George, you've heard about this virus?...
Shall I cough on you, George?
- Colonel Sam Daniels: Outbreak

The Sanctity of Marriage

It’s the seventh sign of the apocalypse. At least that’s what the right wing care takers of our “family values” are shouting from every pulpit of every television congregation. The New York Times newspaper announced this week that they will now publish the announcements of same sex commitment ceremonies.

Surely this marks a further decay of our existing family traditions. It offends the delicate sensibilities of some Christian Americans who want to protect their children from knowing that the world is not perfectly suited to their rulebook. They want to preserve the “sanctity of marriage” as if the church invented the practice, when the church didn't even adopt the pagan idea of a sacred union until the church was four hundred years old.

The protesting logic appears to be that if the New York Times doesn’t acknowledge that same sex commitments happen, then maybe they will just go away. So, yeah – let’s blame the New York Times for contributing to the contamination of that pristine institution by publishing the statistics on how fifty percent of all marriages end in divorce, which by the way needed no minister to desanctify. Let’s raise our “community standards” and get the newspapers to stop reporting on the one hundred and fifty thousand rapes that occur each year to wives by their husbands. And while we’re at it let’s not publish the marriages of all non-religious couples who are married in civil ceremonies performed without sanctification. Aren’t they thwarting the sanctity of marriage, too? How about those who are divorce and marry again? Can we support promoting the union of those who have failed to keep their vows before? Let’s only publish the marriages performed in churches, which truly preserve the sanctity of marriage. And only within approved churches with the proper definition of sanctity.

The sanctity of marriage was in trouble long before gay activism got some headlines. Marriages are legal contracts, filed at the clerk’s office and irradiated by lawyers. What is sacred about that? Sacredness lies in the hearts of those people who honor the oaths they take. Shall we pass a constitutional amendment legislating that? -

© 2003 Leigh McCormick

Rebuttle on Government Pensions versus Compensation
What's a Military Family Worth? by Rush Limbaugh, March 11, 2002 (A rant about compensation for the 9/11 victims versus the military being properly paid.)

My Rebuttle: The military is a volunteer organization. These men and women join for many reasons...some of which is patriotism. Do they get paid enough? No. But when they get shot at...they have guns to shoot back. Part of their job description is that they may get shot at. And as representatives of this government's political policies, they know that they are targets. They live with it every day. That's why they call it bravery. Do they get paid enough? Again NO, they don't. (But they knew that when they joined.) Why don't they get paid enough? Because fat, happy Americans didn't want their taxes going into a peace time military as if it were war time. War or Peace in the modern world...soldiers are targets. It is always war to them. Should we give them a raise? Properly compensate them for their sacrifice? Absolutely.

This government is notoriously grateful for the sacrifice of Soldier Americans when flags are flying and bands are playing and speeches need to be made. But if you don't die...and need medical help the rest of your life...you can't find a flag waiver to save your life...literally. And if you die of "friendly fire"...no one is accountable. And if you leave a family behind...your spouse may get the thanks of grateful nation but it's hard to feed that to the kids. And if you were left behind...you become an ad campaign for some veterans society.

Now - the victims of 9/11 were not soldiers. They didn't have guns, didn't know they were targets and didn't have the training or opportunity to fight back. They didn't even have a target to fight back at. They were not working for the government and didn't know that simply going to work each day might make them a political target.

They were killed as a direct result of other governments disagreeing with our government's political policies. And some of them didn't get to vote on those policies because some of them weren't even Americans. And these families should get every dime they can from the government, from the insurance companies and from every American who knew how wrong these deaths were and donated those enormous sums of money on 9/12.

As for the Oklahoma bombings...yes they should be compensated too. But they are not exactly like the 9/11 victims. These people, like the military, chose to serve their government. But they didn't know that working for the government on their own soil could make them a target of a political commentary done with explosives. Had they had a clue, perhaps they would not have approved of a day-care facility in their building. Adults who make decisions to place themselves in harm's way usually don't take their children along. Yes, they should be compensated…by the government that their children died for and by the Americans who knew how wrong those deaths were as expressed by their monetary donations of support.

Unlike homeland government workers, foreign embassy workers acutely know that Americans are not loved everywhere in the world. History has proven that embassy workers are targets of terrorism. If they go into harm's way and then claim ignorance that is just naiveté. Should the government protect their foreign workers? Yes. Should they be compensated for the sacrifice they knowingly might have to make for their government? Yes! Just as a soldier does.

So are the government paid soldiers who die for this country the same as the government paid embassy bombing victims who died for this country the same as government paid homeland government workers who died for this country the same as the non-government 9/11 victims who died for this country? No. Some had a choice. The victims of 9/11 didn't.

To compare the compensation of the 9/11 victims to soldiers is to say that the 9/11 victims don't deserve that compensation. And they do. But we expect our government to take care of its own. And while I'm spending the government's money, I think government workers who make the same sacrifice should get more. Those who choose to put themselves in harm's way for their country...should be held in the highest esteem. Maybe if the government had to pay for that esteem...maybe they would rethink some of the reasons Americans are not loved around the world. Maybe they would rethink how cheaply they treat their heroes. Then, maybe we wouldn't have need for so many of them.

And for the politicos who just gave themselves raises? You voted them in. And if you didn't, you let others vote them in. They make the policy that pads their bank accounts. And they make the policy that pisses off other governments. And they make the policy on how to take care of the military. And they make the policy that protects foreign government service. And now they are making policy on how to protect homeland security. When do we finally do something about this? We won't, because for the moment, it is fashionable to be patriotic again. However, fifty percent of the fat happy people of this country are not political and still don't vote.

And we the people get the government we deserve.

© 2002 Leigh McCormick

On the Death Penalty
Capital punishment is a subject that slowly spins my head on my shoulders as if I were a demon possessed. Gary Graham, an admitted robber on 20 counts, was executed for murder in Texas last night, June 22, 2000. There was no physical evidence of his guilt. One eyewitness convicted him 19 years ago. If he was guilty, justice was done and there was closure (that phantom constitutional right) for the family of his victim. If he was innocent, he was put to death for stealing.

I have no opinion about this man's guilt or innocence, so save me the twenty page rebuttal. I'm just saying that I'm glad that I don't live in Texas. Because their arguments in favor of the death penalty are as old as Methuselah.

Issue #1: Some people just deserve to die. I will believe in capital punishment when I believe in an infallible justice system. If you can convince me that we've never sent an innocent person to jail...I'll believe that we've never sent an innocent person to the death chamber.

Issue #2: The death penalty is a deterrent to crime. Really? The jails are emptying in Texas? Wow. These same people aspouse the Eastern mentality of "lopping off of hands at the drop of a theft" is a deterrent to criminals...I refer them to the terror states of Hitler, PolPot, Mao, Lenin, Stalin, and discuss among yourselves how well you think it worked for the people.

Issue #3: The death penalty will lower the murder rate. Only people with a conscience believe that the death penalty is deterrent to murder. Sociological studies have proven repeatedly that the death penalty is NOT a deterrent to murder. To criminal mind, death is an inevitable part of the equation.

Issue #4: It's the Lord's way. Well, Bubba - You're not the Lord. The commandment says, "Thou shalt not kill." (Period) It does not say, "Thou shalt not kill accept when…a bunch of us are...pretty sure...it's the right thing to do and the law will protect us from punishment if we are wrong." I wonder how zealous those who impose the death penalty (and support the same) would be if when the consequence of those decisions executed an innocent, a charge of murder on the imposers followed.

Issue #5 Law makers say the death penalty is justice. So I ask…if appeal is the law's safety net to catch its mistakes and overturn unjust convictions…then how do we justify a law of punishment for which there is no appeal?

Issue #6 It costs the people less to kill than feed a murderer. Well, it costs a bit more to the guy who was innocent. My karma/conscience cannot endure the possibility that I approved the death of someone's innocent son, someone's innocent mother, someone's innocent best friend or true love--to save a buck.

Issue #7 "I'm just doing my job." Says the lawmaker, the juror, and the prosecutor. Governor George Bush says that he will uphold the law. George - you mean - "popular" law. You mean "re-electing" law. Under Bush, 131 people have been put to death by lethal injection. I say that those who throw the switch in ignorance have no excuse for those who have wrongly been executed or for those who live with their loss and the injustice of this righteous, lawful mistake. Then there is the separate subject of clemency. Governor Bush had no taste for it. The ability to meet justice with mercy is a grave responsibility and a sacred right, if commanded by wisdom. Enough said about the Governor.

Editors note: I rarely refer to Issue #4 as it usually results in 1) a no win bout of "verse wars" or 2) a cross being burnt on my front lawn.

I have said for decades that I would believe in the death penalty when I believed in an infallible justice system. Reported by Jesse Jackson on the Today Show:

Eight-seven (87)-convicted murderers have been released from death row after DNA investigations proved their innocence... Twenty-two (22)-convicted murderers have been executed after which DNA investigations proved their innocence...

Let's just suppose one suspects Rev. Jackson's motivations and these numbers were wrong by half, wrong by two-thirds…wrong by all but ONE! My opinion is the same. Even if it turns my stomach, I vote to spend the buck to keep a justly convicted murderer alive…because the very deserved closure for the injured families of the murdered cannot be measured against the death of an innocent.

© 2000 Leigh McCormick

Why we kill our heroes.
We love making heroes of people. And we love tearing them down. All one needs to become a hero in our country is to excel at something that makes one appear extraordinary or enviable. Someone, out of reach, on a pedestal, breathing the rarified air of success.

At first blush of knowing our hero, it is ignorance that makes him perfect. Once we dig under the skin, we find that he is merely human, with a lucky, or timely, or otherwise gifted effort that drew attention to him. For a brief moment we think that this “everyman” hero’s example shows us we could be extraordinary too. And we feel good about that.

But one of two things happen with time. The blush is gone and we discover that he not only is he merely human, he isn’t as interesting as we thought he was. We even might find negative characteristics that we can feel superior too. “He’s not so great, I can do that better then he does.”

Or if our hero holds up to close inspection, his noble character or achievement holds a mirror up to us that asks “Why not you?” Then after a bit, the mirror asks, ”What are you doing with your gifts? What aren’t you doing? What aren’t you just like him?”

In defense of our lessor image and our failure to exceed ourselves; and after the hero’s mystery is worn off…we attack. “He’s not so great…just lucky.”

Then, we can retire into complacency and blame our deficiencies on fate. While awaiting a new hero to entertain us.

© 2000 Leigh McCormick

On Guns
The focus articles in the May 99 issue of Newsweek, The Secret Life of Teens was filled with valuable facts, suggestions, reasons and resources regarding what makes teenagers tick…or more accurately…what makes a kid tick like a time bomb waiting to go off. We had hundred of hours of coverage over considering all the possible reasons why the Columbine High School shooting happened. We had every side finger-pointing that it was too much of this...not enough that. And we get…

The List of Why…

It's the parents.
It's the video games.
It's the role-playing games.
It's the Internet.
It's the music.
It's the movies.
It's the clothes.
It's the church.
It's the school.
It's society.
It's the guns.

Okay.

What can I do?

I can be a better parent. I can get involved with my kid's thoughts and feelings and issues. I can assert my parental control button on the net, the TV, the video games, the music, the movies and the role playing games. I can teach my kid to trust me enough to come to me with his problems, so he can grow a positive self-image, an open mind and a generous spirit. Who in time, will have the judgement to no longer require my editing his exposure to the world because he has the wisdom to discard that which goes against the conscience I grew in him…

And after I've grown this great kid...

...Your kid can shoot him.

What can't I do?

Well...I can't make you a better parent. I can't make you get involved with your kid's thoughts and feelings and issues. I can't get you to assert your parental control button on the net, the TV, the video games, etc. I can't teach your kid to trust you enough to come to you with his problems instead of writing them down in a journal or taking them out on his classmates. I can’t keep your kid from growing a self-image fed by romantic icons of misunderstood rebels who get chosen by the devil because no one else is paying attention. I can’t make you instill the judgement he needs to seek just one other opinion - outside his tunnel-visioned, insulated, view of the world - because you haven’t taught him to consider the possibility that his reality isn’t a fixed path or that all of his worth to the universe might be more than becoming a footnote in the history of violence. I can’t make teachers able to reach your child’s closed mind. I can’t make ministers reach your child’s empty soul. I can’t teach humanity how to interpret every juvenile sneeze and whether it might be a cry for help. I can’t make the world simpler so the village has more time to intervene in you ineptitude.

But after you've grown this broken kid…

There’s one other thing I can do…I can keep the gun out of his hand.

•There are 200-million handguns in American homes.
•Every day 100-thousand American children bring a gun to school.
•American gun violence kills more children than all other natural causes combined.

So, I ask again.
What can I do? What could be altered, edited or removed on that List of Why that might have stopped the unfair assault on those children at Columbine?

It's not the parents.
It's not the video games.
It's not the role-playing games.
It's not the Internet.
It's not the music.
It's not the movies.
It's not the clothes.
It's not the church.
It's not the school.
It's not society.

It's the guns.

© 1999 Leigh McCormick

On One Person's view of Justice
Another execution. This time it was a convicted pick-ax murderer named Karla Faye Tucker. Now, I could go on about the Death Penalty but it was the victim's husband that got my fingers twitching this time.

I shudder at the words of the pick-ax victim's husband, advocating Tucker's execution. (It's also a prime example why the concept of a trial by a "jury of ones peers" also scares the crap out of me. If this man is a example of one of MY peers...please gods, let me never need the American Justice system.)

This man is, at best, a convoluted Christian and to think his opinion could define "justice" for his wife's murder leaves me wide-eyed and gape-mouthed. His testimony was to be taken into account by the jury before a decision was made as to Tucker's fate. The first words out of his mouth as the murderess gasped her last breath...was "Here she comes, Cupcake! She's all yours now."

This good Christian believes...that Tucker, the murderess...is going to be punished by her victim, Cupcake?

Where?

Is Tucker going to heaven where the guiltless Cupcake surely went? Or is Tucker so wicked yet, after her conversion to Christianity she was not forgiven by god, and that she will go to hell? If she's in hell...does Cupcake get visiting rights from God? Or, no that would be the jurisdiction of Satan...who would allow Cupcake to punish the murderess? So...Satan is helping Cupcake meet out justice to Tucker? Nice of him, that.

And where is God in all this punishment? Cause God punishes too. There's lots of scripture supporting that. After all, it's quoted every time someone wants "Justice." But, is that before or after Cupcake gets done with her?

And wait...doesn't God forgive you if you say you're sorry and really, really, meant it?

And if Tucker didn't mean it and is a liar as the husband asserts, isn't Satan just a little jealous about sharing his punishing pleasures with a good person like Cupcake? (Who, by the way, is still pissed about being pick-axed 31 times even after she has existed in rapture, basking in the pure glorious love of God for 14 years?)

Unless, of course, she has actually been in meetings for the past 14 years with God and Satan negotiating the gauntlet of punishments the three of them intend to meet on Tucker...the born again Christian.

Statistics indicate that theological arguments with religious leaders bearing strings of degrees after their lofty titles could continue this debate for years on Jerry Springer...and still not come to this moron's conclusions. Yet, we carefully weigh...his opinion...in a decision...of mercy.

Then again...What do I know?

"Statistics can be made to prove anything. Nine out of ten people know that."

© 1998 Leigh McCormick

Top of Page

Home . News . Bio . Chaos and Other Love Stories . B-Sides . The Window .
Blood Magic . Songs from the Upper Shelf . Editorials . FAQ . Sitemap . Links . Contact .