I would like to be as sophisticated as Chris, and as brief, but I can’t. So I’ll start with “AAAaargh!” I understand that the Vatican is all about tradition. I understand that homosexuality is a touchy subject for them, especially as it’s turning out that many “celibate” priests are not, and at the expense of kids who are at a severe power disadvantage. Still, the Pope gets to make rules for Catholics, because that’s how the system works. I accept that. BUT…

Now the Vatican thinks that it gets to make rules for everyone, even you and me. So everyone “committed to promoting and defending the common good of society” (which I actually THOUGHT included me), whether Catholic or not, is supposed to oppose homosexual marriage, and not just that, but any legislation that would give gay couples the same rights as married couples.

“Why?” you may ask. Go ahead, ask. Okay, I’ll play Pope and explain. See, kids, homosexuality violates something called “natural moral law.” God, who is omnipotent, didn’t intend for there to be homosexuality. Humans are sinful creatures with free will, and homosexuality is just a terrible perversion of what God wanted, but since we can do what we want, it sometimes happens.

If our all-powerful God intended there to be homosexuality, there would be homosexual animals, right? See, animals don’t have free will, they HAVE to follow God’s laws. And since there are no verified examples of homosexual behavior among, say, oh, I don’t know… penguins, bonobo chimps, whales, giraffes, rodents, geese or bears… (These are NOT just random examples.) …then homosexuality must be unnatural, right? And a violation of this “natural moral law,” right?

Our friends the Italians are fighting the good fight, though, with great protest signs like “Democracy, yes. Theocracy, no.” and are comparing the Vatican to the Taliban. The Italians literally have Vatican City surrounded, so we can hope. And pray.

From:
Bush Accepts Blame for African Uranium Charge

Bush is taking responsibility for lying about the whole uranium/Iraq thing. But we’re not to blame Condy Rice at all. In fact, Bush says of her, “Dr. Condoleezza Rice is an honest, fabulous person and America is lucky to have her service, period.”

This sounds perfectly fair, except that according to my Webster’s II, “fabulous” means both “of the nature of a fable or myth” and “barely credible.” Bush’s subconscious is starting to play on him, perhaps?

It looks like the Bush administration (specifically Paul Wolfowitz) is shifting its justification for occupation of Iraq to a more September 11th-related story. I really do hope the American people are smarter than the administration assumes.

It’s probably time to read the PNAC primer written by Bernard Weiner. I’ve mentioned the Project for a New American Century before, but Weiner brings it all together in a thought-provoking piece.

It looks like California will hold a special election regarding whether or not to recall our Governor. The Sacramento Bee (incidentally, a great name for a newspaper) has a good overview of the rules and procedures of a recall.

I usually don’t ask you to do much. This site is more of an ongoing rant than an attempt at persuasion. However, if you’re concerned about the intelligence that was presented in support of going to war with Iraq, please consider signing MoveOn’s petitiion to support an independent investigation into WMD evidence.

Online petitions usually aren’t worth the paper they’re printed on, but MoveOn has the right idea. They get real volunteers to print out names and addresses and physically deliver petitions to your local Congressperson. This kind of personal interaction has already been shown to work, and MoveOn has the numbers to make representatives sit up and take notice.

OK, end of plea. Do what you can.