On Gay Marriage

Marriage is a religious institution. Marriage, whether it is mine or someone else’s, has nothing whatsoever to do with our government. Rest assured, though, if there is money to be made from any proposal brought before congress, it will surely pass. There might be resistance, but it will pass.

The conservative right will be all up in arms. This is not because they believe it is a legal issue, but because it goes against their religious beliefs.

The left will claim victory. This is not because their religious beliefs have been substantiated, but because it coddles their political perspective.

But just you wait. The lawyers will rejoice. Champagne corks will be as loud as the fireworks on the Fourth of July.

Political expedience will always surpass religious agendas, in congress, every day of the week. Let’s not forget: an enormous conglomerate of politicians have already passed the bar. They know what is good for the goose is good for the gander.

And the gander are flocking to be fleeced by the geese.

Divorce: You just can’t have it without marriage. There is no money to be made on a gay couple who separates. For that you need ‘legality’. Once the courts become involved, the money will flow into the hands of lawyers like oil spilling into the gulf. The environmental impact from the Gulf spill will be nothing compared to the lawyers impact on the bank accounts of divorcing gay couples.

Although nobody gets married to get divorced, the courts cannot benefit until gay marriage becomes a legally sanctioned financial sieve.

Religious practices aren’t governmentally sponsored, condoned, condemned, or restricted. In the United States, laws aren’t supposed to be made which violate any religious practice. From a purely legal perspective, there is no reason gay couples shouldn’t have equal legal rights.

I’m just not so sure they deserve equal rights to the legal fleece.

Advertisements

Health Insurance

I went to the doctor’s office this past week. This was my first visit since my diabetic prognosis reared it’s ugly (half-millennium glucose mark) around 7 weeks ago. The disease is calming down. The Doc was impressed, though he wants to see me lose more weight. It seems extra exercise is in order. Perhaps a gym membership.

I spoke to my sister Liz today. I asked her if she thought insurance would cover a health club membership. “They are not going to cover that.” She said. “People who are obese go to the doctor all the time. If Insurance paid for that, everyone who was obese would be covered.”

I said, “I’m not so sure. I have a medical condition. I have a disease. A health club membership would immensely help my glucose levels.”

“Well,” she said, “Good luck with that.

I then called my health insurance company to discuss coverage for a health club membership. As my sister had prophesied, they do not have these benefits. I am not surprised, but I am incredulous: “You will cover drugs which cost more than a health-club membership, but you won’t cover a membership to a health club?”

“No we don’t cover that.” she said.

I said, “You will cover me if I am hospitalized, and I need an operation. You cover hospital stays… but you won’t cover the cost of a membership to a health club which would prevent these other costs?”

“That is right.” She said.

About 10 years ago a huge branch from the only tree on my (in-town) property fell onto my yard. I called my insurance company. They told me they would come and take the branch away, and repair the damage caused by the fallen branch. I told them that the tree was rotten and needed to come down. “We don’t take down trees which are standing,” they said, “only the branches which fall.”

“I don’t know if termites or carpenter ants have been inhabiting this tree for many years, but it’s completely rotten. It is hollow inside. This is a big tree.” I said.

“We don’t get rid of trees, sir.” They said.

“Okay,” I said, “let me give you a little background: This tree abuts my garage. The eaves of my garage – and my next-door neighbor’s garage – overhang each other. If the tree falls, it will take out my garage, and the neighbors garage. The neighbors had a fire a few years back, so their house has been totally re-done. So it is possible this tree will take out both garages and break into the brand-new house next door. Or, perhaps it will bounce off the new house and land on my other neighbor’s house. It doesn’t matter to me, though. I am just letting you know, because you are the ones who will be paying for it.”

They came out, took a look, and had the tree removed.

I spoke their language! But when it comes to health insurance, the language isn’t about health, at all! If dental insurance allowed 4 cleanings a year, they would be paying a lot less in fillings. That is dental health, but it is not a language insurance agencies speak. I feel sorry to these poor workers who have to deal with me on the phone, I really do. They have no answers and no authority. They only have the ability to regurgitate policy. Before I called, they probably hadn’t even considered whether or not it made any sense. Apparently, I am the only one who has noticed the snake eating it’s own tail. I said to the agent:

“You will cover drugs, but you won’t cover the activities which would alleviate the need for drugs. You will cover sickness, but you won’t cover health.”

“If you want to put it that way.” She said.

“It doesn’t matter how I phrase it. That is the way it is.” I said. (The rest is just semantics.)

Tonight I rode my bike for 45 minutes. My blood sugar dropped to 105.

Can I get a witness?

Lawyers

Imagine if you lived in a lawyer’s world: This is a world where you are sought after, and people are desperate to hear you speak. They will pay you thousands before you do anything at all, then they will pay you hundreds of dollars per each hour you converse, just to have you on their side.

Although this goes against everything we know about any kind of business, Lawyers regularly practice in this manner.

Common business practice states: NEVER pay somebody up front. If they have your money, they may never work for you. You will wind up chasing them to either get your money back, or to get them to do the work which they have already been paid for.

But you – the lawyer – reassure your clients. You will absolutely spend all their money. In fact, it is your job to make sure that the thousands they have shelled out is just the beginning. So they should not worry. You will do your part.

It is amazing we ever trust these creatures with anything at all. Here is the premise: The Lawyer represents YOU. If you ever paid a lawyer to ask their legal advise on whether you should pay someone up-front, they would likely tell you that is a bad idea. (But not before you paid them your retainer.)

We buy into this premise for the following reasons:

1.) Lawyers don’t have enough confidence in their own abilities to believe you will pay, once you see how they work.

2.) Lawyers need money up front because they aren’t good enough to win in court battling you over your fees.

3.) With full knowledge of #1 and #2, we prove to be the suckers we are, allowing them the leeway to conduct business however they choose.

I love lawyers. They shlep the gonads to live this bravado with near-legal impunity.

But I just wish we were smart enough to insist on passing A LAW – making it illegal for any member of Congress to serve office – if they have ever passed a bar exam.

Imagine: Just changing this one ‘little’ thing would completely alter the political landscape of our country.

But who am I?

It’s Never Enough

It’s never enough just to love, for love is fickle.

It’s never enough just to embrace, for we must also tickle.

It’s never enough to think it’s enough – for beyond the perimeter of possibilities is satisfaction – lying in wait.

It’s never enough to do your best: The one who didn’t do it would have done it better.

Satisfaction is like a helmet of gnats. Impossible to pinpoint, it makes you uncomfortable, and you never feel ownership.

The puppy is cute. She’s adorable in fact. If she could just learn to signal when she needs to go outside that would be great. Cleaning up is tedious and gross. Just let me know, Babe. I’ll take you out. Of course, I could just take her out every 15 minutes. That would work. That would also work wonders destroying my life, and the ownership of said life which I desperately attempt to maintain. But do we ever really own our lives?

Father Gene said: Until you give your time you don’t own your time.

I am trying to own up to that philosophy, but I have no time to give. It is all owned by ‘the others’… who scarf it up like pilgrims to land.

I would gladly give my life for the people I love. This became apparent – like a softball sized tumor – during The Divorce. The divorce process was one of complete disillusionment. I don’t know if anybody can really appreciate what it is to go through a custodial divorce. All I ever cared about was my child. I would do anything for her, but the cards were all tainted. They still are.

The hardest thing to convey was my experience – as the mother of my daughter – and the primary caregiver for the first 6 years of her life. Twice a week I would be in the stands during swim team practices, just me and the other moms. Every Saturday I would take her to dance class and sit outside and chat with the other moms. On Sundays we would go to church – just the two of us – for years before the divorce began. I would wait outside after school – with the other moms – for the bell. Then my beautiful daughter would come running to me. I would pick her up in the air, and we were elated to see each other. On nice days I would bring her to the park. There she would run, climb and swing. I stood watching and occasionally helping her along, alongside the other mothers.

I love my job but it doesn’t pay. It does have a flexible schedule which allowed me to spend all this time with my daughter. While I will never get the time back, it is part of my permanent karmic record of devotional love.

Unfortunately, the courts don’t care. They didn’t even want to see it. I asked the GAL to speak to all these people – professionals – whose lives intertwined with my daughter. I gave them all the contacts, but they actively ignored them. Meanwhile, I was spending 9 out of 14 days without my daughter. She was suffering, and it was apparent. I could only hope to heal her suffering by keeping the battle subdued. I did my best, but the vortex spun a life of it’s own.

It was clear to me that a father’s place is at work. The mother’s job is to bring up the child. I had defied this norm, and was told by The Powers That Be: Too bad. Go out and make more money so you can pay more child support. That is my function. This was the pill I needed to swallow, but it got caught in my throat and I spit it out. The legal system has no right to keep me from my child. No matter how twisted she may be, I have no right to keep her from her mother. Why isn’t my parenting time valued – more than custodial contributions – by the courts? The courts emphasis should be a battery of tests to find out about parental emotional stability. That is all. If there isn’t a problem, then custody should be shared equally. In fact, even if a child might perform better in school living with one parent, this is mutable. Placing emphasis on things outside the home to decide ‘best-interest’ custody is just a venom-spewing, bloodsucking, demonic modus operandi. It is like having an affair to decide whether to stay married. The parents are the authority. When the courts take parental authority – including equal time – away from parents, it is inherently bias and the antithesis of child-advocacy.

Any system which values the money a father can give to the mother, in lieu of the love and attention the father gives to his child, is nothing short of perverse.