Mormons Don't Support Redefining Marriage...

...except when they do it. About 5 times in 150 years.



It was leaked out today that this weekend, California Mormons will be asked by their church to work to oppose same-sex marriage in their state. The LDS Church is up in arms because the California Supreme Court has endorse marriage equality, and in the church's opinion (and that of many religious cult leaders) strived to redefine a "5,000 year-old institution ordained by God."

I welcome the involvement of the Mormons because it might bring some due attention on the absurdity of this "5,000 year institution" argument. You might think marriage is ordained by God. You might think gays are icky. But you have no intellectual right to believe that marriage as it exist in American law is a 5,000 year-old institution. And Mormon polygamy, hot in the news these days, is a prime example.

At the founding of the church polygamy was expressly forbidden. Within a few years, it was mainstream practice with even church founder Joseph Smith having multiple wives. By the turn of the twentieth century, the church banned plural marriage again and began excommunicating its practioners, despite that fact that a church president who survived well in to the 40s was an avowed polygamist. Today, the church is adamantly opposed to polygamy. Mormons have redefined marriage nearly half a dozen times in 150 years.

Of course, I'm afraid of the gay-marriage/polygamy/beastiality comparisons that will surely spew from the mouths of evangelicals, but I welcome the death of the 5,000 year institution argument.

Can you be too gay?

I'm pretty frickin' gay, but really...



Hope his friends love him.

Thanks Dan.

40 Year Old... What?

Do you ever feel like a celebrity? I do.

After letting my manscaping get a little behind because I've been a little preoccupied recently, I decided to catch up. Ooops. Don't manscape at 6:00 AM. The new job has me waking up at normal hours again, and while I might be standing up, I am certainly not awake.

And that, my dear friends, is why I look like Steve Carell in the 40 Year Old Virgin... except I have a racing stripe down the middle of my chest and "abs" as opposed to the classic smiley.

Brian Davis for US Congress!

Apparently I'm running for Congress! I've always wanted to be a Congressman. I also wanted to be a doctor. And a nuclear engineer. And an anti-gay, race-baiting bigot! Turns out my alter-ego Brian Davis has achieved everything I've ever wanted.

Except I have more MySpace friends. Seriously, dude, if you have 2 friends (one of whom is Tom!) take down the MySpace link from your website. It's shameful!

Now Here's an Idea...

Airlines are grumbling about charging passengers more based on weight. Not baggage weight, but the passenger's own weight. Not such a bad idea.

Think about it. If my check bag is 2 pounds over the 50 lb limit, they charge $75. But if the guy two seats over weights 150 pounds more than me, he doesn't pay a penny more.

The main reason the airlines have weight limits on baggage is that a heavier plane uses more fuel, which makes the flight more expensive. So logic follows that a fatty costs the airline more. Make them pay.

I'm not saying that everyone who is a little overweight should have to fork over more cash, although the extra dough out of their hands might keep them from buying a few doughnuts, and the national health implications would be remarkable. But people who weigh an extreme amount, say more than 250 or 300 pounds, should be expected to pay a little more for that flight to Branson, Missouri.