in.....News.Bulletin.....News.Bulletin.....Ne
Item 1. I received my first proposal today. A dowry was offered: payment of law school loans, a condo, a job as an interior decorator, and a dog. Not a bad deal, but I had to turn it down.
Item 2. I met Neil. Erik's deportee friend. Poor fellow. He had been living it up in South Beach for the past six years, running his own business, living in a fabulous condo, partying all night, meeting beautiful women. Unfortunately, he was doing it all without his papers. When Neil came back to Canada to serve as best man at his friend's wedding, he got caught by the INS and now he can't go back to South Beach until he untangles his legal mess. He's the one who proposed to me. He's convinced that marrying an American is the fastest way back into the States. After gently declining his offer, I tried to tell him marrying an American has its complications too... he'd be married. What's the point of being in South Beach if you're married?
Item 3. I have made a resolution. The resolution is that I WILL OWN THE NEW YORK BAR EXAM. It will be done. Originally my resolution sounded more colorful and I had a cuss word in there. Resolutions sound so much more... resolute.. when they have a cuss word thrown in. But then I thought it might be unseemly and somehow somone from the New York Board of Bar Examiners would stumble across it and decide I was unfit to be an attorney because I wrote, "I will make the New York Bar Exam my bitch!" and I would have to go hide my head in shame somewhere.
Item 4. I have decided to leave Canada on Monday. Looketh out America, the prodigal child returneth.
Item 5. The New York Court of Appeals rejected gay marriage two days ago, saying that denying gay couples the right to marry did not violate the New York State Constitution. The New York Times reported: "The majority decision, written by Judge Robert S. Smith, found that limiting marriage to couples of the opposite sexes was based on legitimate societal goals, primarily the protection and welfare of children. It could well be argued, he said, that children are better off raised by a biological mother and father, rather than by a gay or lesbian couple.'Plaintiffs have not persuaded us that this long-accepted restriction is a wholly irrational one, based solely on ignorance and prejudice against homosexuals," Judge Smith wrote in his 17-page opinion.'"
Sigh. "[L]imiting marriage to couples of the opposite sexes was based on legitimate societal goals, primarily the protection and welfare of children." A nice-sounding piece of rhetoric that is TOTAL BULLSHIT in this context. I mean, let's be honest. Haven't we moved past the age of "the purpose of marriage is to have children"? What if a gay couple didn't want to have children? What if a gay couple promised not to have children? Then what happens to the rationale behind banning gay marriage? And the rationale is stupid anyway. "It could well be argued that children are better off raised by a biological mother and father"? Really. I would like to see some kind of proof on that. Is there a documented, peer-reviewed, tested, and replicated study somewhere that shows children raised by a biological mother and father are "better off" than children raised by, say, two non-biological parents, you know, like adopted children, or children raised with only one biological parent and one step-parent, or children raised by their two aunts? And what does "better off" mean, anyway? Does it mean they are richer? Better dressed? Better looking? Better at sports? Less likely to turn to a life of crime? Less likely to be a schoolyard bully? Less likely to get made fun off? More likely to get a high-paying job when they grow up? Like, WHAT ON EARTH DO YOU MEAN COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW YORK?
Well, to be fair I didn't read the whole opinion and maybe the Court of Appeals explained everything. But whatever. Stupid stupid stupid.
Item 6. Oh dammit. Look, my life is boring right now. What do you want from me? All I do all day is worry about all the studying I'm not doing. Although that's going to stop as of tomorrow. (See Item 3.)
Item 2. I met Neil. Erik's deportee friend. Poor fellow. He had been living it up in South Beach for the past six years, running his own business, living in a fabulous condo, partying all night, meeting beautiful women. Unfortunately, he was doing it all without his papers. When Neil came back to Canada to serve as best man at his friend's wedding, he got caught by the INS and now he can't go back to South Beach until he untangles his legal mess. He's the one who proposed to me. He's convinced that marrying an American is the fastest way back into the States. After gently declining his offer, I tried to tell him marrying an American has its complications too... he'd be married. What's the point of being in South Beach if you're married?
Item 3. I have made a resolution. The resolution is that I WILL OWN THE NEW YORK BAR EXAM. It will be done. Originally my resolution sounded more colorful and I had a cuss word in there. Resolutions sound so much more... resolute.. when they have a cuss word thrown in. But then I thought it might be unseemly and somehow somone from the New York Board of Bar Examiners would stumble across it and decide I was unfit to be an attorney because I wrote, "I will make the New York Bar Exam my bitch!" and I would have to go hide my head in shame somewhere.
Item 4. I have decided to leave Canada on Monday. Looketh out America, the prodigal child returneth.
Item 5. The New York Court of Appeals rejected gay marriage two days ago, saying that denying gay couples the right to marry did not violate the New York State Constitution. The New York Times reported: "The majority decision, written by Judge Robert S. Smith, found that limiting marriage to couples of the opposite sexes was based on legitimate societal goals, primarily the protection and welfare of children. It could well be argued, he said, that children are better off raised by a biological mother and father, rather than by a gay or lesbian couple.'Plaintiffs have not persuaded us that this long-accepted restriction is a wholly irrational one, based solely on ignorance and prejudice against homosexuals," Judge Smith wrote in his 17-page opinion.'"
Sigh. "[L]imiting marriage to couples of the opposite sexes was based on legitimate societal goals, primarily the protection and welfare of children." A nice-sounding piece of rhetoric that is TOTAL BULLSHIT in this context. I mean, let's be honest. Haven't we moved past the age of "the purpose of marriage is to have children"? What if a gay couple didn't want to have children? What if a gay couple promised not to have children? Then what happens to the rationale behind banning gay marriage? And the rationale is stupid anyway. "It could well be argued that children are better off raised by a biological mother and father"? Really. I would like to see some kind of proof on that. Is there a documented, peer-reviewed, tested, and replicated study somewhere that shows children raised by a biological mother and father are "better off" than children raised by, say, two non-biological parents, you know, like adopted children, or children raised with only one biological parent and one step-parent, or children raised by their two aunts? And what does "better off" mean, anyway? Does it mean they are richer? Better dressed? Better looking? Better at sports? Less likely to turn to a life of crime? Less likely to be a schoolyard bully? Less likely to get made fun off? More likely to get a high-paying job when they grow up? Like, WHAT ON EARTH DO YOU MEAN COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW YORK?
Well, to be fair I didn't read the whole opinion and maybe the Court of Appeals explained everything. But whatever. Stupid stupid stupid.
Item 6. Oh dammit. Look, my life is boring right now. What do you want from me? All I do all day is worry about all the studying I'm not doing. Although that's going to stop as of tomorrow. (See Item 3.)
posted by J. at 3:00 AM
2 Comments:
1. Not a bad deal, indeed. The best I could offer as a dowry would be the added baggage of my own debt.
2. Adding insult to injury, not only must poor Neil abandon his lavish South Beach lifestyle, but he must serve his time in Canada.
3. Own it!
4. Can't wait!
5. That is stupid.
LIKE WHAT DO YOU MEAN COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW YORK
Post a Comment
<< Home