each day.   Okay, I actually don't want them to find him guilty if he is really innocent.  He just became so gross but I guess that would make a lot of people guilty these days.

Stories

Around a month ago, Roger Ebert blogged about the stories we leave behind followed by another posting last week around the same theme.  I've been thinking about his posts ever since I read them...comments like this:

Nobody will be able to say how we sounded when we spoke. If they tell our old jokes, they won't know whose they were.
That is what death means. We exist in the minds of other people, in thousands of memory clusters, and one by one those clusters fade and disappear. Some years from now, at a funeral with a slide show, only one person will be able to say who we were. Then no one will know.

When my dad was sick, my parents went through all of our family photos and divided them up between the kids.  My dad wrote each of us the same letter.  His letter talked about how the photos evoke memories of pleasant memories, events, people, and more carefree days. In the letter, he ended with:

Earlier I alluded to the "strangers" in these photographs.  They need to be introduced, however briefly, and time permitting. I will offer such introduction at some future date.

That future date never happened because he died several months later.  Lately, I've been organizing many of my digital photos so I can reliably back them  up.  As I've gone through the photos, I have already started forgetting names and places.  Along with that, I keep thinking about people who have played an important role in my life or in my family and who will know those stories?  If I died tomorrow, would my family members know all of the people I have met in my professional or personal life who have made such a difference?  Do they care?  What happens when my generation passes on?

I need to start recording and organizing these stories so it isn't too late.

Townie

I loved the first chapter of this book.  The author, Andre Dubus III, discusses a run with his father, Andre Dubus, and how he didn't want the experience to end even though he was in significant physical pain. The description of his life after his father divorced his mother could easily read like any other memoir of a kid with divorced parents.  His memoir is different because of the obvious fact that he took up writing just like his father.  I couldn't figure out how the 18-30 year old Dubus was going to end up as a writer because it sounded more like he was going to become a boxer or dead from bar fights.

I will admit that I grew a little tired of reading about the different bar fights, ongoing thoughts of why he was into fighting or building up his strength, and how he felt after some of these fights.  I wondered why this book received so much praise and what was I missing that others found so compelling.  As the book moved into his post-college years, I finally understood the appeal because it reminded me so much of the early chapters.  After finishing the book, I listened to some of his radio interviews because I really wanted to hear what his voice sounded like.  He talked about how he believes anyone can change based partly on his own experiences. There is a large part of me that agrees with this sentiment.  I have this other belief that some of the strongest people I know came from childhood years that were not ideal.  They had many rough patches of doing stupid things but pulled it together and are now some of the most eloquent, compassionate people I know.  I suspect Dubus falls into this camp.  Now I want to read his fiction and some of his father's short stories.

The Marriage Stuff

No, I am not announcing any nuptials.  Since Vice-President Biden made his comments about gay marriage on a Sunday news show, I've been thinking more about the gay marriage debate and politics.

My own feelings towards gay marriage have evolved over time so I can't fault President Obama for working through his feelings.  I still feel strongly that there are basic rights that we still need to achieve in the workplace and the marriage issue moved the focus from these issues that still need attention.   I also believe very strongly that government needs to get out of the marriage business as in who and when should get married.  As President Obama said today, "the word 'marriage' was something that invokes very powerful traditions, religious beliefs and so forth."  Anyone should be able to get a civil union by going to the local government and sign up.  We still have too many things connected with marriage like health care or taxes to do away entirely with civil unions.  If people want to have a religious celebration and follow their beliefs then they can do it in their church.  I really don't care if people want to go marry their cats in a religious ceremony, marry their cousins, or marry for the tenth time.  It isn't important to me unless my main professional organization decides to pass resolutions in support of cat marriage at our annual conferences.

But, my interest in marriage equality and recent current events were stirred up because of two very basic issues for me.  First, I really dislike hypocrisy.  I get so tired of the argument that gays getting married will undermine the role of the family and sanctity of marriage.  There are so many examples of gay couples who have been faithfully together for billions of years while we have plenty of other examples of heterosexual couples who don't really demonstrate a stable family life.  Every side has examples we can use so we just need to get away from all of this hypocrisy and stop that argument right now.

Second, I respect people who stand up for their beliefs even if it isn't the most popular opinion.  While I never liked Ted Olson when he was solicitor general for President Bush or for any of his other public positions, I admire him for standing up for gay marriage and against Proposition 8.  He lost favor with many of his buddies who wondered what the hell happened to him.  I respect other politicians who have come out in favor for gay marriage when it isn't always the best political move, Vice-President Biden as the example on Sunday.

So, I have been watching President Obama and wondering what he would do.  Despite what some groups think, he is not the most progressive person when it comes to gay rights.  I always hoped that his opinion on gay marriage was truly evolving and not just a statement to bring in campaign dollars from the gays.  Last night, I read some commentary that said President Obama wouldn't come out in support of gay marriage because it could cost him votes in critical states like Virginia and North Carolina.  At that moment, I decided to ignore my long-held belief that I wouldn't vote for someone based on one issue by making a pact with myself to not vote for President Obama if he ignored his beliefs just to score some votes.  I would rather he lose the election by standing up for his beliefs.  Of course, I could argue that I really have no idea what goes through his mind and what he truly believes but so what.  Imagine my surprise when I heard the news today about his evolved stance on gay marriage.  I really don't care if this costs him the election.  It was the right thing to do. Do I think he is truly in support of gay marriage?  It is squishy if you read everything he said.  I don't think he is going to make any steps to make it easier for gay people. Did he still make a major step in the right direction?  Definitely.