Proposition 8 in California which made gay marriage illegal in that state by amending that state’s constitution, after 18,000 gay marriages were preformed when the state supreme court made it legal, is in federal court:

From this site:
http://www.equalrightsfoundation.org/our-work/perry-v-schwarzenegger/

Proposition 8 amended the California Constitution to eliminate marriage rights for same-sex couples. As a result, the State of California is in violation of the United States Constitution, the “Supreme Law of the Land.” The United States Constitution guarantees every American basic fundamental rights, including the right to equal protection under the law.

As its first step in its mission to advance equal rights for every American, The Foundation filed a federal court challenge against Proposition 8 in May 2009. The case’s significance has seen it move swiftly toward trial, which will begin on January 11, 2010.

Specifically, Proposition 8:

• Violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
• Violates the Due Process Clause by impinging on fundamental liberties.
• Singles out gays and lesbians for a disfavored legal status, thereby creating a category of “second-class citizens.”
• Discriminates on the basis of gender.
• Discriminates on the basis of sexual orientation.

So if you got a couple extra bucks floating around, please donate to these guys – as they are fighting the battle that will make gay marriage a right in every state in the united states if the court finds in our favor and that the California law is unconstitutional. Everyday I’m thankful I live in Massachusetts, but there aren’t many other places I’d feel welcome / safe living in.

Rachel Maddow interviewed the two lawyers fighting prop8, a conservative and a liberal oddly enough:

And if you have even more free time, the New Yorker has an excellent piece up on it:
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/01/18/100118fa_fact_talbot?currentPage=all

And even more free time:
The conservative lawyer for the case penned an article entitled “the conservative case for gay marriage”:
http://www.newsweek.com/id/229957

I went back to the Wayback Machine to see the different incarnations of the CFG site. I’ve had 3 previous ones that I can remember. The last one was the blue design, using html tables and a touch of CSS:

The design previous to that was HTML only and had the menu bar along the top (doesn’t that logo look familiar. . .):

Both of these were when I had the CFG domain name, either pointing at the GeoCities free website, the 0catch site or the current godaddy locations. The wayback machine’s records only go back to Sept 3, 2000. Following links there the ‘site update bulletin’ shows the first entry as being May 23, 2000. They don’t have it, but it is still on my harddrive:

May 23, 2000: update bulletin created, cerebus checklist finished — pictures currently being added, created new index.html file for y’all to choose frames or no frames versions — this seemed to get rid of the ‘error’ message that keep popping up. Just finished added all of the pictures (that I currently have) to the Cerebus Checklist.

Frames? Wowza, that does take me back. Before GeoCities I had the CerebusFanGirl site on Juno using their WYSIWYG Homesteader interface – before I learned HTML. I don’t know when I started the CFG site, I want to say late 1999, but I don’t have any code dated that far back. The first IMHO column that I did, the precursor to my blog, is dated April 01, 2000. I know I had the CFG site before then – and as you can see by the above update, I had finished (ha!) the Cerebus checklist at that time.

10 years.

So taking what I learned about CSS from developing the CerebusTV website, and learning more (if you’ve been by in the past few weeks you’ve seen drop down menus and the links page was set up with tabs), I’ve redesigned the CFG page yet again.

Yes, I like purple.

The site looks best with any web browser other MicroSoft’s Internet Exploder – I’ve tested with FireFox (which I use and highly recommend), Safari and Chrome, and it looks like I want it to look with those browsers (MS claims that they are CSS 2.1 compliant with MSIE8, but the site still looks different on that browser while on the others it looks the same). I’ve set it up so it is formatted for a 1024 wide resolution monitor, but it looks the best if you have a monitor with at least a 1680 wide resolution screen. There are a few more tweaks that I want to do to it, but they’ll be minor.

So a friend of mine got a 10 pack of tickets to the Boston Bruins. I’m not a huge Bruins fan like I am a Patriots fan, but if a chance to see a hockey game live comes up, I’ll take it. So I’ve been to a few games this season at the Garden, wearing either black or yellow and really enjoying the game. I’m starting to pick up a few of the rules, and learn a bit about the players and the positions.

Back in early October, I was on NHL.com looking at Bruins jerseys, thinking perhaps I’d get one to wear instead of the random yellow tee-shirt or the random black sweatshirt I had been wearing. That is when I saw it, the Winter Classic edition of the Bruins jersey:

Nice! So I ordered a jersey and had it customized with Tim Thomas’ name and number – the goalie had stood out during the games I had gone to, including a shut out.  Then I waited patiently as the NHL.com site stated the jersey was a pre-order and the jersey wouldn’t be available until Dec 1st.

Well, Dec 1st came and went, and with no email updates from NHL.com I went to log into my account yesterday, Dec 5th, to see what if anything had transacted. . .Nothing had happened. No charge to my credit card, no updates, nothing. So I found the customer service contact us form. . .

which, let me digress here for a moment, in itself should have set off the customer service fail horn. They asked for all the standard information: name, order number, a drop down menu for reason for contacting customer service, email address. . .and my phone number? Why did they need my phone number? You already have one method of contacting me: my email address, it isn’t necessary to take my phone number unless you are going to call me. Which I don’t want you doing! So I just gave them my home phone number. As it only is for my DSL and has no phone connected to it. . .so it’ll just ring and ring and ring. . .good luck with that. And so unnecessary to ask me for my phone number.

. . . and sent this:

To: customerservice@nhl.com

Subject: Order Inquiries

I placed my order on Oct 11, and understood that that Bruin’s winter classic jersey was a pre-sale that would be available Dec 1st. From your website it also states that for customized orders "please allow for additional time beyond the expected shipment time indicated on the Product Detail page. The additional time required for customization varies from several days to several weeks depending on the options you choose."

So let me ask you these questions:
1. Since the Winter classic is on Jan 1st, 2010, will I have it before the game? (I would hope being a pre-order that my order would be at the top of the list to get done.)
2. When I put my order in I had to pay shipping. Now there is a promo for free shipping. Why are you penalizing me for ordering early?

Since this is my first NHL jersey, I really wanted to have it before I went to the Dec 2nd game – seeing as that was so unlikely to happen, and didn’t, I hope it will arrive by 12/30 game I have tickets for. . .

Thanks!
Margaret

Their response lacked a certain something. . .like an answer:

Dear Valued Customer,

If this automated e-mail does not answer your question(s), please contact our Customer Service department using our toll free number.  You may also reply to this email with the subject line “Customer Service Follow Up.”  Our Customer Service is open 24 hours a day seven days a week to better serve you.

For the most current information about your order, please visit Your Order History located in the “My Account” section of our website.  Your order status on the website is automatically updated each time your order moves a step further in the process. (Please note: After you place an order, order information may not appear in your order history for up to 60 minutes.)

After you place your order, you will receive order update e-mails regarding your order.  You will receive an e-mail once your order enters our system.  You will receive another e-mail once your order is ready for shipment.  This e-mail will contain a tracking number and the name of the carrier for you package.

Tracking numbers are assigned to packages almost immediately and generally appear on our website along with your order information.  Please be advised that it may take up to 48 hours (2 business days) or longer before the package is checked into the carrier’s tracking system. That means even though your package has already shipped from our warehouse and is on its way to you, the carrier may not be able to provide any information about your package for up to 48 hours or more.  Some orders may contain items that ship separately by different carriers and /or shipping methods; the individual item status for orders that are shipped via multiple methods is also available in Your Order History.

Due to the fast shipment processing time, once the order is received into our system we are unable to modify or cancel your order.

Please note:  All shipping times are for business days only.  Business days include weekdays Monday through Friday excluding holidays.  If you received a shipping confirmation over the weekend, your package is ready for shipment; however, the carrier will not pick up the package until the next business day (This is usually Monday morning, unless the Monday
is a holiday).

Occasionally, orders are delivered via a carrier that does not offer the ability to track a package.  In these rare instances, Your Order History will not offer tracking information, but will still offer order status and other details.  Customer service representatives will not have any additional information.

For more information on the checking the status of an online order please visit the section of our online Help Desk titled Your Order.

If this automated e-mail does not answer your question(s), please contact our Customer Service department using our toll free number.  Our Customer Service is open 24 hours a day seven days a week to better serve you.

Best regards,

Customer Service

FAIL. No, make that EPIC FAIL.

They did not answer any questions, they spammed me with an automated email and if I wanted answers I’d have to call them?

So with no answers to when I’d get my jersey, being penalized by ordering early by being charged for shipping that others weren’t paying, and a lack of customer service I did the only thing I could think of.

I cancelled my order at NHL.com and then I went to eBay and purchased the same jersey, but with a Tim Thomas signature on it. And guess what? Free shipping! And an answer as to when I get it: 3 to 5 days after it ships on Monday!

So if you want an NHL jersey? I don’t recommend NHL.com for they are The Fail and the Suck.

And even after I cancelled my order, NHL.com appearantly doesn’t care why. They sent an automated email to tell me I had cancelled my order, but no way to tell them why – I guess they don’t care enough about what the customer is thinking when they cancelled the order, as if NHL.com doesn’t have a corrective action system in place to try and correct anything to make the shopping experience better for future customers.

Well, they won’t have to worry about this customer, because she’ll never be going back.

I’m sending this out in the mail tomorrow:

President Barack Hussein Obama
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500
Hello President Obama,

Since I was 18, I’ve voted in every presidential election. Even when I was serving overseas with the US Army in Panama, I happily filled out my absentee ballot and mailed it in. I have not, however, voted for a democratic candidate until you. I watched the tallies came on election night, and when I heard that you had won, I shed tears of joy.  For CHANGE was about to happen to this country, and as a lesbian, I thought that finally a democratic president will give me and fellow gay and lesbian Americans the rights that we have been denied for so long.

Finally, a CHANGE to federal civil rights law to include sexual orientation and gender identity, so gay people do not have to worry about being fired for being gay, for being discriminated in the workplace for being gay or for being denied housing for being gay.

Finally, a CHANGE to the military’s discriminatory practice of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, Don’t Pursue” (“DADT”) which has led to the discharge of over 11,500 servicewomen and men and forced many more in a “closet” of fear in which they should not have to live.

Finally, a CHANGE to the federal government’s denial of rights to same-sex married couples, from joint federal tax filing to immigration status of married same-sex couples, with the repeal of the “Defense of Marriage Act” (“DOMA”).

I have heard lip service previous from former presidents, most notably, Gov. Clinton, to the gay rights movement only to be metaphorically kicked in the nuts. Gov. Clinton, a supposedly liberal president, did the gay rights movement more harm then most Republican presidents, with his implementation of “DADT” and “DOMA”.  Please show me that you are not another gay rights “ally” like Gov. Clinton.

So far your administration has done nothing but squander opportunities to show your support of gay rights; from the most recent Department of Justice’s brief filed in support of DOMA to your refusal to put a stop loss on gay service members until DADT can be ended. Do not tell me what legislation you’re currently supporting or that you want a way to end DADT that strengthens our military as you stated in your LBGT Pride Month proclamation.  Please bring CHANGE to the current inequities of gay and lesbian Americans such as myself, and fulfill your campaign promises and not just paying us lip service and showing us a lack of integrity when it comes to gay rights.

Take care,
Margaret

It isn’t that I’m looking for a personal response from him, as I know how busy he is, but I have to make my voice heard.

So the past couple months I’ve been driving a lot on the highways – up to Vermont or down to New Jersey, it is limited to the northern eastern seaboard of the USA.  And wow, there are many a stupid driver out there, and either I was just looking for patterns in their stupidity or they happen to be stupid in all the same ways:

• No Switchers: These people pick a lane and stay in it. Be it the far right lane, causing you problems when you try to merge on the highway, but they are there refusing to move over (or speed up / slow down). Be it the far left lane, causing you to have to slow down, and try to get around them as they refuse to move over even though people want to pass them.
• Tag-A-Longs: There are two types of these drivers. The first kind tag-a-long with a car beside them making a very effective barrier to anyone trying to pass them. The second kind don’t want you to go: when you try to pass them, they speed up to keep up with you – until you just gun it so hard that their car can’t either keep up or they get caught behind someone slow in their lane.
• Brakers: These drivers brake for no reason what-so-ever or because they get right up on the car in front of them, then keep tapping their brakes. . .like they lack the ability to draft properly.

The majority of drivers out there aren’t half bad and actually seem to have some common sense. . .but the 10% of drivers that fall in the above categories, they just make my driving experience . . .well, I was going to say painful, but there is an odd satisfaction to being able to get around one of these idiots, but at the same time, my trip could go so much smoother without them in my way.

So I don’t know shit about cars do I?  I don’t bother opening up the hood to a car, and when I see an engine this is the look on my face:

 (Thanks to Puffy for the picture of me at the most recent New England Auto Show)

So when you would say that the filter that controls the variable timing control sensor was dirty, I would have no clue to what you’re talking about. It isn’t like I don’t make filters that go into a GM engine’s cam phaser valve. That the filter that I designed the manufacturing process to make goes into such a unit to filter oil which controls the timing of a car – which by that I mean the cams, valves, lifting of the pistons – all that good jazz. And it isn’t like I went on a tour of the plant that assembles the cam phaser,  saw the ins and outs of their completed unit and how my filter interfaces with it.

Yeah, I would know nothing about a filter that could get dirty because of something in the oil thereby effecting the timing of my car,  ’cause I’m just a girl.

I don’t want to call the kid an asshole, ’cause he was really nice to me. Even showed me the tats on his back. And I don’t know what he would or would not tell any other customer, male or female, about such an error alarm.

So frak you Honda repair d00d when you tell me that the code in my2004 Honda Accord EX was a “P1009 error code that means a valve was stuck”. Really. Stuck. So when I get home and search the internets and find that the DTC code P1009 is for the VTC Advance Malfunction. Umm. What is a VTC I think. So I search the internets and find out, Valve Timing Control. Umm. Okay. I read up on the code, and basically the steps for the code go like this:

1. Remove the VTC strainer, and check it for clogging
2. Is it clogged then clean it and replace the engine oil filter and engine oil, if not then test the VTC oil control solenoid valve
3. If the VTC oil control solenoid valve is okay then check the VTC actuator
4. If the VTC actuator is okay check the VTC system oil passages then check for the alarm again

The only valve he could be talking about is the solenoid valve, which is as we all know, a mechanical valve that is controlled by electricity. When the valve is at rest, when it has no electricity applied to it, the valve is close. When the valve is active, when it has electricity it is open. So you telling me “the valve was stuck” doesn’t help. It makes it sound like an electrical problem, which it wasn’t. Unless there was something large stuck in it preventing the valve from closing all the way. But this won’t jive with something else he says further along in our “conversation.”

It didn’t help that when I asked him which valve, was it one of the piston engine valves, an intake or exhaust valve, and he says no, it was outside the engine and points to some diagram (which vaguely looked like a cam phaser that I was familiar with, but I didn’t say anything. I should have. That’ll show me to keep my mouth shut). He then continues on that the mechanic didn’t find anything and it was probably just “some bad gas” or something that caused it.

So gas got into my VTC sensor that is supposed to be an oil only component? Wow. Sounds like a big mess!

No. What the big mess was the Honda repair guy assumed that I didn’t know my ass from a variable timing control sensor. Either that or perhaps he doesn’t know the difference, and he is just relaying information from the mechanic to me? I’ll go with the latter as it makes him an idiot and not a sexist. Though he could be a little from column A and a little from column B.

So I got hit with $99 to check the alarm, but you did nothing for it – as there is no labor costs associated with said alarm about checking the strainer (i.e. filter), soleniod valve, etc. Thanks Honda. I maybe just a girl, but I’m not stupid. You pulled one over on me this time, but do you think I’ll take my car there again? HAHAHAHAHA!

Hint: the good customer service relation would be to do the 30K service that I asked (i.e. checking fluids, brakes, etc) and as a “freebie” write off the five minutes it took for you to plug the computer up to my car’s computer and see it was a P1009 code and then not do anything about it. Umm. Perhaps I’ll write a letter to the dealer’s owner.

Over at Pam’s House Blend a blogger there, Travis Ballie, talked about a National Review oped piece that is trying to frame the religious groups as victims of the Gay Mafia’s oppression in trying to limit the religious groups’ freedom of speech with regards to their opposition to gay rights:

“Indeed, this language has become increasingly effective across the board with right wing causes. The “infringement of religious liberties” card has also reared its head with the recent controversial decision by the Bush Administration to allow doctors to refuse to give women abortions or even prescribe contraception. At first glance, this argument seems valid. After all, someone shouldn’t be forced to do something against their beliefs.

At closer look however, no one is being forced to do anything. Forcing someone to violate their beliefs would be like forcing a Hindu to eat a steak or a Muslim to eat pork. Last time I checked however, people who enter into a job of public service have, once they willingly decide to enter that field, must uphold their responsibility to the public. A fireman can’t refuse to stop a fire at an abortion clinic because it goes against his religious values. A Muslim public school teacher cannot refuse to teach a class of Jewish students because they feel it may violate their religious beliefs. There is a line between religion and our secular government that the right wing is trying to blur here. By crying violation of religious freedom, they mask a strategy of imposing ONE religious ideology on a nation of varying ideologies and beliefs.”

And that last sentence there is the kicker and bears repeating: “By crying violation of religious freedom, they mask a strategy of imposing ONE religious ideology on a nation of varying ideologies and beliefs.”

The National Review oped piece that Travis was discussing, says:

Gay activists are already using the legal system to try to revoke the tax-exempt status of the Mormon church. If you believe that churches and synagogues, priests and rabbis won’t eventually be sued for their statements on sexuality, you’re kidding yourself.

Actually “Editors” (who must be too afraid to put their real names on their opinion pieces for fear that the Gay Mafia will track them down and force them to marry someone of the same sex), I think you are overly pessimistic and have a heighten sense of paranoia. Religions are free to say whatever they want, it is when they put hundreds of thousands of dollars towards a campaign to support legislation that they cross the line that their tax-except status per US Code Title 26 section 501c, which is what the court case is set to determine: did the Mormon Church cross that line? And even if the courts find against the Mormon Church, guess what? The Mormon Church will still be able to speak their mind about any anti-gay rights topic it so desires, they just won’t have tax exempt status any more.

You, unnamed “Editors” just take your “argument” the extra step and say they’ll be sued for their statements. Sued? For what? Being idiots? Please. Fear monger much?

The oped piece goes on to say:

Churches oppose same-sex marriage in part because it represents an implicit threat to freedom of conscience and belief. California already had one of the broadest civil-unions laws in the country. There was little in the way of government-sanctioned privileges that a state-issued marriage license would confer. But the drive for same-sex marriage is in practice about legislating moral conformity — demanding that everybody recognize homosexual relationships in the same way, regardless of their own beliefs.

Wrong. As Travis stated above so eloquently, no one forced them to take those jobs have done so under their own free will. No one is forcing them to do that particular occupation. And also by making gay marriage legal, no religion is forced to recognized a gay marriage unless they want to perform the ceremonies themselves. By getting rid of gay marriage in California (because yes, it did exist long enough for 18,000+ couples to get married), these other religions are forcing their beliefs down our throats. Which brings me back to the original sentenced I pulled from Travis’ blog entry: “By crying violation of religious freedom, they mask a strategy of imposing ONE religious ideology on a nation of varying ideologies and beliefs.”

And really unnamed Editors: “legislating moral conformity”? Isn’t that what you, unnamed Editors, are trying to do with your support of the passage of Proposition 8 andwhat others are doing with other anti gay civil rights cases around the country? Trying to force your unreasoned immoral dislike of gay people on to us? Thank God the first amendment protects me from you enacting a complete theocracy based on your “moral teachings”. Lets hope you can learn the same lesson: religion belongs in the Church, the Synague, the private home, but not in our laws. You can continue to spew all the anti-gay rhetoric you’d like, just keep it out of our laws.

Not really. I just wanted to use that line for a title. . .but I did see the new Frank Miller movie today: The Spirit. Supposed based on Will Eisner’s comic of the same name, of which I’ve only read a couple short stories. I went into the movie not knowing too much about the Spirit or the world he inhabited, only that many comics professionals hail Eisner as one of the comics legends.

The film is beautiful – the shots of The Spirit running around the city, the snow, the technique the Miller is known for from Sin City of using splashes of color, it all worked for me. The plot, it was a bit thin. But everything else was over the top. I mean, a scene with a dentist chair and equipment and where the main villian and “side kick” are dressed in full Nazi uniform and back drop to boot? And then add a kitten named Muffin, oh hilarity!

Unlike Batman where it is so dark and depressing, the Spirit is a bold swatch of color. When the hero walks around showing off a photocopy of one of the prep’s asses to any hotel doormen to see if they would recognize her, to me that is over the top. This entire movie was exaggeration, from the Spirit’s womanizing, to the guns pulled out by the Octopus in the final confrontation, and it all worked for me. I enjoyed The Spirit – my tookus did not hurt whatsoever.

I stated this: “Dang activist judges telling our state legistatures what they can and can not tell us to do in the privacy of our own homes. But that is only one right out of a plethora of rights that are granted to a couple by marriage”.  The right to privacy isn’t granted by a marriage – as one would assume by that travesty of sentence arragenment. That second sentence should read “There are a plethora of rights that are granted to a couple by marriage that gay couples do not have due to the Defense of Marriage Act and anti-gay marriage laws through out the US.”

In the year 2008, soon to be 2009, does anyone seriously say something like this, let alone believe it to be True, anymore: “The homosexual lifestyle is inherently dangerous and destructive.” Oh really? Have any facts to support such a wide sweeping generalization?

It looks like a columnist Jeffery T. Kuhner of the Washington Times believes it or at least he wrote it in his commentary for today. (Thanks to Pam from the Blend for the pointer. Or not, as this guy got my blood boiling so to speak.) He supported his statement above with this: “It is not just that most gays and lesbians are casually promiscuous, and that ritualized sodomy is profoundly unhealthy. But homosexuality is incapable of natural reproduction; its lifestyle is one that is barren and childless – and without children, there can be no future and ultimately, no hope.”

Oh, Mr Kuhner, why don’t you come join the rest of us in the new millennium where straights are just as “casually promiscuous” as gays and practice just as much “ritualized sodomy” as gays. It is also a place where “natural reproduction” is not the only means of having children. Even though I’m a lesbian, my reproductive system works just fine, and there is a place called a “sperm bank” that I can go visit if I want to have a kid. Or I can even go do it the old fashion way, get knocked up by some guy – sure I’m disgusted at the thought of having sex with a man, and it’d be the worse 5 minutes in recent memory, but I could do it. Actually, you might be familar with the concept of adoption, where the majority of children are from straight people who for whatever reason turn over the raising and custody of their children to someone else.

So no, being gay and lesbian isn’t a “lifestyle. . .that is barren and childless” like you claim. That tears down one support of your argument that “the homosexual lifestyle is inherently dangerous and destructive” but also about your anti-gay marriage stance: “The purpose of marriage is to procreate and raise children within a stable, committed framework; it is the primary mechanism by which society reproduces itself and passes on one generation to the next.”

I think Mr Kuhner is going to run into a lot of married straight people who aren’t it for procreation – which according to Mr Kuhner is the old fashion way of a man and a woman having sex together, no outside help allowed – so all of the marriages of infertile couples? Null and void. All of the marriages of any woman over the age of child bearing? Null and void. All of the marriages of couples that just plain don’t want to have children? Null and void. All of the marriages were the couples rather adopt an child rather then make their own? Null and void. Mr Kuhner, I think you’d be better off trying to get each state and the federal government to add a statement to their marriage licenses that a couple must have a child within a certain time frame lest their marriage be null and void. And better yet, make it so they have to take a medical exam before getting married to ensure both husband and wife are physically capable of having childern.

As to the “stable, committed framework” – that isn’t necessarily guaranteed because the married couple is straight. I’d rattle off a list of news articles that show this to be true, but all one needs to do is just turn on the evening news to watch the sick deprived things straight couples do to their children. And those are the ones that make the news, not to mention the ones that are only reported to state child protection agencies.

There are so many false statements in that commentary, I’m only picking out the ones that just get my goat. Like this one: “The debate about same-sex marriage has nothing to do with “gay rights.” Homosexuals are free to do anything they like in the privacy of their bedrooms.”

And that right to privacy was only given to gays by the US Supreme Court ruling “Lawrence v. T exas” in 2003! Dang activist judges telling our state legistatures what they can and can not tell us to do in the privacy of our own homes. But that is only one right out of a plethora of rights that are granted to a couple by marriage – perhaps next time Mr Kuhner you could do a simple search of Wikipedia that comes up with a handy dandy list of rights granted by marriages. I know Wikipedia isn’t the end all and be all for journalistic research, but it is a good starting point.

Read Mr Kuhner’s full commentary if you dare – he comes off sounding like he wants to revert the United States to a taliban like theocracy ruled by the judeo-christian part of society. I for one am thankful that the 1st Amendment protects me from him forcing his christian dogma down my throat.