Spring Getaway 2013

First day of our spring getaway could not possibly have gone better. The weather was nice and sunny and the high temperature reached 72. Pam and I sat on the beach for a couple of hours. When the sun went behind the clouds it would get chilly, but just about the time you were getting uncomfortable, the sun would come back out and it would feel glorious again. Dinner was at T-Bonz over in Barefoot Landing. It was fine, nothing special. Filled up on fried pickles and it took my appetite away by the time the jambalaya was served. My bad.

It was so great watching baseball last night. It’s like all is once again right with the world when it’s opening day in America. All three of my teams won, the Red Sox, Nationals, and Braves. Some will scoff at the very idea that one could have “three” different teams in baseball. I make no apologies for my split allegiances. My oldest connection is with the Braves, the team that I have been with the longest. Their triple A farm team was in Richmond for 30 years so I naturally developed an interest in them. I go back to the teams with Hank Aaron, Dusty Baker, Phil Neikro, and Ralph Garr. Then I married a girl from Maine and got sucked in to the Red Sox orbit by my Father-in-law the year that Bill Buckner booted Mookie Wilson’s grounder in the World Series. Finally, when the Nationals moved from Montreal to DC, they became my “local” team. All of their games are broadcast locally so I’ve been able to see them develop from truly awful to spectacular over the last four or five years. I love their manager, their style of play, and many of their young talented players. Plus, unlike the Braves and the Red Sox, I actually get to go to see some of their games in person. Consequently, my enthusiasm for them has grown rather rapidly.

So, there you have it, I’m a Braves, Red Sox, and Nationals fan, and proud of it. How do I manage to watch a divisional matchup between the Braves and Nationals? It ain’t easy. What would I do if the Braves or Nationals end up in a World Series with the Red Sox? I would have the time of my life, THAT’S what.

So, today it’s 60, sunny, with little or no wind. We will laze around inside for the morning, then sit on the beach for a few hours, then clean up and head out to shop for a while before dinner. What a great idea this was. A huge shout out should go to my buddy Doug Greenwood for buying this adorable condo in the first place. That way, I get to enjoy it and he gets to pay the real estate taxes! It pays to be friends with a 1%er!

First Quarter In The Books...a Review

The first quarter of 2013 is now in the books. I’ve had over 100 appointments, conducted 52 annual reviews, completed 29 separate transactions, and ended the quarter with a barrage of business that made all the numbers look nice. On the home front, we’ve entertained thirty supremely talented singers from Belmont for a weekend, completely overhauled the upstairs of our house, suffered the loss of Matthew Crawley, and banished Molly to the uncarpeted rooms of the downstairs at night to deal with her rare but disgusting bouts of incontinence.

I have enjoyed my wife’s amazing cooking every night as we watch Frazier reruns, DVR episodes of Person of Interest, Nashville, Parenthood, and Pioneer Woman. I have looked on with proud fascination as my daughter writes her Master thesis at Wake Forest; I’ve listened to the incredibly beautiful music that my son has composed at Westminster. I’ve watched two friends endure extreme personal trials with grace and dignity, one which ended poorly, one which ended with deliverance. My Dad spent three weeks in the hospital and recovered stronger than before. It gave me the chance to spend twenty nights with him and listen to more great stories and if possible have my opinion of him become even more worshipful.

A Super Bowl was played and I can hardly remember who won. Our political leaders have spent most of their time warning us of coming disasters that never seem to come. President Obama seems always to be either leaving for a vacation, on vacation, or returning from vacation, which I’m totally fine with. Matter of fact, I think all of them should go on even more vacations, since they will be much less likely to do us harm from the slopes in Vail.

This blog continues to accumulate more readers; I’m halfway through a novel I started writing in January, and I was able to survive a recent attempt at offering an opinion on the subject of gay marriage, all in all, an eventful three months.

Now, we will have Pam’s family over for Easter Sunday complete with an egg hunt for the kids. Then Pam and I have planned a little 4 day escape to catch our breath in Myrtle Beach.

Life could be a whole lot worse.

Gay Marriage Debate...Part Two

http://doug-thetempest.blogspot.com/2012/05/gay-marriage-debatewith-myself.html


I start part two of this gay marriage discussion by providing a link to a similar debate I had with myself last May during the Presidential campaign, just to prove to you that I have given my views on this topic a lot of thought. I have never lost sight of the very real possibility that I could be wrong on much of this. However, rereading the post from almost a year ago does remind me of just how contentious an issue this is.

One thing that I've noticed is that people have a very difficult time separating the legal issues of gay marriage from the religious issues of gay marriage. Some think it is impossible to do. I disagree. To me they are two entirely different discussions which I explain in relative detail in the above blog post. to illustrate this point I will bring up an argument that I hear all the time that baffles me, to wit, if gay marriage is elevated to legal equality with traditional marriage it will somehow devalue the institution of marriage. In my opinion, this is a misunderstanding of the marriage vows. When Pam and I got married, I stood at the front of a church and recited my vow to her in front of God and man. As I recall, no representative of the government was present. All the benefits that I receive from the tax code etc.. and all other approvals that flow my way for being legally married are a function of law. But my vows were not made to the state, they were made to my beloved and God. So, how can the fact that two gay people happen to get married down the street alter the sanctity or the holiness of MY vows? I believe this to be a specious argument.

So the question then becomes, if the sanctity and by extension the holiness of the marriage covenant comes from it's religious underpinnings, how can we make an argument that gay people should not be able to be married under the LAW? What does the one have to do with the other? My marriage isn't made sacred because I get to file a joint tax return, it is sacred because it is a holy institution to start with. I can find no compelling reason to deny gay people the right to marry that doesn't begin and end with religious conviction. I have plenty of them, as I explain in the above referenced blog, but as a purely legal matter, I suppose I have come to the point where I can find no reasonable objection.

The one thing that gay and straight people have in common is the fact that we are both sinners. As a result, I believe that gay people will have just as difficult a time as straight folks have had honoring those wedding vows.

The hardest part of this issue for me is how do we move forward? How do the two sides of this come to an understanding that allows us to live together in peace without all of the bitterness and acrimony? Maybe the kids were on to something all along, we need to learn how to love each other despite our differences, to overcome the heat and fury of this debate will require superhuman effort. Both sides of these barricades are manned by human beings with beating hearts. To paraphrase Shakespeare, if you cut them, do they not bleed? Surely we have more in common than the issues that divide us, right?

The Gay Marriage Debate

Yesterday the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the case of California’s Proposition 8, a ballot initiative which changed the California constitution to prohibit gay marriage. The people of that state passed the initiative in 2008 with 52% of the voters agreeing that the historical definition of marriage as between one man and one woman should not be changed. The verdict was immediately challenged and overturned by the 9^th circuit court and was then appealed to the Supreme Court for review.

If I had any brains I would simply let this go without comment. The issue is a minefield of accusation. Words like “bigot” and “fag” are being thrown around like hand grenades at anyone stupid enough to go public with an opinion. Well, there has never been any doubt as to whether I am stupid enough, the evidence showing that I am stupid enough for practically anything, so here goes.

Facebook yesterday got lit up with these small red squares which I later learned were indications of support for gay marriage. The back and forth was quite awful, as I have come to expect on that medium. I know and understand the basic arguments on both sides and many, though not all, of the tangential ones. I am left confused and torn.

On the one hand, if a society decides to change the 4000 year old understanding of what marriage is, it better have a damn good reason for doing so. Marriage is a foundational relationship of human interaction, serving as it does as the primary organizational unit of civilization,( notice the links I am willing to go to avoid the ghastly term “building block”!!).  But I also know that slavery was a foundational relationship of human interaction for something close to 4000 years too, and still is in many areas of the world. The fact that we grew to value the dignity of human life enough to stigmatize and outlaw human bondage was a high water mark in our development. The question then arises, does prohibiting gay marriage equate logically with abolishing slavery? Proponents have very eagerly picked up the civil rights banner, cloaking their cause as the natural next step in personal freedoms and claiming the rhetorical high ground that that association brings. As a side benefit, this strategy also allows those on the other side of the debate to be breezily accused of being bigots, the natural descendants of Bull Conner.

For most of my younger friends the issue seems to be a simple one summarized by a simple question, “Why shouldn’t people be allowed to love whoever they choose?” It’s all about love. Why can’t we all just get along? Of course this binds the issue of “love” to marriage in ways that are not consistent with history. The close relationship with romantic love and the institution of marriage is a very new one historically speaking, a relatively modern construct. For centuries before ours marriage was much more often of financial, political, or even self preservation origins. Marriages were entered into to strengthen tribes, alliances and other forms of human organizations, but most importantly to provide the safest vehicle for the formation of families, the propagation of the species, child rearing, for lack of a better term. Now, I admit, this understanding doesn’t do well on a Hallmark Card, but nonetheless it is a fact of history sometimes lost in our modern obsession with romantic love. So, getting back to my young friends and their argument for gay marriage…if love is the issue, then why prohibit any two people who “love each other” from getting married? Why shouldn’t a 35 year old man be able to marry a 15 year old girl, or a 15 year old boy, or a 15 year old dog? It’s all about love, right? Or how about that strange place where love truly abounds, our 35 year old man and his 6, 35 year old girlfriends? Love conquers all, or so I’m told on Facebook.

The burden of proof should be on those who propose a redefinition of marriage. What will be the results down the line of this redefinition? Will the legal precedent be set for future redefinitions like I describe, and if so, how do these changes benefit society, and are those benefits without risk?

I have not here introduced religious convictions into the debate. I have some on this issue, but they are not germane to the legal argument. However, religious issues still abound. If gay marriage is made the law of the land, what is to become of churches who teach the traditional view( Catholics, Baptists, etc.)? If they refuse to conduct such marriages, will they be held in contempt, stripped of their tax free status? Will their priests and ministers be sent to jail? And what is to become of the millions of people who still hold to a 4000 year definition of the institution of marriage? Are they to be magically transformed into bigots and shamed from polite society?

 

There is much more to discuss here, but I must go to work. I have many sympathies with the pro gay marriage argument which I will detail in tomorrow’s blogpost.

 

                                      TO BE CONTINUED  

Cyprus...Explained

Imagine for a moment that you are a middle class citizen of Cyprus. You work, pay your taxes and keep your nose clean, like most patriotic Cypriots. Your government has its share of incompetent boobs but in no larger supply than any other country. You put up with it because…what are you gonna do? You live on a beautiful island with mostly great weather, live and let live, right? Well, one day you wake up, head into Nicosia for some lokum and coffee. Then you stop by the ATM of your Cyprus Popular Bank to withdraw a few Euros when you notice an unusually long line. You think to yourself, “Damn Turks” and wait patiently for your turn. Soon the people ahead of you start to get agitated, a frenzy of Greek and Turkish epithets start to fly. It is only then that you discover that the machine is out of money, not only out of money, but closed indefinitely. You hurry home and fire up your laptop and discover that the 165,000 Euro balance in your savings account that you’re so proud of shows only 99,000 Euros. What in the name of Glafkos Clerides is going on here, you shout at the computer screen!?

It takes days but you finally piece it all together. The Cyprus Popular Bank has apparently been run by people so inept, they make Bernie Madoff look like Warren Buffett. They have made millions of ill-advised loans that would have bankrupted them long ago had it not been for huge infusions of cash from insanely wealthy Russian mobsters who picked your bank to launder all of their drug money through. Well, now your bank is in dire straits, needs to recapitalize, but the Eurozone beaurocrats wanted something in return. So, over the weekend, literally in the dead of night, the boobs in your government worked out a deal with the Boobs of the European Union where anyone with over 100,000 Euros in savings would have their accounts reduced by 40%. The money would be transferred to Brussels immediately, in exchange for a bank bailout, without your permission or consent.

Welcome to the New World Order.  

Visit From Some Old Friends

Easter week dawns amidst schizophrenic weather, the day trying to decide if it should clear off and warm up, melting the snow off the trees or get colder and send more snow/sleet/ rain down upon us. What a hot mess. Usually, Easter week is when I clean up the golf clubs, and start thinking about maybe going to a driving range or something. I mean, it’s been 7 months since I last played; maybe it’s time, but, not today.

This week is crammed full of end of quarter business activity, a frenzied five days of review appointments, bill paying and the endless assessment of numbers. There is a light at the end of this tunnel however, since I will celebrate the end of the 1^st Quarter by taking a few days off next week and going on a trip somewhere with Pam. The to-do list this week includes an item, “PLAN TRIP”, so there’s that.

There’s also a special treat on the agenda of this Easter week. Many of you long time Grovers will remember Greg and Deena Greer, veterans of the famed McMath Sunday School Conglomerate, which dominated GABC back in the day. They moved to Knoxville, Tennessee years ago, Greg leaving a perfectly great job to pursue the ministry, and more specifically to get involved in some start up church. Of course, it was a ridiculous career move for Greg and I questioned his sanity. But, as is often the case when it comes to God’s will, I was wrong and Greg was right. The church has thrived; the Greer family did not wind up on public assistance, and God has blessed Greg and Deena with a wonderful life. Part of that life is a 6’5”, 270 pound offensive tackle named Chandler Greer, who is being heavily recruited by a long list of big time college football programs, among them, the University of Virginia. So, they will be staying at our house one night this week, having dinner and then heading up to Charlottesville for their recruitment visit the next morning. I can’t wait to see these wonderful friends again. Incidentally, what does one feed a 6’5”, 270 pound high school senior who has been riding in a car all day? We were thinking of making him an entire meat loaf for his appetizer, and taking it from there.

My NCAA brackets are still intact, although they were leaking oil at one point over the weekend. La Salle? Pacific Gulf Coast? Puh-leeze. 6 of my elite 8, and all of my final four are still alive and kicking.

My book is rocking along. Chapter 17 has hit a plot device that will require writing skills that I’m not sure I possess to pull off. So much fun though, I must admit.

Ok, you’re all caught up.

Harvard Wins. Revenge of the Nerds.

Ok, there I was feeling rather smug about my bracket. I picked 3 out of four winners in the play-in games, then proceeded to get 13 out of 15 of the first round contests. Then I wake up this morning and see that Harvard beat New Mexico late last night. Seriously?

I am here to tell you that if Harvard University has now become a basketball power, we are in serious trouble as a nation. What’s next, MIT putting a beat down on Alabama in the Sugar Bowl? Forget testing for steroids or illegal drugs, I demand to see the full academic transcripts of every man on the Harvard roster. I want SAT scores, GPA’s and I want the NCAA to demand that each of them translate two chapters of The Odyssey into English before their next game. If their starting five can’t explain the central importance of the Pythagorean theorem to Euclidian geometry in less than two minutes then I want a full investigation into their eligibility. What are we to make of this? Here we have the premier academic institution in all of America going out on a basketball court and defeating a State university who won 29 games this year and who many thought should have been seeded even higher than a 3. New Mexico’s coach, Steve Alford had been interviewed more times than Hillary Clinton in the days leading up to the tournament. Many wise prognosticators of college hoops had declared New Mexico as their pick to make it to the final four. So, I’m supposed to believe that a bunch of scrappy eggheads who lost to mighty Columbia by 15 points in February, just waltz out onto the floor and beat the Lobos? Color me skeptical.

So, now the West Regional has been transformed into Revenge of the Nerds. Wonderful.