We're off!
Item:
We came within a Derek Rose ACL and Clippers upset of running the table in our Round 1 NBA Playoff picks. Here's how we see Round 2 shaping up:
(editor's note -- the analysis was done before the series started. as usual, we've just been lazy in posting.)
EAST
(1) Miami Heat vs (3) Indiana Pacers
Miami had no trouble with the Knicks in the first round. That's because the Knicks suck. The Pacers disposed of Orlando in 5. We're just not convinced the Heatles are as good as they think they are. Add in a Pacers coach from Philly and we smell an upset.
Pacers in 6
(4) Boston Celtics vs (8) Philadelphia 76'ers.
We love Sixers coach Doug Collins. We think the Sixers are a talented, exciting team with youth on their side. We think the C-men have their best days behind them. We think their age will eventually catch up with them, after this hyper-speed season. There are so many reasons we want to pick Philadelphia. Still...
Celtics in 6
WEST
(1) San Antonio Spurs vs (5) Los Angeles Clippers
The Spurs swept Utah but we're still not sold on them. We had the Clips losing to Memphis in 7 but they won that road game 7 and face San Antonio. We originally had The Grizz beating the Spurs in 7. We think the LAC is still a year away, even against the cast of Cocoon.
Spurs in 6
(2) Oklahoma City Thunder vs (3) Los Angeles Lakers
The Thunder swept the World Champion Dallas Mavericks out the door and didn't break a sweat after Game 2. The Lakers went seven to beat Denver. We see no way the Lakers win this series, barring catastrophic injury to Westbrook and Durant. The Lake Show will be ending shortly.
Thunder in 5
FURTHER DOWN THE ROAD
We'll revisit after this round but right now we see it going down like this:
Pacers over Celtics
Thunder over Spurs
Thunder over Pacers
~~~
Item:
Here's some food for thought.
Seriously, North Carolina?
Far too often in today's political climate, we tend to label folks on the other side of a given issue pejoratively. Be it evil, stupid, power-hungry, hypocritical or selfish, we tend to disparage others, rather than tote the benefit of our own view, much less try to understand the other side's. Here at FfF, we make a sincere effort to understand all sides of an issue, then lay out our case and let the chips fall as they may.
But this one?
Now, we completely understand the opposition to gay marriage. We do not agree with those who are against it but we get it. We follow the logic and can see how those who think this way get from point A to point B in their logic. That logic, of course, is that marriage is between a man and a woman and anything else -- any broadening of scope, if you will -- will dilute the institution and have negative repercussions. This, of course ignores the fact that the implementation of "no fault" divorces has done more harm to the institution than any one single thing, thus removing the social stigma of divorce and leaving us with about a 50% rate of failed marriages.
Then there is the spiritual component: the bible says homosexuality is wrong, thus making gay marriage legal goes against the bible. Now, it is all well and good to base your personal candidate selection and voting on but the government has no place using the bible as its rule book. That's pretty cut and dry.
Still -- we get those arguments, despite what we feel are gaping holes therein.
However.
The civil union is the perfect solution. It grants the couple all of the legal rights of straight couples. They can make end of life decisions and get the tax benefits and all the inheritance issues and all of the other things that make marriage worth doing legally. It also encourages lifelong commitment, which I would think we're all in favor of and can see the societal benefits of.
The thing a civil union does not do is make it a marriage. What's the difference? Legally, nothing. Semantically -- it makes all the difference in the world. It allows all those opposed to gay marriage on moral grounds an out. It allows for compromise. Homosexuals get equality under the law and those not ready to accept the concept yet get to keep the word marriage. It is a true compromise, in that nobody gets everything they want but no one gets shut out completely. In ten years, when everyone realizes there's no real difference, you change the word.
What North Carolina has done though, seems particularly mean spirited, if not outright cruel. Although gay marriage was already illegal in the state, they went one (major) step forward and actually amended the state constitution to declare that that the only valid "domestic legal partnership" in the state is a marriage between a man and a woman.
Why?
Why go out of your way -- why go to such lengths -- just to block homosexuals from equality under the law? Morality, sanctity of the institution of marriage -- we get all that. This amendment does nothing to further any of that. In fact, we make the argument that is is in direct conflict with Christian morality. Going out of your way to take away someone's rights just because you can and want to is absolutely NOT "what Jesus would do".
If the people of North Carolina were literate enough to read this, I would tell them to be ashamed of themselves.
Alas, even that would be wasted. They're clearly not capable of shame.
~~~
Fare thee well, Donna, we'll see you on the Other Side. Save us a Last Dance.
~~~
Item:
Recent iTunes Purchases:
Rufus Wainwright, Out of the Game -- LP, 2012
Catchy pop stuff with ok lyrics.
***(of 5)
Glen Frey, After Hours -- LP, 2012
Cleanly-performed, if not groundbreaking collection of standards.
***
Keane, Strangeland -- LP, 2012
Echoes of The Killers' Hot Fuss, with a disturbing Coldplay vibe that kills it for us.
**
Willie Nelson, Heroes -- LP, 2012
Old school C&W set is easily one of the best albums we've heard this year. The voice is starting to slip a bit but the lyrics are strong and the playing superb. Kris Kristopherson sounds terrible in his cameo but all other guests (Merle Haggard, Sheryl Crow, Billy Joe Shaver, son Lucas Nelson and Snoop Dogg) absolutely bring it.
**** 1/2
Alanis Morissette, Guardian -- Single, 2012
The first single from her forthcoming album, it has solid verse lyrics (you who has smiled when you're in pain...who has soldiered through the profane) that are undone by a weak chorus both lyrically and musically. (I'll be your keeper of life as your guardian; I'll be your warrior of care, your first warden). What the hell does that even mean? Is it supposed to be a play on prayer warrior?
**
~~~
Quote of the Week:
“Always
end the name of your child with a vowel, so that when you yell the name will
carry."
--Late Beastie Boy Adam Yauch
~~~
Internet Video of the Week:
Sleep well, Adam.
~~~
Ridiculous Story That Actually Appeared in a Publication of the Week:
Here.
Let. It. Fucking. Go!
~~~
Idiot Criminal of the Week:
Scott Miles of Syracuse, NY.
Here's why.
Dude -- you might not want to hook up with mom after raping her son.
~~
Parting shots:
Between the Lakers and Clippers making it to the second round of the NBA Playoffs and the NHL's Kings on the verge of winning the Western Conference, you think Staples Center operators AEG are making a little coin this spring?...Interesting side note to the North Carolina amendment: anyone who received domestic partner benefits at work -- even the straight ones -- just lost them, too...While searching for things to hyperlink for this post, we came across this great headline...
And with that, we bid you adieu.
Until next time,
Keep the Faith
