Tag Archives: south carolina

Stuff learned this weekend

Stuff I learned this weekend during those rare times when I went out of the house:

  • South Carolina has some real issues with defending against a field goal block. Or two. Or three. That was gut-wrenching to watch. (Yes, I dabble in college football every once in a while.)
  • The NFL is still incredibly unpredictable. Week 10 was definitely full of upsets, with Green Bay beating Minnesota, Houston beating Jacksonville, the Jets beating the Patriots, Miami beating Kansas City, and Pittsburgh beating New Orleans. The best upset of the weekend, though, was Cleveland beating Atlanta — a Carolina win tonight will put the Panthers in a better position in the South (Atlanta still holds the head-to-head advantage pending the result of their Week 17 matchup with Carolina). And I’ll tell you what…Buffalo sure gave Indy a scare!
  • Never, ever, ever, ever let me watch any movie that has anything to do with computers. I will pick it apart. The latest victim: Stay Alive, which is predicated on people dying the same way they do in a computer game. I recommend it — if you’re intoxicated.
  • Wes Craven is a sick, sick man — and that’s what makes him such a genius.

Hmmm…I should get out more. Only four bullet points? Ridiculous. I’m sure I missed something.

An interesting analysis on how we voted on the Marriage Amendment

Dan’s analysis of the votes cast for and against the Marriage Amendment on Tuesday is incredibly intriguing. The highest percentage of ‘No’ votes came from Charleston County, and you may or may not be surprised to see exactly where in Charleston County these ‘no’ votes largely came from. Check it out — the results are very intriguing…

Election Day is tomorrow…

So tomorrow is Election Day, the culmination of a 2006 midterm campaign truly for the ages, with as much mudslinging as one possibly could imagine. It’s a sure sign the stakes are astronomical.

South Carolina’s not quite so much in the heat with the critical Senate races, and our red districts are likely to stay that way (though I’m going to try my best to change this), so we haven’t really seen too much. The governor’s race is the usual “he voted to raise taxes 23482342377423 times” and “he hates education blah blah blah” that we’ve seen in the last couple races. Here in Charleston, I’ve seen some ridiculous ads for candidates for the Charleston County School Board with atomic explosions and such. It’s utterly ridiculous.

The most ridiculous thing about this 2006 election, at least for issues I’ll be dealing with, is the infamous Marriage Amendment referendum, which would effectively limit the only type of recognized union between two people as licensed marriage between a man and a woman. This eliminates not only gay marriage but also common-law marriage, a man and a woman living together but not being wed yet, etc. It’s an incredibly broad amendment. Any chance of same-sex couples attaining any type of civil union will be pretty much gone, barring a major shift in ideology of the South Carolina government and another constitutional amendment.

I guess my question is why people feel so threatened by two people of the same sex wanting the same legal rights as others who are in a heterosexual union. I just don’t understand this one. It seems to be an issue of semantics; the government has adopted the term “marriage” from a legal standpoint, and I’m not sure I agree with this. “Union” seems to be a better legal term; let’s leave holy matrimony to the churches. If there is a church out there that wishes to marry a gay couple, I don’t see why anybody in government should have a problem with this, either. It seems that most of the opposition to gay marriage comes from a religious and not a legal standpoint, and I have a problem with this, because if a bloc is going to use their religious views to impose their legal will on people who may not share those views, then we run into some serious questions of equal protection and an endorsement of religion, and that just isn’t right.

Folks, let’s not legalize discrimination tomorrow. Please, say no to the Marriage Amendment.