Election season

I am soooo sick of election season. I just want it to be decided already so the country can move forward. I can't stand how polarized politics have become. I'm sick of the left trying to convince us that Romney is a cold, heartless creep who spits on poor people and women. I'm sick of the right trying to convince us that Obama is a radical, socialist failure who wants government to control our lives.

You know what? I tried several times to write a political diatribe here about my frustration with the Republican Party, but in the end I think I'll just say screw it. Arguing politics is like arguing philosophy. You can go around in circles, spin things this way and that way, but in the end there is no objective right answer. Suffice it to say at this point I almost certainly will vote Obama. As a critical thinker, as a gay man, as a lover of science and reason, and as a secularist/borderline atheist, this makes the most sense to me. Maybe I'm wrong. My parents, especially my dad, think he's the worst thing to happen to the White House since . . . well ever, haha. But I need to do what feels right to me. Feel free to leave your opinions about the election in the comments, but DON'T get nasty about either candidate or party! I get so tired of all the BS rhetoric.

In other news things are going great with Ben. I had another amazing weekend with him, though I sprained my neck somehow and was therefore pretty much down for the count the whole time. But he was very sweet and understanding. I love him :-)

Happy New Year!

First post of 2012! I just got back from a week-long car trip with my parents. It was a great time. We visited family all over California. We started here in So Cal with Christmas.  I got to spend time with both sisters and all my nephews and nieces.  I'm becoming a lot closer to my nieces, who are at the fun age (10-12).  My nephews are in their teenage years, and the one I've always been closest to has become waaaay too angsty (sample dialogue exchange between my sister and him:
Sister: (yells his name to come down and see us after he's been holed up in his room with his girlfriend)
Nephew: (yells) WHAT DO YOU WANT???
The other nephew seems much better, he even expressed interest in majoring in something like physics when he gets to college (yay, science!!!)

Next stop was Central CA to visit my dad's younger brother and his wife.  I've always really liked the two of them, especially as I've gotten older.  They have really fun personalities.  My aunt reminds me of Kelly Ripa for some reason, and my uncle sort of brings to mind Steve Martin. Maybe it's his dry sense of humor. He's my favorite of the three brothers (including my dad) to talk politics with, because he actually uses a little thing called LOGIC in his discussions and doesn't get overly emotional. He's good at selling his positions on the issues (he used to work in business), though we did reach an impasse or two. He tried to argue that conservatives are more logical thinkers, while liberals are more emotional and less good at thinking of the financial ramifications of the programs they want to implement. That may be true in some cases, but I think that's a huge over-simplification and could just as easily be argued the other way.  In fact, I looked up a scientific study that suggested the exact opposite of what he said. He wasn't interested in reading it of course, haha.

Final stop was Northern CA to visit my dad's older brother, his wife, and my three cousins/best friends in the world (BFW's?) I did a little more discussing politics with my two cousins that enjoy that kind of thing (oldest and youngest, both so much more open-minded and reasonable in debate than either of our fathers or our uncle) as well as their father (probably falls between my dad and my other uncle on the emotional to logical spectrum).  One interesting thing: my uncle was unaware of Rick Santorum's anti-gay views (not that he necessarily disagrees with them), as well as Michelle Bachmann's numerous mistakes and inaccurate statements that she has become notorious for. What's the sole source of information from the outside world playing in his house all day long? Fox News. Just . . . interesting, that's all.

Then I talked politics with my dad (with my mom listening in) for part of the ride home.  We agree about religion (we're critical of it) but differ on politics (as I've made clear numerous times before). Still, I kept the conversation fairly civil. I just want to keep his mind going about these things, as I get the impression that the only time he really thinks about his beliefs is when I force it on him.

So, to summarize, you know when they say that the two topics you shouldn't discuss at family gatherings are politics and religion?  Umm . . . screw that.  :-)  What should I talk about instead, the weather?  (Oooh, global warming, good one! I'll save that for next year).

Thanksgiving visit

Happy Thanksgiving everybody! Okay, technically it's no longer Thanksgiving where I am, as I'm in the Midwest right now visiting my parents. But it's still Turkey Day back home in California.

I came on this trip with the intention of not discussing politics with my dad. After all, what are the two forbidden topics to keep the peace at a family gathering? Answer: politics and religion. Pity those are two of my favorite topics. I lasted midway home in the car before I broke the rule. Oops. I can't help it. I want to understand how my dad's mind works, why he believes what he believes, and whether he really is as closed-minded as he often seems to be.

The bad news: He still believes Obama is a secret Muslim (whether or not he still believes he was born in Kenya wasn't entirely clear). He would support ANYONE for president over Obama, including Michele Bachmann and Rick Santorum (both come across as religious fundamentalist, anti-science, homophobic candidates with poor critical reasoning skills and a nasty habit of playing fast and loose with the facts). In fact, he doesn't have a problem with a religious fundamentalist becoming president, as long as they are a conservative (he figures they wouldn't have enough power to do anything too destructive . . . and yet he places the blame on so many of the country's problems on Obama). He agrees with Santorum's assertion that the Don't Ask Don't Tell repeal was a mistake. That last one really set me off . . . not yelling or anything (not my style) but I explained to him my feelings about how honesty and integrity should be core values of the military, and those values were harmed by the DADT policy. Not sure I made him reevaluate, but he didn't really argue against that point either.

The good news: Despite his unfortunate position on DADT, he really doesn't seem too homophobic. I asked him at one point whether he thought it more likely for a gay man or an atheist to be elected president (we were talking about how there's a de facto "religious test" for the presidency in this country, since the majority of Americans won't vote for someone who's not religious). He replied a gay man would be more likely, because homosexuality is becoming more accepted in our society. When he said this his tone wasn't harsh like it usually is when he's talking about something he disdains (like liberals). At one point several years ago I had asked him about his thoughts on gay people, and as I recall he believes that it is not a choice (though he doesn't support gay marriage). Also, he's not particularly religious, although when I asked him about his beliefs today he dodged the question.

Anyways, I think I've mastered the way to talk politics with my dad. Let him know explicitly that I'm only interested in discussing the subject if he keeps his emotions under control and tries his best to provide sources for some of the claims he makes so I can do further research on them. I know we're not going to see eye to eye on things, but I'd like to at least understand where he's coming from, and maybe help him see the error of his ways when he makes outrageous claims without backing them up.

In other political news: Michelle Bachmann was the victim of a pretty rude joke on Jimmy Fallon's show. The drummer of the house band, Questlove, decided that the perfect walk-on song for her would be "Lyin' Ass Bitch" by the band Fishbone. She apparently didn't notice at the time, but later demanded an apology from NBC. I can't believe I'm doing this, but I'm actually going to agree with her on this one. I don't care who it is, but you don't insult your own guest. If you don't agree with someone, fine, don't have them on the show. And if you're the drummer of the house band, then that kind of thing is out of your control so suck it up, do your job, and be respectful. Sure, he made news and probably made a lot of Bachmann-haters crack up. But he also humiliated Jimmy Fallon and NBC, and gave the right wing more fodder to complain about the bias of the "mainstream media" (which is exactly what Bachmann did in response). Sorry Questlove, but what you did was classless. When you're dealing with an ignorant person of questionable honesty like Bachmann, you want to act better than her.

Anyways, to wrap this up, I hope everyone had a great Thanksgiving and is enjoying time with their loved ones. I know I complain about my dad's political views a lot, but he and I get along fine, and we're really able to immediately transition from a heated political discussion to casual small talk with no hurt feelings. It's good spending the holiday with my parents (and our dog and cat). I don't get to see them very often anymore. Thanksgivings have gotten a lot smaller since they moved so far away from the rest of the family, but they really seem to be happy here. So, I'm happy for them.

To boldly go

I've never been much of a Star Trek fan (I was more into Star Wars . . . at least until those horrible prequels), but strangely enough two Star Trek related items are on my mind today.

First of all, as many of you probably already know, Zachary Quinto came out recently. He's most known for two roles: the villainous Sylar on Heroes and Spock in the Star Trek reboot. I actually first saw him on 24, where he played a CTU programmer (I think his name was Adam). His latest roles are in the movie Margin Call and the TV show American Horror Story, neither of which I have seen yet. I'm glad that he's decided to live openly. I know the decision to do so can have big career repercussions for actors. I guess it was the news of another gay kid committing suicide that convinced him it was the right thing to do.

The other thing is a fan-made Star Trek production called "Blood and Fire." It apparently is a continuation of the original series with new actors cast as Kirk, Spock, etc. Featured is Captain Kirk's nephew, Peter Kirk, who is gay and in a relationship with another member of the Enterprise crew. The only scene I've seen involves the two of them. It is a fairly long scene of the two of them in Peter's quarters, getting rather intimate (with most of their clothes on, though Peter manages to lose his shirt). I was reading a discussion board about the episode on the website of the creators, it was pretty interesting. There was a lot of Star Trek fans who were upset by that scene. Some just because of it's length and the effect on the pacing of the episode, but quite a few because of its very presence. Some complained that it represented catering to the "gay agenda" (oh how I despise that term). A couple of people complained about not being able to let their kids watch the episode (granted, apparently there's also some rather scary, violent scenes later on, but they were at least partially talking about the gay love scene). This of course began to degenerate into a discussion about the morality of homosexuality in general, which caused one of the creators to start threatening to ban people.

The internet is a breeding ground for such heated arguing and hateful rhetoric. I seem to have a compulsion to read the comments section on articles about controversial topics, especially gay rights. I almost always end up angry/sad at some of the ignorant, hateful things that some people say. Of course, there are usually more logical, compassionate people chiming in as well. However, even some usually logical people can have some pretty ridiculous beliefs and misunderstandings about homosexuality.

Case in point: I was talking to one of my best friends the other day, and the subject of gay rights came up when we were talking about the Republican candidates. He expressed his opinion that gay people shouldn't be able to get married, because gay people raising children would propagate homosexuality. I tried to explain to him that studies suggest that children of gay parents are no more likely than children of straight parents to be gay, but he was skeptical. Bah. Of course, I do realize that not everyone has put as much deep thinking into the subject as I have (for obvious reasons). Still, there's still so much misinformation out there that people are clinging to! If gay parents turn their kids gay, how come not all children of straight parents are straight?

Rant

I hate politics in this country.

It depresses me reading about the candidates for the Republican presidential nomination and how they lack manners (Rick Perry repeatedly interrupting Mitt Romney at the debate), critical thinking skills (Rick Santorum and his DADT repeal = social experimentation nonsense) and contact with reality (Michelle Bachmann . . . enough said).

It angers me to read the latest quote from Glenn Beck, claiming that the Occupy Wall Street protesters would, if given the chance, drag capitalists out into the street and murder them. Not to mention the back and forth between rightwing and leftwing media figures. I can almost hear them now:

"The OWS movement is the leftwing version of the Tea Party!"

"Nuh uh! Is not! The Tea Party are true patriots! The OWS protestors are dangerous, criminal, Marxist radicals!"

"Shut up, you're stupid! OWS represents real Americans, the Tea Party are racist, bigoted rednecks who want to line the pockets of the top 1%!"

"Blah blah blah!"

"Blah blah blah!"

Human beings are capable of such great things. And humanity has come so far during it's relatively brief time occupying this planet. But imagine how much greater we might be were it not for our tendency to hate each other. To be intolerant of those that are different. To refuse compromise. To close our minds to other points of view and press our beliefs on others. To use arguments based on emotional manipulation instead of logic and reason.

I don't want to despise the Republican party. Nearly everyone in my family is Republican, and I am sympathetic to some of their values, such as personal and fiscal responsibility. But when some of the most influential and vocal members of the party proudly exhibit what I consider some of the most frustrating and destructive weaknesses of humanity . . . well I really can't see myself supporting any of them, that's for sure.

But what does that mean instead? Voting for Obama again? I think I'd have an easier time telling my dad I'm gay or bisexual than I would telling him I voted for Obama's reelection. It's not enough to just say he's Republican. He's attended two tea party rallies and is a fan of such media figures as Glenn Beck, Ann Coulter, and Rush Limbaugh. He also was a believer in the "birther" conspiracy that claimed Obama was born in Kenya and had covered it up. He has described Obama as "evil" on multiple occasions.

I think I'll be trying my hardest to avoid talking politics with my father come Thanksgiving.

Some links, and # 1

A couple of interesting articles I stumbled upon today.

This first one is about Rick Santorum. I don't think I mentioned the other aspect of his appearance in the recent debate: the audience's reaction to the gay soldier that asked the question about DADT. They booed him. Straight up booed a member of our military because he is gay and dared to ask whether Santorum planned to erase his newly given right to honesty and openness (answer: yes, he does).

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/09/23/dont-ask/?scp=2&sq=santorum&st=Search

The next one is an interesting article by an "experimental philosopher" from Yale about one's true self.

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/06/05/in-search-of-the-true-self/

Anyone who reads that, share with me: what do you think determines your true self? Is it your basest, most automatic instincts? Or does it lie in your values? If I remember, maybe I'll say what I think next time.

And last but not least, lets finish up our little countdown of Hot Guys of Reality TV that influenced my sexuality discovery process (which is ongoing).

The winner is . . .

J.P. Calderon from Survivor Cook Islands!

J.P.'s from the same season that Ozzy Lusth is from, which I guess brings this countdown full circle. He didn't really play a huge role that season and got voted off before he could make it to the jury. But I really liked him. He has that mixture of handsome face, buff body, and soft-spoken demeanor that can be extremely attractive. I continued to keep track of his career after he left the show and ventured into modeling. He wound up on another show called "Janice Dickenson Modeling Agency." Even though I didn't watch it, I watched his pivotal scene: his coming out.

Basically, Instinct Magazine wanted to feature him on the cover. Janice approached him with the opportunity, but also with the catch: the magazine only puts out gay men on the cover. J.P. decided at that point to come out. Suffice it to say my fascination with him grew more after that.

What did you think of my countdown, did anyone else watch any of those shows?

I Don't Practice Santoria

The title of this post is extremely cheesy . . . you'll know why in a moment.

I was checking Google news today and came upon some stories about the debate between the Republicans running for the presidency. One of the top stories focused on Rick Santorum (haha, get it? yeah, I told you), who until today I knew little about. Apparently, he's quite the social conservative. In answering a question addressed to him from a newly out gay soldier, he pledged to reinstate Don't Ask, Don't Tell if he becomes president. He called the repeal of the policy "tragic," and an example of "social experimentation" in the military. He said that gay soldiers were actually better off under the policy. Most nonsensical of all? His justification for wanting the policy back: because "sex and sexual preference should not be an issue in the military, period." Um, yeah Rick, it shouldn't be an issue. That's an argument for why DADT SHOULD be appealed!

Mitt Romney's rep sounds like he did a good job of parroting the usual right wing talking points. "It was a mistake to make a social change like that in our military at a time when we are engaged in foreign conflicts." I guess that's the political equivalent of saying, "We think it's best to wait until hell freezes over. That will be the optimal time." Still, as of right now Mitt Romney seems like the candidate I would hate the least.

I hate to feel such disdain for the Republican candidates when so much of my family is hardcore Republican. If I do decide to vote for Obama to be reelected, I'd better not tell my dad. In his eyes, Obama is evil incarnate (literally, he has used the word "evil" multiple times to describe the president . . .)

Anyways, enough politics. My little silly countdown is at number 2. This choice will be a familiar one for this blog, as I've talked about him a couple of times in the past. He's my very favorite bisexual guy, Mike Manning from The Real World DC.

I'll throw in a bonus too, since I'm talking about The Real World. I totally forgot about this next guy when I was thinking of who to include on this countdown. I forget what season he's from, but he seems to have made quite a name for himself in the world of online fitness. His name is Scott Herman, and . . . damn. So hard to choose what picture to use. Here's a couple.

Do Ask Do Tell

Great to hear that Don't Ask Don't Tell is officially repealed. We expect our soldiers to uphold strong moral values, and one of those is honesty. Forcing our troops to lie about themselves should not be the American way (and isn't any more)! By the way, if you haven't seen this yet, check it out http://digitallife.today.com/_news/2011/09/20/7859855-gay-soldier-comes-out-to-dad-live-on-youtube

Number 4 on our countdown of Hot Guys from Reality TV comes from a show from a couple years ago called "Make Me a Supermodel." He's the first gay man on this list (but won't be the last). He was most notable for his onscreen bromance with a straight guy named Ben. His unrequited feelings for Ben led into a really interesting close friendship. I give you, Ronnie Kroell (looking a lot buffer than he used to, damn)!

Bad faith

I've realized the major issue I'm dealing with has changed. Before I was struggling with the question of whether I'm attracted to guys. Now I've pretty much accepted that I am. So now the major issue is whether I can be attracted to girls enough to still pursue them. I do periodically meet girls that I like. There's just a lot less of the physical attraction that I feel toward certain guys.

I don't know whether to simply be a slave to physical attraction, though. I learned recently about Jean-Paul Satre's concept of "bad faith." Basically, one is guilty of bad faith if he believes that his path in life is predetermined by forces beyond his control. Of course, our choices are constricted by our circumstances, which existentialists refer to as our "facticity." But we are still free to choose between a number of options, and it is bad faith to claim that external forces make the choice for us. Thus, me claiming that I must live a gay lifestyle because I have an attraction towards men would be bad faith. In this way, one could argue that being gay is a choice, so to speak. The attractions are not chosen, but the behavior, the lifestyle, is. I think this is one of the major misunderstandings between the two sides of the gay rights issue. They have different interpretations of "choice." I think the sides arguing about whether or not homosexuality is a choice is pretty counter-productive.

Speaking of the two sides, I guess there were a number of Prop 8 protests yesterday. I have mixed feelings about them. For one thing, why couldn't all of those people mobilize like this before the election? I don't really understand what they hope to accomplish now, other than pissing off the religious right even more. On the other hand, it seems like a fair number of straight people are attending the protests too, which shows it's an issue that is important to more than just those that are directly affected by it.

It's been about a year since I started reading blogs. I feel like I've made progress, though not as much as I would like. Time is of the essence, and I'd really like to choose a side before my 20s are gone. Sigh.

Political and Philosophical Ramblings

Time to make up for the sparse postings with this massive post . . .

So, Barack Obama is going to be our 44th president. No big surprise there. I just really hope he is able to meet at least a fraction of the expectations that have been put on him. Sure, I voted for him. I'm just a little disturbed by the savior-status some people elevate him to. My dad, on the other hand, falls to the other extreme. I was shocked talking to him the other day. He seems to whole-heartedly believe that Obama was born in Kenya, and there is a massive cover-up to conceal that fact since it would make him ineligible for the presidency. Not to mention all of the anarchists and terrorists that he is buddy-buddy with. I really hope I never buy into wacky conspiracy theories like that. Such is the danger of constantly immersing yourself in only one side of a debate. I try to temper any Fox News I watch with MSNBC, or just stick to CNN, which at least seems somewhat balanced.

Prop 8 passed (just barely) here in California, as I'm sure everyone is aware. While I'm still working out my feelings about homosexuality, I was hoping it would fail. However, I'm not too pessimistic about the future. Looking at the demographics of the voters, young people tended to be against the proposition while older people were for it. Thus, as demographics change over the next couple of decades (or even the next decade) the scale will most likely tip in favor of allowing gay marriage.

One thing that bugs me is I find flaws in the arguments on BOTH sides of the debate. The gay rights side's argument is that this is an issue of equality of rights. One group is being deprived of fundamental rights by another group which enjoys them. My friend pointed out an interesting flaw to this argument: as it is now, everyone has the same marriage rights, the right to marry the opposite sex. No one group is being deprived of rights that another group has, despite the argument of gay rights activists. What they want is ADDITIONAL rights, the right to marry the same sex, that would apply to everyone (though gay people would obviously be the only ones who would want to use these rights). Now, supporters of gay marriage would argue that the right that gays are being deprived of is the right to marry the one they love. But is that a fundamental right? What if the one you love is married to someone else? Is that spouse depriving you of your fundamental rights? Just food for thought. I thought the argument was interesting, and couldn't really think of a good response.

My beef with the anti-gay marriage side is probably pretty familiar. The whole emphasis on "protecting the family" and especially the whole "the way it's been for centuries must be right." They had a good point on a local radio show one day: two slutty drunk idiots can get married one night in Vegas, as long as they are a guy and a girl. But a gay couple who have loved each other for 30 years? Nope. Nothing like the "sanctity" of that heterosexual marriage. And don't get me started on the "If Prop 8 fails, they'll teach gay marriage in schools!!!" Those scare tactics are probably what tipped the balance in favor of Prop 8, sadly.

So if I find flaws in both sides, why did I choose to oppose Prop 8? I had to do some serious thinking about my views on homosexuality, and I realized that one of my major hang-ups in figuring myself out is my lingering conflicts about the issue. The increasingly mainstream view is that it is a natural variation of normal sexuality. The American Psychological Association removed it from the list of mental disorders back in the 1970s. Yet it's hard to shake the doubts from my mind. This next part is going to sound extremely controversial, I apologize in advance, the following doesn't represent my opinion, just some of the thoughts I've had lately while trying to figure the whole thing out . . .

If everyone in the world were homosexual, humanity would obviously be in big trouble since procreation would grind to a halt. So homosexuality is okay for our species as long as not too many people practice it. Now of course, in this overpopulated world, you could argue that a little less procreation might be a good thing. But should there be so many preconditions for something to be considered moral? Saying homosexuality is okay, as long as it is limited in scope and the human population is large enough to withstand any decline in procreation?

Then a weakness to this argument occurred to me. Being celibate is not considered immoral. Heck, some religious leaders are required to be. But if everyone on Earth were celibate, humanity would suffer just as much as if everyone were gay. The same number of babies would be born: zero.

So where I stand now is that homosexuality is certainly not optimal in a Darwinian sense, but I think in this day and age consenting adults who love each other should be able to marry. The alternative is way too many loveless marriages. In fact, allowing gay marriage might actually improve the overall sanctity of marriage, since marriage is supposed to be about love.

Sorry if I offended anyone with my ramblings, I just wanted to be honest with some of the arguments that have been going through my mind. Please, anyone who makes it this far, share your thoughts, I'd love to see what you think.

B

Shhh

I have a secret. I'm pretty sure my mom knows what it is. And my dad suspects it, but he wouldn't want to hear it from me. My conservative uncle and aunt would probably throw a fit if they knew. Yeah, my whole conservative Republican family would probably disown me if word got out.

Any guesses?

Yep, I voted for Obama.

I tend to think of myself as a moderate. I like to try to see things from both sides, to try to figure out who would be the best choice, and not because I'm blindly following one ideology or another. After much deliberation, I settled on Obama. Plus, being a moderate, my ideal situation is to have the power switch between the parties. Too long with one party being in power tips the scale too far, at least that's the way I see it currently. The Republicans have had their time. Now I want to see what a Democrat president will do with the country. And if the result is disappointing . . . well, then there's always 2012.

Election time has crept up on me. I wanted to go into this feeling super-informed. I wanted to have read both Obama and McCain's books and researched all the propositions. What can I say, I feel guilty when I vote uninformed. Well, I didn't have time to read the books, but I did read up quite a bit on the propositions thanks to a nifty site I found called ballotpedia.org. Basically like wikipedia, except for ballot initiatives. Not just California, either. It has summaries of the propositions, arguments for and against, lists of supporters and opponents, and links to info sites. If only all propositions were one sentence long. That's the good thing about 8, I guess. Short and to the point.

Kind of scary how topics that absolutely bored me before are now fascinating me. Like politics. And history. I feel like a lot of subjects are forced on us at an age where a lot of us are too young and/or immature to appreciate them. I seem to have a thirst for knowledge, I think I've been out of school too long. And yet look what I've done, prolonged the gap before grad school. At least this will give me time to try to learn about a broad range of subjects before my life becomes consumed by one specific one.

And now the ramble ends. Good night.

Back so soon?

Hello blog, it's been a while. I bet you thought I had abandoned you, huh? Not quite yet. The issues that were preventing me from having the time/mental resources to deal with this sexuality thing have been resolved, at least for now. I found a new job, which I've been at for a few weeks. Not going super smoothly so far but I'm settling in. I miss my old job, especially the people since I got along so well with them, but I'm sure this one will grow on me. And the pay is better, which is always good. Grad school is now at least two years away (a requirement of the job). Which is probably for the best, since I still wasn't feeling super confident about what program I wanted to apply to.

So now that those pressing issues are off the table, my mind wanders back to what I tend to refer to as "Issue X". The X representing the fact that it's something I'm so uncomfortable with I can barely admit it to myself.

Today I reached a point where I felt pretty confident in saying "Yes, I am bisexual", instead of "I think I may be bisexual." Hard to write off the evidence. I hesitate to go farther and say I'm gay, since I still feel that the potential is there to have feelings for a girl, since it has happened in the past. So now I'll have to consider what my next step should be. I think I need to have another talk with my mom. We still haven't talked about it since the first and only time. I might consider talking to some of my more socially liberal friends at some point. Of course, that's how I feel today, and just like I sometimes waver on the type of grad program I'm gravitating to on any given day, this might just be subject to change. We'll see.

The other day I was home and was discussing the propositions that will be voted on in November, including Prop 8. Yes on 8 will define marriage as being between a man and a woman in the state of California. I went through all the Props to get my mom and dad's opinions on them, to help me decide how I might vote. When we got to that one my dad voted Yes (expected) but my mom said No. Now, I'm not sure whether that had anything to do with our talk earlier in the year opening the possibility of me being gay or bi, but it was nice to hear nonetheless. Means she is a lot more accepting of homosexuality than my dad. He'll be a challenge, should it come to that.

I watched the debate between McCain and Obama earlier (most of it, anyway). Pretty entertaining. Apparently the consensus is that it was a tie, but overall was better for Obama since foreign policy is supposed to be McCain's strong suit. It will be interested to watch Palin vs. Biden next week (assuming I can stand to tape "Supernatural" that is, haha).

Wow, it's late. So much for going to bed early tonight, that never seems to work out. Later.