Help me out here. Proposition 2 for Texas Constitutional Ammendments on the 2005 ballot bans gay marriage (which we generally agree at best is piss-poor unAmerican legislation — keep the State out of individual freedoms, and more specifically only govern things that need governing — and at worst is State-mandated bigotry.) However, the confusing part is that it also says:

This state or a political subdivision of this state may not create or recognize any legal status identical or similar to marriage.

and it evens specifies that rights and legal uses of “…guardians, … private contracts, …hospital visitation, property, and the entitlement to proceeds of life insurance policies…” is unrelated to marriage.

So, my brain is twisting. That defines “marriage” through a single-minded point of view but defies the state’s ability to enforce any marriage-related apportioning…right? It specifically is worded so that marriage (being identical to itself) is no longer a legal status. How does this affect divorce? Will it change Texas’s no-fault status? What about domestic abuse?

Ultimately I think it is reactionary, poorly worded, short sighted and unneccesary legislation so I will vote it down…but I think it may have the right message at it’s core.

A buddy and I “got into it” the other day because he was gushing over the iPod Nano like it was God’s gift to technology.

So I lay into him about being marketing driven sheep and he challenges me to disprove that the Nano isn’t a magical flute from Narnia that will change the world…or maybe the conversation just devolved into whether or not the Nano was revolutionary, speaking from both a tech and $ perspective. What do you think?