(no subject)

An MA Republican in the legislature has proposed a bill that would offer civil unions to all couples regardless of gender, and leave the definition of 'marriage' to religious institutions. From the Globe.

Rep. Loscocco opposes gay marriage but also opposed the recent 'compromise' Constitutional amendment that banned gay marriage but mandated civil unions. I don't know exactly where he's coming from, but my initial impression is that he's serious about this, not trying to shock people.

If losing the word 'marriage' to religious groups (some of which, of course, will welcome gay couples with open arms) is the price of equal marriage-like rights nationwide for all couples, then count me in. If only Massachusetts takes this step, though, then straight couples will hop across the border to marry in Vermont so they can get federal recognition. Result: the same as the Travaglini amendment, but without touching the Constitution. Better than nothing, worse than the presumptive impending May 17 status quo.

Here's the thing: I'm down with people having strong ideas of what the abstract/cultural institution of marriage means. I'm in favor of folks having ideas about what belongs in the Constitution that don't change with the wind. But anyone who holds a position on either of those topics must realize not everyone agrees with them nor ever will. The Constitution is what judges and lawmakers make of it; marriage is different for every congregation and every couple.

Civil marriage, on the other hand, exists because of laws. My opinion on whether two friends of mine can file their taxes jointly is totally worthless if the feds disagree. If someone thinks that same-sex couples deserve the legal benefits of marriage but wants to hold up those benefits until AFTER their personal leanings on the cultural issues mentioned above are flattered sufficiently, they're a narcissist or worse.

Loscocco, I suspect, is no narcissist. He's just (at best) one of the many legislators who views equal recognition for same-sex couples like highway improvement -- worthwhile if it's not much trouble, rarely a necessity, and an issue on which a large-enough, loud-enough group of citizens might as well be listened to before they get really mad.

FRANK ZAPPA - Jazz From Hell (Ryko)

Relieved, for once, not to have lyrics in the music. It reduces the chance that I'll love this but at the moment I'd rather not confront the question of what Zappa had to say for himself by 1986.

Much better than the Synclavier pieces on Mothers Of Prevention. Much, much better; the percussion sounds synthetic but not FAKE. On the other hand, superficially, the more 'out' sections sound a lot like the weird drum outro in the Loud Family's "The Second Grade Applauds" that Scott Miller once explained was generated by accidentally leaving the sound on while dragging the mouse across the screen with the "misc. percussion" voice selected in your sampler software.

In fact, the one piece with live instruments is the one which sounds overprocessed/insincere/lukewarm. The sad truth is that I would probably like this a little better if it were programmed into a Game Boy by Bit Shifter or someone like him, and yet I like it enough.

(Me #20, Zappa #47.)