sliced bread #2

Some look at things that are, and ask why. I dream of things that never were and ask why not.

Thursday, June 30, 2005

A record-book romance?

--------------------

signed a lease together last week...
been furniture shopping this week...
celebrating 5 months together today...

then i read this article...

talk about perspective, eh?


--------------------

John Rocchio remembers his wife as a fetching young woman with an air of intelligence and a fine pair of legs. Amelia Rocchio recalls her husband as a handsome young man who didn't have much to say at first. John was walking from the trade school where he studied the printing business to his uncle's laundry when he spotted 17-year-old Amelia. He was smitten, impressed with her looks and her smarts.

It was the start of something beautiful — and long-lasting. Wed in a Roman Catholic church in 1923, the Rocchios marked their 82nd anniversary several months ago and could be the world's longest-married couple. The website of Guinness World Records lists a British couple as holding the record with an 80-year marriage, but the husband died this month at 105. Who is next is unclear.

"Patience and understanding will get you a long way — especially with your wife," John, 101, explained matter-of-factly. Asked what has kept them together so long, his 99-year-old wife answered: "Love."

— ASSOCIATED PRESS
--------------------

Thursday, June 23, 2005

The Onion

--------------------

this week's issue has to be the funniest to date...

ROFLMAO doesn't even begin to describe my reaction...

--------------------

second star to the right...

--------------------

... then straight on to yuppie-land!














Bloor Kingsway Manor: Tranquil Luxury in the Heart of the City

--------------------

well, if Peter Pan can have Neverland and Michael Jackson can have Neverland Ranch, i guess i'm entitled to my own piece of paradise as well... "located at the corner of Old Mill subway station" in Toronto, "in between the Kingsway and High Park areas", this "professionally maintained and managed" building with "professionally manicured landscaping" sits "in the heart of an upscale residential neighbourhood"... by a sheer stroke of luck, i managed to find this gorgeous apartment that could very well pass for a condo... it comes with 3 appliances, a custom kitchen with imported ceramic tile, new thermopane windows, hardwood flooring, and a landlady that resembles the Oracle...

classy doesn't even begin to describe it!

i'm sooooooooooooo excited!!! i'm looking forward to starting this new adventure... not only is this a fantastic place to find, more importantly, it's awesome knowing that i have someone amazing to share it with...

August 1st can't come soon enough...

--------------------

Saturday, June 18, 2005

perspective...

--------------------






















When I consider thy heavens, the work of thy fingers,
the moon and the stars, which thou hast ordained;
What is man, that thou art mindful of him?
and the son of man, that thou visitest him?

Psalms 8:3-4
--------------------

Friday, June 17, 2005

affirmative or democratic action?

--------------------

We have repeatedly argued that potential candidates for the Supreme Court of Canada should be chosen on merit, not race or ethnicity, and should be subject to a higher degree of scrutiny than they have been in the past -- or will be under the government's proposed judicial selection reforms. It now turns out that Supreme Court Justice John Major essentially agrees with us.

In an interview this week, Judge Major told CanWest News service that he does not believe the spectre of public hearings or private interviews would scare off good judicial candidates: "I don't think very many people would be deterred unless they had some skeleton they were afraid of." This effectively destroys the federal government's justification for not requiring potential justices to undergo a vetting procedure.

Judge Major did not stop there. He had some other sage advice for the government: "Appoint the most qualified person." He added that any appointment to the Supreme Court of Canada "has to be absolutely on merit." If his advice is respected, this would put an end to the lobby for creation of a designated aboriginal seat on the Supreme Court.

Strange as it may sound, the idea of making high court appointments on the basis of race or ethnicity has enthusiastic supporters. Ethel Blondin-Andrew, the Minister of State for Northern Development, started vocally making the case for the next judicial appointment to be an aboriginal in February. Around the same time, Justice Minister Irwin Cotler emphasized that he wanted to see "qualified people amongst the aboriginal community" get "serious consideration" for the next judicial vacancy. We would hope the Minister would want to see qualified people of any race or ethnicity get "serious consideration."

The high court is already held in suspicion by some people because of an unacceptably opaque and undemocratic appointment process. The last thing we need is to extend this folly to the practice of ethnic profiling. It is encouraging to learn that a veteran of the court concurs.

-- Editorial, National Post (2005/06/17)
--------------------

15. (1) Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.

15. (2) Subsection (1) does not preclude any law, program or activity that has as its object the amelioration of conditions of disadvantaged individuals or groups including those that are disadvantaged because of race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Part I of the Constitution Act, 1982,
R.S.C. 1985, App. II, being Schedule B to the Canada Act 1982 (U.K.) 1982, c. 11.


--------------------

to paraphrase a line from Harvey Fierstein's 1987 play Forget Him, "I have never made an attempt to be contrary either in my ethnic background or the non-performance thereof... I am simply the seed sown and grown of the nourishment provided"...

i've never cared much for "playing the race card"... while i've attended various focus groups addressing the challenges facing individuals who belong to "equity-seeking" groups, i've usually found it galling that someone could assert entitlement to certain things simply by virtue of their ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, etc... pretty ironic considering that i could probably claim a lot under most of those banners... but somehow, i've always considered "affirmative action" as condescending, as if to say "if we didn't have to meet a quota, you wouldn't be considered good enough"...

i'm idealistic about a lot of things... i would like to believe that this is a meritocracy, that determination and hard work pay off, that natural talents and abilities should see one through, that "the cream rises to the top"... as the editors of the Post wrote, i would want to see qualified people of any race or ethnicity get "serious consideration"...

but i suppose that's not always the case...

the argument advanced by intellectuals like the Hutch is that this is a matter of democracy, and not just another case of using the language of "rights" as a trump card... it would be naïve of us to insist that judges are doing nothing more than applying the law and interpreting the Constitution when they tackle controversial public policy on social and moral issues... insofar as judicial interpretation affects the lives of ordinary Canadians, those who wield such power – as any body exercising such influence over public policy – ought to be answerable to the people... and not just "answerable", but "representative"... after all, democracy is supposed to be for the people and of the people...

so while i would still hesitate on "self-identifying" as a minority merely to improve my job prospects (and generally disagree with "rights"-talk as the be-all and end-all of public policy debates), i think there's something to the idea that any powerful institution or organization -- be it public or private -- should operate on democratic principles... with all due respect to the Honourable Justice Major, there's a reason why those of his ilk are being or should be phased out... maintaining a wilful blindness about the inaccessibility of justice for groups and individuals of minority status -- especially the First Nations people of Canada -- demonstrates how disconnected people in power tend to be from the reality of the status quo...


"The Supreme Court justices have strenuously denied that they are intruding into the political sphere. Yet, the impact of their decisions has been politically strategic in a most profound way. It demonstrates that, as important as the Charter is to society, who gets appointed to the judiciary and the Supreme Court is even more important." -- Errol P. Mendes

--------------------

children's books yet to be published

--------------------

DR SEUSS books that weren't...

1. One Bitch, Two Bitch, Dead Bitch, You Bitch
2. Herbert the Pervert likes Sherbert
3. Fox in Detox
4. Who Shat in the Hat?
5. Horton Hires a Ho
6. The Cat in the Blender
7. My Pocket Rocket Needs a Socket



LITTLE GOLDEN BOOKS that never made it...

1. You are Different and That's Bad
2. The Boy Who Died From Eating All His Vegetables
3. Dad's New Wife Robert
4. Kathy Was So Bad Her Mom Stopped Loving Her
5. Curious George and the High Voltage Fence
6. All Cats Go To Hell
7. The Little Sissy Who Snitched
8. Some Kittens Can Fly
9. That's It, I'm Putting You Up For Adoption
10. The Magic World Inside The Abandoned Refrigerator
11. Strangers Have the Best Candy
12. You Were An Accident
13. Things Rich Kids Have, But You Never Will!
14. Pop! Goes the Hamster...And! Other Microwave Games
15. The Man In The Pool Is Actually Satan
16. Your Nightmares Are Real
17. Places Where Mummy And Daddy Hide Neat Things
18. Why Can't Mr. Fork and Mrs. Electrical Outlet Be Friends?


--------------------

Tuesday, June 14, 2005

therapeutics

--------------------

the universe is an infinite sphere...
the centre is everywhere...
the circumference nowhere...

--------------------

first of all, i didn't even realize that was a word...

secondly, apparently more people read this blog than i thought... i didn't install a hit counter purposely because i thought it'd be too much of an ego blow to realize that i was talking to myself... but i've gotten random msg'es from various people as of late who have stumbled on this site somehow, and it's kind of reassuring to know that i don't have to succumb to solipsism... and yet i feel somewhat self-conscious with that knowledge now... kind of like realizing that your neighbours can hear you singing in the shower...

or something like that...


anyway, apparently it's a rule or policy of some sort for some people that therapy shouldn't be discussed... well, sucks to your ass-mar... no, well, i don't mean that... i just mean... well... i think it should be discussed... how else can therapy be therapeutic if it's conducted in isolation? i would at least think that the people closest to you should be aware... or maybe not... is it better to not discuss the details of those sessions with your partner -- or with anyone -- because it may be precisely because of them or situations involving them that drove you to the little couch in the first place?

i don't know...

i've got a little assignment now... i'm supposed to keep track of the situations that trigger anxiety and my reactions and thoughts before, during, and after the experience... i get to have a paper record -- a fancy little chart, even -- of how seriously messed up i am... this ought to be fun, right?


anyway... blah blah blah... privatization of health care... blah blah blah... michael jackson... blah blah blah... crisis in bolivia... blah blah blah... third-world debt is cancelled... blah blah blah... same-sex marriage vote... blah blah blah... rhetoric, rhetoric, and more rhetoric...

someone please stop the voices...

--------------------

Most of us are familiar with the phrase “human spirit.” It usually refers to the qualities of love, courage, high ideals, strength, and goodness that inspire human beings to act on behalf of others or to challenge personal limitations. Similarly, there is a “couple spirit” that can be created in a relationship. It grows out of each partner’s willingness to believe in the other and consciously work toward achieving the highest and the best in the relationship. You might say that couple spirit is a spiritual energy that grows out of the joining of the human spirit within each partner. The result of this joining is an alliance that has a life of its own.

-- Bernardo and Catherine Monserrat
The Spiritual Relationship: A Partnership That Lasts
Science of Mind Magazine (June 2005)
--------------------

Sunday, June 12, 2005

"think for yourselves and let others enjoy the privilege to do so too..."

--------------------

in the spirit of Voltaire, and in light of the upcoming 25th anniversary celebration of Pride in toronto, this perspective offered from a series of interviews in the Toronto Star becomes even more poignant...

--------------------

I took this cross-country trip to grasp the true voice of Canadians.

I'd already heard the politicians, religious leaders and gay activists. And I'd studied the polls that told me that 40 per cent of Canadians support gay marriage, 40 per cent oppose it, and 20 per cent are undecided. I also knew that opposition was declining and support was growing, as some undecideds were perhaps having a change of heart.

I intuitively felt that this was not a simple yes or no issue. I believed the real voices of Canadians had more complexity, depth, and nuance. It is a story that would be told in quiet tones by unsure and often conflicted voices.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Two voices that don't show up in opinion polls come from the heart of British Columbia's Bible belt. Krystal Morrison, 22, and Amy Clark, 19, both of Kelowna, take their cues from their pastor. They open our conversation by revealing they're both devout Christians and explain that their perspective on the issue of same-sex marriage is coloured by their faith. But, unlike poll numbers, those colours have shades.

"It makes me sad that Christians are becoming known only for all the things we disagree with," says Morrison. "It makes me sad because it detracts from the real purpose of the church. I'll tell you, my views are not shared by very many people in this area. Sometimes it's really hard to say I'm a Christian," she adds. "I'm kind of a rebel."

When she was 16 and living in Washington State, Morrison became friends with some lesbians she met while working at a coffee shop. As their friendship flourished, Morrison heard the painful stories of discrimination and couldn't help but wonder, "How much of that pain was caused by Christians?" At the end of our conversation, Morrison says she would not go out of her way to prevent same-sex marriage. "My message to other Christians is that we are missing the point." She declares, "I don't have to agree with you. I have to love you."

Though less expansive, Clark is equally pointed. She mentions the story of Jesus intervening as a woman accused of adultery was about to be stoned. (For those of you who weren't paying attention in Sunday school, that's the one that goes: He that is without sin among you, let him cast the first stone.) "He wasn't saying adultery was right," Clark says.

"He was just saying, `Don't judge.'"

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'm feeling jittery as I amble toward two burly men at a McDonald's in Lloydminster, Sask. This is a town divided, literally. Situated smack on the border, it is half in Alberta and half in Saskatchewan, which I suppose means gay marriage is legal on the Saskatchewan side of town and illegal on the other. They are two hard-assed truck drivers, tough-as-nails road warriors who make the Trailer Park Boys look like the Boys in the Band.

"I'm against it big time," says Jerry Bluda, 46. His buddy Ross Gundersan, 51, agrees. "Marriage is for a man and a woman," adds Bluda, who admits he has a "queer" cousin in Ottawa with whom he does not communicate. "We have nothing to talk about," he says.

"I think it's disgusting," says Gundersan. "My wife feels the same way."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sixty-four-year-old Ken Cameron, who owns KC Saddlery in Red Deer, Alta., is fighting trim in snug jeans, cowboy boots and a sharply tapered denim shirt. His massive shop, filled with saddles, spurs, cowboy boots, lariats and horse blankets, is situated on Highway 2, the road that connects Calgary to Edmonton. Like his store, his opinions are grand and orderly. This is Klein country.

Cameron accepts that same-sex marriages will probably be legalized in Canada. But he also believes such liberal laws are ushering modern civilization one step closer to the end. "Look at all the other great cultures of the world that fell," he says. "They don't exist anymore because they became dysfunctional." Cameron, who has belonged to both the Conservative and the Reform parties, worries that, "even Alberta is inching toward destruction." It's only a matter of time, he feels, before his beloved province is as messed up as Ontario. I wonder if he knows that both provinces already are about equally opposed.

"If I had livestock that didn't breed, I would have to destroy it," he says.

For him, the "right" to same-sex marriage is not the real issue. He believes the problem is homosexuality, and that discussing "rights" is ridiculous. "They are ill. But the system says they have the right to be treated like anyone else." This runs contrary to nature's law, he says. "If I owned livestock that was homosexual or if I had cows that were hallucinating because they were eating bad grass, they're gone."

But not everyone in the no camp is so decisive. I spoke with Sylvia and Allan Sparling, a married couple from Tavistock, Ont. We talked on the grounds of Parliament Hill in Ottawa. Sylvia, a 52-year-old nurse, is convinced homosexuality has biological origins, but she and her husband don't support gay marriage.

"Just don't call it marriage," she says. "We've been married for 27 years and we don't think it's the same thing. Marriage happens naturally between a man and a woman." They have a 19-year-old daughter, and if she were to announce that she wanted to marry a woman, they say, they would advise her, "Don't count us in on it. If it's a civil union, that's fine."

At other times, the voice of intolerance is so angry, it's mute.

In Corner Brook, Nfld., a husband strongly advises his wife not to talk to me. She ignores his plea, however, explaining to him that while she is extremely unfamiliar and uncomfortable with the subject of homosexuality, she feels she can contribute to my story. "I believe it is a matter of human rights, whether I feel comfortable or not," she says. Her husband pushes my business card across the table in disgust and storms away.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As I cross over Lake Superior, down into southern Ontario, across Quebec and into New Brunswick, it's becoming clear that, while the polls insist the country is split on the issue, the breakdown is much more complicated. I discover that there are Canadians who feel strongly that same-sex marriage should not be legalized, and on this they are unmovable. But even those who think homosexuality is unnatural and that gays should be barred from marriage often concede they wouldn't seek out a politician who supports their views or punish one who doesn't.

In Murphy's Cove, N.S., for instance, I meet a couple standing in front of their house, which is covered in their wildly colourful folk art. It's a Sunday morning, and the local parish priest has just finished blessing their pet goat. Though they decline to give me their names, they tell me they're opposed to same-sex marriage, but also make it clear they would not oppose it. They join the chorus that laments, they wish it had another name. As I randomly approach people, I begin to realize that I could never predict how anyone would react to my questions.

In Marie Joseph, N.S., I greet Jim Langille, a beleaguered-looking, 55-year-old lobster fisherman. He's a weathered, postcard-perfect old salt, who I'm sure will fulfill my stereotype of a homophobic good ol' boy. I'm wrong. (I shouldn't have been surprised. Support for gay marriage is actually higher in Atlantic Canada than it is in Ontario.) I was astonished by his lilting voice as he let out an "oh my dear" and beamed.

"Whatever floats your boat. It's a free country. People should live and die as they choose. I think men around here feel they have to do the whole he-man, workin' in the woods, workin' on the water thing," he says. "Even if they agreed, they wouldn't say it."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A retired English and drama professor living in Nanaimo, Edwin Turner, 71, is convinced the world is experiencing a cultural and moral shift and that all Canadians should be independently thinking about issues such as same-sex marriage, abortion and stem-cell research. There are a lot of ethical issues facing Canadians now and we owe it to ourselves to think things through, he says. He believes the politicians only serve to muddle the issues and wishes the courts would assume more responsibility.

Like Turner, one Broadview, Sask., businessman, who didn't want me to use his name, believes politicians use these issues for their own means, and too often there is little consistency, particularly when the issues pertain to "family values." He has the funny countenance of an old-fashioned Catskills comedian.

I'll call him Shecky. I ask him how he feels about legalizing same-sex marriage. Shecky answers my question with a question. "Which is worse for the family: prostitution or gambling?"

We agree: Gambling is worse, because it destroys marriages, ruins finances and alienates children. "There," says Shecky. "So why is the government in the gambling business but it criminalizes prostitution? You see? There is no consistency. So legalize same-sex marriage."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ultimately, Bill C-38, which the government intends to pass into law before the summer, is a young person's law. They're the ones who'll have to live with it the longest. There are uneasy voices in this group, but more than any other demographic, the majority of them support allowing gays to marry.

Anna Trevelyan, a 22-year-old temporary office worker in Ottawa, credits her tolerant upbringing for her positive attitude toward same-sex marriage. "You can't give some people rights and not everyone," she says. "My friends and I do talk about this. I'd say girls are more supportive than boys."

Trevelyan says she's proud of the gay activists who are pressuring the government to change the laws, and compares their stance to the struggle for women's rights. "A lot of people are resistant to change, and I believe it takes people with convictions to be trailblazers."

While the results of certain polls and the comments of Trevelyan suggest that young men are less likely to embrace the concept of same-sex marriage than young women, that is not what I'm hearing. Simon Brulotte, 25, is a doorman at the Holiday Inn on Sherbrooke St. in Montreal. "The key word is devotion. Religion is about devotion between man and God. Marriage is about devotion between two people."

Brulotte says he knows some gay people but insists they have not influenced his stand on same-sex marriage. "I don't talk to people about it because I'm afraid someone would start joking, and if I went along with the joke I'd feel bad the next day."

Cory Pierce, 32, says the day he dropped his best friend in high school because he was gay may have been the "uncoolest" moment in his life. "I grew up in conservative Kimberley, British Columbia. My best friend in the world turned out to be gay and I shut him out," he says. Pierce says he's determined to make up for that mistake. "I was 19 and I was more worried about what my friends would think. It was a small town more interested in hockey and four-by-fours. High school is hard on people."

Tamara Diallo, a 21-year-old Montreal student, opposes gay marriage, worried that it will lead to a further erosion of the institution. "Where will it stop?" she asks. "I can see it changing bit by bit so that eventually it's not marriage anymore." She also worries about religions that may be forced to perform marriage ceremonies against their beliefs.

Her friend, 21-year-old Vincent Duchesne, counters, "This is a legal marriage" and explains to Diallo that religions will not be forced to perform marriages if their doctrine forbids it. "It's a rights thing," he says. "And everybody should have the same rights."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Perhaps no other place in this country encapsulates the intricacies of the gay-marriage debate as well as Whitehorse, the place I chose to begin my journey. Last year Steven Dunbar, 44, and Rob Edge, 47, won a legal battle with the Yukon government for the right to marry. "We could have driven across the border to British Columbia but that wasn't good enough," says Dunbar, who was born in Whitehorse and lived most of his life there. "My family and I contributed a lot to this community over the years, and I wanted to be married here to the man I love. I'm a Yukoner. I don't want a licence that's not recognized by my government. I knew my timing was right and that the territory was ready for it."

The couple met online in 2002. They weren't looking for sex. They didn't even particularly want to date. They were serious. Both men wanted husbands. With Edge living in Calgary, they realized the 2,400-kilometre distance between them was too far and it was resolved that Rob would move to Whitehorse. Dunbar has two daughters with a lesbian couple and is a very involved father. Rob moved, and the couple immediately filed a human-rights complaint against the territory.

At the same time they began making plans for their wedding. A ruling in the couple's favour was handed down July 14, 2004, and they were married three days later, with 220 guests. "If we'd lost, we would have had a wedding but no marriage," says Stephen. "It would have been disappointing. I really wanted a verbal, legal, socially recognized ceremony that represented my commitment to Rob in a community where I had contributed so much. I was as involved as anyone here and I was being denied a right. I really felt that the system before was telling me that I was not worthy, that I was not equal."

Steven thinks he knows why his fellow Yukoners were supportive. "I think it's because they knew me as a kid growing up here. They knew and loved my dad. People had to ask themselves, `What am I really afraid of?' It forced them to ask themselves some tough questions. This is a territory founded on the gold rush, on opportunity, and that independent, pioneering environment endures today. There is a lot of land here and few people. It gives you the time and the space to think," says Dunbar, suggesting that a mindset focused on survival forces you to make priorities, to decide on your own what's important.

The couple have since become minor celebrities in this small community. Whitehorse has a population of about 22,000, and the Yukon, roughly the size of France, has only 35,000 people. As we stroll down the main street, they are warmly acknowledged by almost everyone. In 2004, their marriage was listed as the third biggest story in the Whitehorse Star, after a controversial budget story and a devastating forest fire. "We were the good news," says Dunbar, former president of the local chamber of commerce.

At a coffee shop I meet a woman dressed casually in a nylon tracksuit and sandals. And I ask her about Dunbar and Edge. "We should have never pitted Yukoner against Yukoner," she tells me, instructing me that the sparsely populated Yukon was built on a tradition of respect for the individual. Only later does she identify herself as Pat Duncan, former premier of the Yukon and, until losing a vote at a leadership convention this month, the leader of the Yukon Liberal party.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On the final day of my journey, in the middle of a cold, wet afternoon, I find myself being unceremoniously evicted from a dark waterfront pub in St. John's, Nfld., with my arm cocked behind my back. I am apparently being put to the sidewalk for engaging two patrons in a conversation about same-sex marriage — the same exchange I have been pursuing with hundreds of Canadians over the past three weeks. (Though, to be fair, it also could have been simply because I am a reporter or, most objectionable of all, someone from Toronto.)

I have been in Erin's Pub on Water St. for only a few minutes, barely enough time to select two people I thought might talk to me, barely enough time to explain that I was travelling across Canada from Vancouver to St. John's to find out exactly how Canadians feel about same sex marriage, before I am sent packing. But as I stand in the rain feeling indignant and a little embarrassed, in the last moments of my 8,000-kilometre road trip, I wonder if I had simply poked my finger once too often and, perhaps, too deeply into the cage of public opinion.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Though that experience concluded my journey, it is not what comes to mind when I look back on the hundreds of encounters that populated those three weeks. What resonates is the sheer complexity of life experiences that help Canadians determine where they stand on same-sex marriage. This is not an isolated debate. It touches some deeply and some not at all. It is connected to who they are.

I didn't have to put many kilometres on my rental car before I realized that tolerance doesn't have a face. Behind the columns of tidy poll results lie messy, even contradictory opinions that don't fall into perfect columns according to geography, age or gender.

Finally, if Whitehorse represented an ideal community built on shared respect, it was a quiet married couple from Moncton, N.B., who represented the ideal, respectful dialogue. Teacher Patty Blanchard, 47, articulated precisely why she supports legalizing same-sex marriage. But her husband of 23 years, Marc Beaudoin, a thoughtful 47-year-old college teacher, just can't get his head around the concept.

His wife tells me her story. "My father had 15 children: seven with his first wife until she died, and then eight with my mother," begins Blanchard. "My mom was incredibly intelligent, a writer, a scholar and a poet who had studied in New York. When I was a kid she told me that she never wanted to have children. That's a shocking thing to hear. But my mother loved the church and says she received a lot from it. At that moment I decided the church was not going to control me. I feel I understand homosexuality, and I support same-sex marriage."

Beaudoin confesses he's not so clear. He's protective of the institution and worries about its future. "There is so much symbolism in the word, so much history," he says. "It is a union that protects the creation of the family." The furthest he can come is to say he believes "gay couples should have an equal and parallel marriage."

His wife pulls an immense smile. She pats his hand with a reassuring rub. "He'll come around," she says, in a mock-patronizing voice. The gesture makes him laugh. And it made me wonder if he will be the next Canadian to leave the undecided column behind in the next poll.

"Yes," he says, grinning over his coffee, "I'll probably come around."

--------------------

Monday, June 06, 2005

Europe, the Good Life and Us

--------------------

"Anybody who has lived in Europe knows how delicious European life can be."

So wrote New York Times columnist David Brooks last week.

He got that part right. Not only do the Europeans have great food, wine, clothes and architecture, but they've managed to avoid the slavish obedience to the marketplace that has left North Americans chained to their work stations, feeling obliged to work ever harder in order to consume ever more trinkets. The corporate world has certainly been successful in indoctrinating North Americans in the mentality of full-blown capitalism, convincing us to accept its harsh divide between rich and poor.

But Europeans have traditionally been smarter. They've taken control of the marketplace and subordinated it to the needs of the population, creating a more egalitarian society with benefits for all. Their political culture reflects this. They pay higher taxes but in return receive more social benefits: generous pensions, subsidized tuition, national child-care programs, extensive unemployment insurance, five-week holidays and lots of other stuff that we rarely hear about over here.

In recent years, the business elites of Europe have been trying to move their countries closer to the harsher North American model of unbridled capitalism, arguing — as our business leaders argue — that it's the way of the future. But in many ways it's actually a resurgence of the past, a throwback to the 19th century-style unfettered capitalism of extreme inequality and worker powerlessness that past generations fought so hard against and ultimately rejected.

Millions of Europeans wisely seem determined to reject it again. Last week, voters in France and the Netherlands voted against a proposed European constitution aimed at establishing the dominance of the marketplace. North American commentators were quick to denounce the vote, perhaps out of fear that people here might realize that unbridled capitalism doesn't have to be the way of the future, that we too could have generous social programs.

So, for instance, Brooks, the Times columnist who acknowledged the deliciousness of European life, went on to argue that the European model is outdated, that — for all its appeal — it's just "not flexible enough for the modern world." In fact, European-style social welfare systems do nothing to prevent a country from being highly competitive in the modern world.

If you doubt this, check out the latest findings of the Geneva-based World Economic Forum, which ranks the economic competitiveness of more than 100 countries around the globe. Among the top six globally competitive nations are four European countries that have extremely comprehensive social welfare systems — Finland, Sweden, Norway and Denmark. Altogether, 15 European countries rank in the top 30.

Right-wing commentators find it best to ignore this reality.

It's easy to see why — it utterly destroys their argument that generous social welfare systems undermine competitiveness. Europeans have been skeptical of the right-wing dogma. They understand that life can be both delicious and globally viable.

Right-wing commentators here are really hoping you won't grasp this.

--------------------
The Toronto Star (2005/06/05)
Linda McQuaig is a Toronto-based author and commentator.

Saturday, June 04, 2005

B-ing positive +

--------------------

Pisces (February 19-March 20)

"I invite you to try an exercise in creative pretending.

Ready?

In all the ways you can imagine, stop thinking that you're outside, and instead visualize yourself as inside. In other words, suppress your tendency to fantasize that the good stuff is out of reach and hard to get. Picture yourself as being right in the midst of it. End your sense of exile and come all the way in to the heart of every matter. If you do this meditation ten minutes a day for the next seven days, by this time next week the world will already be changing to match the vision you've been building."

--------------------

a lot happens in a week... a whole lot, once you really think about it...


grade reports were released earlier this week... let's just say that i've C-n the grades, and i'm B-ing positive + cuz it's gonna be A-okay... i could've done a lot worse... could also have done a lot better... but oh well... surviving the first year of law school with a B+ average isn't anything to cry about, right? notwithstanding the fact that i'll probably have to kiss the idea of clerking for the Supreme Court goodbye, i think everything will work out in the end... i'll still have a decent shot at landing jobs and all that jazz... and there's still a lot to look forward to over the next 2 years left of school...

so i'm gonna keep my eyes on the prize, as it were...


anyway, i'm here watching my little angel sleeping and can't help but think that this is about the only thing i could want in the world right now... it's really been an incredible ride... reading that horoscope couldn't have come at a better time... after all the anxiety i've been going through as of late -- more likely self-induced than anything else -- it might be worthwhile to take the advice seriously... while i'm holding on the order of the rose-tinted D&G for now, maybe it's time to consider the amount of water in the glass...


"The greatest mistake you can make in life
is to be continually fearing you will make one
."
-- Elbert Hubbard
--------------------