Thank You and Good-bye

Well, I tried!  I thought Blogspot.com would be such a good idea.  Not unlike moving to house that you aren't thrilled with from a home you dearly love, I moved here nonetheless.  It's time to return, though, to my happy place.

To find more blogs, please go to http://Powodzenia.wordpress.com/.  Thank you for visiting here.  I truly appreciate your interest in my writing.

James

Show Business is Not Just Show

Broadway at night

Whether one is attending a show on Broadway, in a regional house such as Music Circus, in a local theatre company like Civic Theatre West, or at a high school, show business remains a business.   Like all businesses, during tough economic times, income decreases while expenditures remain the same or increase to produce a show.  Contrary to popular belief, theater companies do not make 100% of their income from ticket sales.  That would be impossible for most companies who want to produce outstanding theater.  Some have a higher percentage of their budgets supported by ticket sales; however, most don't.  Most apply for grants and donations from the government, private foundations, corporations, and individuals like you and me.  Theaters, after all, are charitable organizations; however, these resources are dwindling every year.

The good news is that according to Giving USA, 75% of all charitable donations are offered by generous private individuals.  The challenging part of the news is that charitable giving dropped a total of 3.6% in 2009 to $303.75 billion nationally (Pursuantmedia.com, 2010).  Giving to the arts alone dropped 2.4% to $12.4 billion.  According to the National Center for Charitable Statistics, the average family in Sacramento County listed on its taxes as having donated $2,865 per year in 2006.  This is about $1,400 less than the statewide average, and similar to the giving patterns in Inyo, Nevada, Tuolumne, and Butte Counties (2010). 

Music Circus

I received an e-mail today from the largest theatrical organization in Sacramento today requesting money to assist them in making up a shortfall created by our challenging economy.  Richard Lewis, the executive director of California Music Theater Company (CMT), the parent organization of Music Circus, the Broadway Series, and Cosmopolitan Cabaret, requested donations from patrons from $100 to $2,500.  People simply aren't filling their seats in the way they have in the past.  Sadly, CMT is not the only one to have this experience.  For different reasons, Artistic Differences just closed up shop, as did Civic Theatre West, formerly Magic Circle Repertory Theatre.  Without exception, every theater company needs community support to continue operation.

One might wonder why someone should donate to their favorite theater when there are other pressing financial concerns in front of him or her.  One must remember that whether ballet or opera, musical theater or straight plays are your thing, one has to attend the productions and support the business of show business.  Otherwise, like all organizations without adequate support, they disappear.

Imagine for a moment those evenings or Sunday afternoons when you saw the best production you'd ever seen.  The lights in the house went to half, and you knew that something magical was about to happen.  You've seen shows there many times, and this, your favorite theater company, rarely disappoints.  The conductor takes her downbeat, and the music swells.  Immediately, you are in the show!  The characters come to life, the lighting is perfect, the costumes dance, and the sets let you forget for just a moment that your mortgage is upside down and that your son is starting college in the fall.

None of this happens by accident, and none of it is free.  You pay your ticket price, of course, and for that, these companies are grateful.  They love to see you in the seats, not only because of your pocketbook, but because they are truly joyful to know that you have returned again as a secure patron who knows she will see an amazing production!  They are proud of their work.

Tower Theatre, Roseville

Even with a full house, ticket sales account for about 30% to 50% of the money necessary for operation.  Imagine if the work you did paid for only 30% of your bills.  It wouldn't be pretty.  This isn't because of poor business practices that it is set up like this.  It is because without these donations, few people could afford to attend shows. I suppose most people wouldn't want to, or couldn't for that matter, pay $60 a ticket to see a local production or $240 per ticket for Music Circus.

What's the other option?  If every person who bought a $20 ticket in a 400 seat local theatre donated $25 to $50 a year or more, that would be a huge boon to the company.  You, then, become a stronger patron of the arts.  You have helped assure that a variety of shows are available in your area, and your thumb print is seen on the stage. 

Are you a business owner?  Perhaps you could buy an ad in a program for your company?  If you own a larger company, you could even sponsor a show, and have your name on the marquee.  There are many, many options to support the arts in your area.  Call your favorite company to find out what your options are.  As with any business, theater is about relationships onstage and off. 

You can take a leadership role in supporting the arts in your community.  Donate to your favorite theater.  Make a few calls.  Talk with your friends.  Chat with local business owners.  It only takes a few minutes of your time, and the benefits to your community are enormous.  I know the theater company you choose to support will be extremely grateful.  Your name likely will end up in the program, too.

The power to maintain and grow the artistic community is in your hands.  For those who actively participate already, thank you.  You've made a difference.  I, for one, am anxious to see what those who are now contemplating a greater involvement in theater will do. 



Woodland Opera House



References:

Pursuantmedia.com (2010, May) Giving USA Executive Summary. Center on Philanthrophy at Indiana State University. Giving USA Foundation. Clearview, Illinois. Retrieved from http://www.pursuantmedia.com/givingusa/0510/

National Center for Charitable Statistics (2010)   Charitable Giving by Households that Itemize Deductions (AGI and Itemized Contributions Summary by Zip, 2006), Internal Revenue Service,The Urban Institute, National Center for Charitable Statistics. Retrieved November 24, 2010 from http://nccsdataweb.urban.org/NCCS/V1Pub/index.php

Promotion of Gay Culture?

Jesse Tyler Ferguson and Eric Stonestreet as
Mitchell and Cameron on ABC's "Modern Family"

On CNN.com today, there was a video article about the distress some folks feel at seeing more gay characters on the television.  Whether the characters are gay themselves or the people playing them are gay in real real, a segment of the population is unhappy that television is, in their words, "promoting homosexuality."  It is unfathomable to me how some folk make these ridiculous claims out loud and expect to be taken seriously.

Let us define our terms.  According to Webster's Seventh New Collegiate Dictionary, "promote" means "1 a: to advance in station, rank, or honor...2 a: to contribute to the growth or prosperity of... b: to help bring (as an enterprise) into being... 3 slang: to get possession of by doubtful means or by ingenuity (Merriam, 1971)."  If any part of this definition is appropriate, it is to advance in honor.  While this may be challenging for some, others may believe that bringing gay people into a legitimized place in television is timely and important.

The other definition that should be considered is that of "reflect," which reads, "...4: to give back or exhibit as an image, likeness, or outline : MIRROR."  This seems a more accurate identification of what is happening on television as we see increasing numbers of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people in the casts of shows in the mainstream media.

"Will and Grace"
L-R Sean Hayes, Debra Messing, Eric McCormack,
and Megan Mullaly

Most people believe that prior to the title character, Will, and his sidekick, Jack, on NBC's "Will and Grace," that ran from 1998 to 2006, gay people had never appeared as weekly characters in primetime on television.  That simply isn't the case.  In 1972, Vincent Schiavelli portrayed what is believed to be the first gay character in a recurring role.  The show ran for only one year, but it set a milestone nonetheless (Wikipedia.com, 2010).  Anyone who watched television in the 1960s couldn't possibly have missed the flaming Uncle Arthur character portrayed by the flaming Paul Lynde on "Bewitched," or Mr. Sulu, portrayed by the elegant George Takei, on "Star Trek." 

Paul Lynde as Uncle Arthur
on "Bewitched"

Certainly there were guest appearances by gay characters, but usually they were drag queens, effeminate gay best friends forever, or bar flies.  Even "Queer as Folk," the British television series that began in 1999 and was followed by the American version in 2000, was shown only on a premium cable channel, HBO.  Network television wanted nothing to do with these folks.

Ellen DeGeneres, followed by Rosie O'Donnell, made huge inroads into the public consciousness when they announced they are gay (Insidesocal.com, 2010). The very famous A-list celebrities broke down walls that continue to make a difference to gay folk everywhere; however, they were not characters in a scripted show.

Although Jack was likely the first principal character on a network television show, any other single character would have increased the number of gay folks on television by 100%.  Out of the thousands of characters that populate the small screen, one character accounted for a miniscule percentage of returning characters.  Today, gay people are showing up all over network television, including on "Modern Family," "Glee," "GRΣΣK," and "The Office." Based on conservative estimates that 10% of the population identifies as gay, the number of characters on television still does not reflect the actual segment of the population that exists in the United States.

The concept that these characters are promoting homosexuality is like saying BET is promoting being Black, or Turner Classic Movies is promoting living in the past.  How does that even happen?  A person is who he or she is.  He may appreciate another culture, or even emulate that culture, but there is no way to change who one is.  If a young man or young woman is straight, watching gay characters on television will not make them gay, any more than watching straight characters since the inception of television in 1930s made any of the gay folk straight.  If an individual is gay, these characters may provide an open door to his or her own truth, making it easier to admit that truth to others.  This can only be healthy for that person in the long run.

More appropriately, what we are seeing is gay people more accurately reflected, not promoted, in the media.  Gay characters are identified as loving individuals and couples, having children through birth or adoption, and living ordinary lives for the most part.  What some people are afraid of is that gay people will be viewed as "normal" by the masses.  If these characters are promoting anything, it is the truth about the ongoing lives of gay folk that exists in our current society. 
_______________________

References:
Daemonstv.com (2009) [Mitch and Cameron]. Modern Family. Photograph. Retrieved from
http://www.daemonstv.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/modern-family-500x333.jpg

Insidesoccal.com (2010) [Time cover: Ellen DeGeneres]. "Out in Hollywood". Insidesocal.com.  Retrieved from http://www.insidesocal.com/outinhollywood/1101970414_400.jpg

Mediamum.files.wordpress.com (2009) [Will and Grace]. Mediamum files.wordpress.com. Photograph.  Retrieved from http://mediamum.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/will-and-grace.jpg

Mereditharnold.files.wordpress.com (2010) [Paul Lynde]. Mereditharnold.files.wordpress.com.  Retreived from http://mereditharnold.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/paul-lynde3.jpeg

Thedailyprofaner.com (2009) [Gay Family]. Thedailyprofaner.com. Retrieved from
http://thedailyprofaner.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/gay-family.jpg

(1971) Webster's Seventh New Collegiate Dictionary. G. & C. Merrian Co. Chicago, Illinois. p. 682


(1971) Webster's Seventh New Collegiate Dictionary. G. & C. Merrian Co. Chicago, Illinois. p. 719
Wikipedia.com (2010) "List of television shows with LGBT characters." Wikipedia.com. Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_television_shows_with_LGBT_characters

Thinking Back

For the first time in a very long time, something told me to look for the earliest entry in my journal for this date.  I came across this entry, dated September 8, 1993.

Mary and Dziadzia - September 8, 1993

"I just got back from the hospital where I held Mary Elizabeth for the first time.  What an incredible thing!  I held my graddaughter.  She's so beautiful.  I can hardly wait to have her home where we can take care of her.  I remember the feeling of being held by my grandfather, my Dziadzia.  I don't remember his person, because he died when I was very young, but I remember the unconditional love he gave me and it is that on which I have based my desire to love everyone unconditionally.  I also saw my father as a Dziadzia, and the love he gave to my children, and [my brother,] David's children.  I have seen my Papa, Grandfather Herrera, and how he loves so simply  and completely.  These role models are worth emulating.  Maybe I can compile these qualities to be the best grandfather that I can be.  Maybe not the best ever, but the best I can do.  I am really tired, so I think I will stop now, but know that I am peacful and joyful.  It is a wonderful thing!  She is a wonderful, beautiful child and she has filled me with peace now that she has been in my arms.  Big tisses, Mary Lillabits."

After reading this entry, I remembered that I had written a description of her birth from my perspective.  She had asked me to do so as a part of an exercise for her classwork a couple of years ago. 

"It was a beautiful fall day in River Park. Your Mom and I decided to go for a long walk. Your mother seemed to have a lot of energy at the time, so our walk got longer and longer. Apparently, it was too long, because it wasn’t much later that your mother went into labor.

"Your Mom and Dad were living with me in the home we’d lived in for sixteen years at the time.  They had been living in an apartment in the South Area of Sacramento, but the area was not very safe and the closer it got to your birth, the more I felt it was better that they come stay with me. Finally, after a lot of convincing, they agreed.

Raven-of-Strong-Flight

"When your mother said she was feeling labor pains, we took her into the hospital to be checked out by the doctor. The doctor said that Ana was in labor and that she would have to go into the hospital. It was several weeks too early and we were concerned. We knew that when a baby is born too early, the child’s lungs wouldn’t be fully developed and the risk to his or her well-being was very high.

"The doctors said they might have been able to stop the labor, but the amniotic fluid that surrounded you in the womb had broken and was leaking. That put you at risk of infection since you were no longer surrounded by the protection of the sac that held the amniotic fluid. They said you had to be delivered at that point.

"Your mom’s labor began subsiding, but they felt it was necessary to induce the labor again, so they started your mom on pitocin. They kept increasing the medication to such a level that your mother was having one long, painful labor pain without any break in between. Normally, contractions, which is where the muscles flex around the mother’s uterus to get the baby out, go for a few seconds, and then she has a few minutes rest. Well, you and your mom didn’t have that rest. I finally had to insist that the doctors stop the pitocin. When they did, labor went on as normal and your birth went on as would be expected. The problem is that your mother had been in labor for nearly three days by this time. She had been in a lot of pain and she was so very tired. One must remember that your mother was only 17 years old when all of this was happening. It had to be really hard for her to deal with.

"Everyone was there at different times to support your Mom and you. Your Dad were there, of course, and I was there most of the time. Your uncles, J.D., John and Michael and Aunt Rita stayed with your mother for a lot of the time. I must say, your Uncle John wouldn’t leave your mother’s side. Even when everyone was told to get out of the room, John would go and sit outside in the hall. Grandma Barbara and Grandma Florabelle were there quite a bit, also, because they didn’t want to miss your birth. Even Grandpa Tom was in the waiting room.  When it was time for you to make your arrival, they wheeled your mother into the birthing suite and there was quite a crowd. Mom and Dad and all four of your grandparents were there, as well as the hospital staff. I was your Mom’s birthing coach, so I took the lead in helping your Mom deliver you.

The Glica Family - 1993
Top: John, James, James David
Bottom: Michael, Mary, Ana, Rita, and Michael (photo)

"A few pushes and you were here. Five pounds, ten ounces of beautiful baby. You cried a little bit, but as I looked over at you, you began turning purple. I knew what that meant immediately. You weren’t breathing very well. Your mother didn’t hear you crying, so she asked what was happening. The doctor said, they were just checking you out. When it was clear that you were having difficulties, they told your mother what was happening. It wasn’t long before they took you to the Neo-Natal Intensive Care Unit (NNICU). That is where newborn babies go when there are serious problems with their health.

"Your lungs hadn’t fully developed yet. Your mother wasn’t able to produce enough milk to feed you and so they eventually had to start gavaging you, which meant they put a tube down your throat and made sure you were getting milk.

"You little body was struggling so hard, but it was getting more and more tired. You got down to four pounds, fifteen ounces during your stay, so they could not let us bring you home. You were receiving around the clock oxygen through a respirator since you were not able to breathe on your own.

"By all accounts, it appeared you were dying. We wouldn’t have any part of that, however. We knew from the time when Aunt Rita had cancer as a young baby, that we had to pray.

"Everyone was praying for you, of course, but your mother and I decided to go into the NNICU and pray together with you. Your mother put her right hand on your head and her left hand on your feet, I put my hands on hers and we began praying. We offered your spirit to God and asked that he choose what course your life should go. It was in that moment we had to let go of you into God’s hands. It was also in that moment that you started to get better.

"Soon, you were gaining weight, you came off the respirator and we finally got to hold you. One of my favorite pictures is the photo I have of me holding you for the first time in the NNICU. It was a picture we didn’t know we’d ever be able to take.

L-R David, James, Ray, Ana, and Mary

"Modern medicine and prayer are what brought you back to us. God guided our hands at every step. I really believe that, Mary.

"Everyone responded differently while you were ill. Some people, like your Grandma Barbara tried to keep your Mom’s spirits up. Some left us alone to work on taking care of you. I believe we were all afraid we would lose you and the natural tendency to panic kicked in for some. They didn’t know what to do. We had never faced anything like this before.

"We found out that you had a hole in your heart that they said would correct itself as you got older. Your lungs would grow enough eventually to get you off the respirator and soon they would allow us to take you home. We had gone through a very tough ordeal, but as a family, and through prayer, we got through it together.

"It challenged us and we met the challenge. You showed us just how strong you would be in that time. It was for that reason I also named you in the Native American tradition, Raven of Strong Flight after I found the Raven feather the day before you got off the respirator."

James with seven of his grandchildren,
L-R Nathaniell, Ray, Emily, Jacob, Mary, Justin, and Christian

Grandparenthood started for me when I was very young; 34 to be exact.  Of course, this has been the pattern for my birthfamily for at least seven generations. My grandmother became at great-great-grandmother when Mary was born and she was only 70.  I must believe that although we've each had our challenges as parents, the fulfillment for them must have been as wonderful as it has been for me. 

Since Mary's birth, I've been blessed by 10 grandchildren, all of which came before I was 50.  I give thanks to our Divine Creator for blessing me with such an abundance of love from my wonderful grandchildren.  I especially remember my Mary Lillabits for starting the ball rolling 17 years ago.

I love you, Mary.

Love,

Dziadzia

Sexuality vs. Love

Author's Note:  This blog is reprinted from my previous blogsite published at Powodzenia.wordpress.com on June 3, 2010.  With the debate raging about marriage relative to procreation and sex, I was encouraged to rethink our language in this topic.   

As we continue having debates regarding rights, freedoms, and full citizenship for people in same-gender relationships, we may want to conserve our energy and make our discussions more efficient and accurately reflective of every type of relationship.

As I watched Current TV, the channel developed by former vice-president Al Gore, and Illinois senator, Al Franken (D), I heard a woman say that these debates, especially those going toward the U.S. Supreme Court, are made more challenging because the word sex is involved. The word to which she was referring was, ”Homosexuality.”

If it’s really an issue, why not use a different word? The Latin word, “homo,” means, “same.” “Hetero,” mean “different.” The Latin root, “amor,” means, “love.”

Homoamorous means two people of the same gender love one another.

Heteroamorous means two people of different genders love one another.

So, why not change the word. It’s not as though we’re using ancient or sacred words to describe our relationships. “Homosexuality” was coined on May 6, 1869 by Karoly Maria Benkert, a 19th Century Hungarian physician, who first broke with traditional thinking when he suggested that people are born homosexual and that it is unchangeable. With that belief as his guide, he fought the Prussian legal code against homosexuality that he described as having ”repressive laws and harsh punishments (Conrad and Angel, 2004).”

One would suspect that Dr. Benkert would appreciate this change in lexicon so that we change our focus in this debate from sex to love. John and Frank are not two people in sex. They are two people in love. Deborah and Sheila are not two women who spend their lives sexing each other, they are two women loving each other. This is especially true because homosexuality has been demedicalized in so many ways.

If we’re going to have to have this debate in the first place, let’s speak accurately about the people involved. We are homoamorous people. We are two people of one gender who are in love. Those in opposite gender relationships are heteroamorous.

How complicated can that be? If I were to approach someone and ask them if they’d like a slice of bread, their first question is likely, “What kind is it?” As a people, we love clarity. Homosexuality and heterosexuality are simply not clear enough terms for the breadth of our relationship. Homoamorosity and heteroamorosity are clear winners when it comes to describing the relationships with which I am most familiar.

Sexuality is an important, if not a terribly time consuming part of most marriage relationships. It helps motivate our interest in a particular person whose gender is consistent with what we prefer; however, that, too, is not always the case.

Is it unthinkable that two people can have a relationship that is purely emotional in form, without sex, who continue to love one another nonetheless? Ask many people who are of a certain age.

Homoamorosity and heteroamorosity are not only options for the terms homosexuality and heterosexuality, they might even be the preferred forms given their more emotionally inclusive qualities.

My mother used to say, when trying to get the direct truth out of me, “Jim, call a spade a spade.” Although I never played bridge, from which this term comes, I knew what she meant. Name something as it is. I now get that message all the more clearly.

Thanks, Mom.
__________________________

References:

2010, Plato.stanford.edu. Retrieved from http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/homosexuality/

Conrad, P., & Angell, A. (2004). Homosexuality and remedicalization. Society, 41(5), 32-39. Retrieved from Academic Search Complete database.

Craigslist as Intermediary Procurer?

There was a time when I recall washing machines in people's homes that still had to be hand-cranked.  Others had electric ones that just needed to be set and forgotten until the bell rang.  Automated teller machines came along shortly after microwave ovens as television remotes, the wired kind, developed at about the same time.  People are simply creative.  Now, in our Electronic Age, we have passive e-pimps such as Craigslist doing what used to be done by fedora-wearing, gold chain emblazoned men on street corners. Perhaps that isn't nearly as damaging as the serious allegations that under-aged children are being sold into sexual service on Craigslist as well.

Seventeen attorneys general from around the country have written to Craigslist CEO Jim Buckmaster, and  founder Craig Newmark (see left), to request the removal of the adult services section on Craigslist.  Three attorneys general have added their voices the letter as well.  This advertising section, it is alleged, permits people to sell their sexual services to adults seeking sex.  The larger problem is that the services of young girls are also trafficked online in this same site.

As long as the internet has been functioning, there have been sexual ads of all types available.  Prostitutes in the guise of masseuses and masseures, escorts, fetishists, and dates, have been promoting their services in a huge variety of sites.  Pimps have been offering their employees' services in the same way.  The difference here is that Craigslist is acting as an intermediary giving tacit approval for these activities through neglect and silence on the matter.  They are not placing the ads, but they are providing the unfettered bulletin board.  The greatest concern is that young girls and boys, under the age of consent, are advertised as commodities for adults' pleasure in these ads.

Prostitution is unseemly, illegal in most places in the country, and for some, a sin.  With that being said, this particular branch of the service industry is flourishing.  Men, who make up what is a lion's share of the customer/john population (why else would they be called, "johns?"), have been using these types of services since time immemorial.  As I was doing online genealogical research for information on San Francisco during the 1870s, I found multiple census postings for "brothel owner" and "prostitute" in the space designated for type of employment.  There is a reason it is called the world's oldest profession.

The real question is, how responsible should Craigslist be for these ads?  The issue is not whether prostitution ads can be found on Craigslist, it is how we, as a society, stop the selling of young girls and boys into illicit service?

Newmark has previously indicated to the press that Craigslist is very responsible when it comes to ads on their service.  They review each ad for appropriateness and remove those that are suspect.  It has been alleged that this has not been done, even to a minimal extent (CNN.com, 2010).   

It is interesting that thus far, the administration at Craigslist has not invoked their First Amendment right of free speech for their clients.  It is likely that this is because they would be defending an illegal activity that is promoted on their site and abhorrant to the general public.  If they had reviewed their ads more effectively to ensure young people are not involved, they might have had a leg to stand on; however, as it is, they simply decided to close that section of the ads.  The adult services section, previously known as erotic services, now has a placard reading "censored."  The censorship, however, is only in the United States since the section is still available in other countries.

Anyone who has ever been on Craigslist knows that they have personal ads, some of which are very graphic.  There is little doubt that these sections will soon be filled with the ads for paid sex, using increasingly subtle language to get their message across. "Generous man sought for enjoyable evening of pleasure with young lovely," may be the language du jour.  Without a large staff dedicated to review each and every ad, this free service will never see a time without prostitution showing up in amongst their ads.  To avoid being closed down all together, they may want to take this issue much more seriously because beyond their business concerns, our children are being sold to profit adults who have no regard for the health and safety of our children.  Does Craigslist really want to be painted with this same brush, too?
____________________________

References: 

CNN Wire Staff (2010) "Critic praises Craigslist move to censor ads, calls for more info." CNN.com Justice. Retrieved from http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/09/05/craigslist.censored/index.html

Scaryforkids.com (2010) [Frightened teen girl] http://www.scaryforkids.com/. Photograph. Retrieved from http://www.scaryforkids.com/pics/babysitter.jpg

SFGate.com (2010) [Censored Adult Services] sfgate.com. Digital Photograph.  Retrieved from http://imgs.sfgate.com/blogs/images/sfgate/techchron/2010/09/03/CraigslistCensored.jpg

SFGate.com (2009) [Craig Newmark and Jim Buckmaster in front of Craigslist.org] SFGate.com. Photograph. Retrieved from http://www.sfgate.com/blogs/images/sfgate/techchron/2009/03/20/Craigslist_EBay-

After Some Thought on Proposition 8

It must seem unfathomable that a writer who would be directly impacted by Judge Vaughn Walker's ruling on Proposition 8 in California would wait an entire month to put his thoughts down about the event.  Perhaps as it is with the gravity of the ruling itself, the weight of my thoughts required a thoughtful approach to this concern.

On August 4, 2010, Judge Walker ruled in the California's Third District Court of Appeals that there was no reason to allow Proposition 8, the California law that prohibits consenting, unrelated people over the age of majority, gay folk in particular, to stand.  The ruling effectively permits all eligible people to marry regardless of their genders.  Although the door appeared to be flung wide open, Judge Walker wisely approved a stay of his decision awaiting a decision by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and Attorney General Jerry Brown whether they would appeal the decision in the United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.  When the word was released that neither State official was willing to make that appeal, the defendent-intervenors such as the Pacific Justice Institute approached the Ninth Circuit to request permission to appeal on their own, which is currently awaiting a hearing, most likely transpiring in November 2010.

In November, most likely after the election, a decision will be made whether the defendent-intervenors can appeal.  If they cannot, then it is clear they will attempt to take the case to the United States Supreme Court.  If the Justices determine that the case will not be heard before them, then Judge Walker's final decision will stand. 

Between the cases in Massachusetts regarding the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and the Proposition 8 case in California, the country is facing what it believes to be a cultural shift of monumental proportions.  It cannot be understated that when we define marriage as a legal contract between two people regardless of gender, it is a significant change in perception.  The irony, of course, is that we are behind the rest of the world in this process.  As Americans, we are once again under the misapprehension that until we make a decision like this, it hasn't really happened.  Our arrogance is unmatched around the globe.  The Netherlands has had marriage equality since 2000.  We are not breaking new ground.

Why is it that countries as diverse as The Netherlands, South Africa, Iceland, and Argentina, have found their way to recognize full marriage rights for all their citizens and the United States is still behaving as though we are trying to take something away from a specific segment of the population by providing rights to all citizens?  Could it be our Puritan background?  Not likely since the Puritans were so revolutionary as to believe they had such an innate freedom of religion that they moved across the Atlantic Ocean to build a society in which their personal freedoms were recognized.  This was during the 16th and 17th centuries.  Now, of course, we have other groups asking for the same freedoms and recognition of their belief systems, and our "as it's always been done" powerbase is attempting to deny those freedoms.

The tide is changing.  During the 1960s, when President Lyndon B. Johnson prepared to sign the Civil Rights Act, people began separating themselves from the discriminatory stance they had held for so long because they didn't want to be part of the losing team, members of which included the Ku Klux Klan.  Today, centrist Republicans are beginning to choose equality instead of discrimination.  Slowly, people are recognizing they will be the losers in a battle of wisdom and awakening.  That's not a good place to find oneself, especially if one is facing an upcoming election.

At a personal level, I know that in 100 years, equality in marriage will be as accepted by the majority as equal right for the races is today.  Our great-great-grandchildren will wonder what the fuss was all about.  Grandpa Tom and his husband, Papa Cal, are like a lot of other people's grandparents.  The economy will flourish with extravagent weddings between homoamorous people.  They will no longer be called gay weddings, they'll just be weddings.  Forms will say, "Spouse 1" and "Spouse 2."  In 100 years, we will have settled into our comfort zone about equality, and there will be less room for discrimination against any other people.  Perhaps it is my American idealism that leads me to believe in these joyful dreams.  If history is any indicator, we will find someone else against whom to focus our disgust and animosity; however, I hope not. 
______________________

References:

Advocate.com (2010) [Marriage rings and map of Argentina] Retrieved from http://www.advocate.com/uploadedImages/ARGENTINA_MARRIAGEX390.jpg.

Hoan, Tony (2009) [Defend Equality, Love Unites]. My portfolio.usc.edu. Graphic art. Retrieved from http://myportfolio.usc.edu/tonyhoan/6a00d8341c730253ef010535ee7bfe970b-640wi.jpg.

LaVictoire, Bridgette P. (2010, September 9) "California governor and attorney general not required to appeal Walker ruling."  Lezgetreal.com. Retrieved from http://lezgetreal.com/2010/09/californias-governor-and-attorney-general-not-requires-to-appeal-walker-ruling/.

Mintz, Howard (2010) "Federal judge strikes down California's ban on same-sex marriage."  San Jose Mercury News, MercuryNews.com.  Retrieved on September 5, 2010 from  http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_15677407?nclick_check=1.

Rinaldi, Richard (2005) [William and Roy]. http://www.renaldi.com/. Gay and Lesbian Elderly. Photograph, Black & White.  Retrieved from  http://www.renaldi.com/portfolio/williamandroy.jpg on September 5, 2010.