prop 8

so the election is in about a week and ill be happy for it to be over.  im not so interested with the presidential election as i am about prop 8.  i support prop 8 and am going to vote 'yes' on prop 8.  im tired though of the opposition.  not that i havent been vocal or an open supporter of prop 8.  but i havent attacked the other side.  not that i mind or am not used to opposition or even a little bit of persecution when it comes to my beliefs. im mormon.  its synonymous with religious persecution.  ok.  not entirely.  but i do believe that a 14 year old talked with god.  i also believe he translated a golden bible.  and it only gets stranger from there.  i spent 2 years in spain talking to people about my religion. im plenty used to people not agreeing with my beliefs and sometimes telling me i was crazy for what i believed.  which is fine.  you dont have to agree with me, but it would be nice if people at least accepted that i might believe something different than what they do.  and im not saying that everyone in favor of 'no' on 8 doesnt accept my viewpoint.  not at all.  im sure most do accept that i, and others can and do have an opposing viewpoint on an issue.  that its conceivable that i, and others might actually have different beliefs on an issue.  but there are always small minorities that have voices like majorities.  

i think the whole thing has gotten a little out of hand.  for instance, the school system is right at the center of some of it.  look, i realize that its not part of california school curriculum to teach about marriage.  but that doesnt mean they cant.  just because they dont have to teach about it, doesnt mean they cant if they dont want to.  at the same time, come on, its homosexuality.  its commonplace in america today.  whether or not this proposition passes, homosexuality will be taught in schools.  maybe it wont be taught that two people of the same gender can marry, but do you honestly think that this day in age any child is going to go through a sex-ed class in school and that the teacher wont at least discuss homosexuality?  and even if that teacher doesnt, your child will be taught plenty about homosexuality and sex on the playground and everywhere else.  its as though children are only taught things at school.  but in reality, most of a child's street education comes from friends and many other places.  you get a sex ed class in school and that will comprise 25% of the sex education your child gets outside the home.  the rest will come from somewhere else.  i still remember the day magic johnson got aids.  why?  because it was the first time i ever heard about or learned about aids. my friends and i spent all day at school talking about aids.  did any of us really know much about it?  nope.  but we spent the whole day teaching each other about it.  so this is all just more of an indicator to me, that its increasingly important to make sure that my future children are taught many things in the home.  am i going to home school them?  never.  i dont want them to be awkward.  but i do want my children getting married in a mormon temple.  im guessing that isnt being taught in the schools.  just like i assume history classes wont be devoting as much attention to joseph smith as i would like.  no matter what happens with this proposition, if i want my children to have a certain background or upbringing, a lot of it will have to be taught in the home.  

anyways, im rambling.  and maybe im off completely on that and on this entire issue.  maybe im not.  basically, its become a massive and heated mess.  people are trying to redefine marriage.  sorry.  i cant.  if it was another issue about gay rights or privileges, then i might be able to have a different viewpoint.  i believe that marriage is between man and a woman. thats correct.  its a belief.  im basing my political viewpoint on a belief.  im not the first to do it.  probably wont be the last.  i understand that other people may think that its a right of theirs to marry someone of the same gender.  hopefully they will understand that i have a belief and im sticking to it.  

anyways, its just unfortunate that its become such an issue and if there ever was a point where a middle ground could have been reached, its long gone now.  'equality of rights.'  if only it were that easy.  one side wants a right and i want to exercise my right of religion.  here, they happen to conflict.  im sorry if my religion or beliefs are upsetting to you.  what do you want me to do?  im not going to change them.  not an option.  so i guess we just have to remain on opposite sides of the issue with my viewpoints/beliefs sometimes being mocked or ridiculed.  its fine.  its not the first time.  surely wont be the last.  a break would be nice though.   

happiest place on earth...and in hell

so last night nellie and i went to disneyland. we try to limit our 'happiness' to 2 rides each time we go to disneyland. we try to do two different rides so that we will get through them all by the time our season passes expire in february. last night we did a repeat of space mountain, but we did get to two new rides: 'mr. toads wild ride' and 'pinocchio.'

so i dont know what exactly mr. toads wild ride is based on, but its a messed up ride. i thought it was based on the story 'the wind and the willows.' i dont really remember that story that well, but i remember seeing the cartoon when i was younger. all i really remember was that there was a toad and he got himself in to troubles and at the end he somehow escapes from rats or weasels. im not exactly sure. not that it really matters though because the ride is completely ridiculous and makes no sense.

in most of those storybook rides, there are voices or someone sort of narrarating as you go through the ride. there are no voices on mr. toads, so you are left to interpret the story on your own. you start by going in and out of a library. then through some sort of alley where there are weasels on the ceiling. then you weave around and head through the streets of london. you almost get into about 4 car accidents and there are explosives all over the place. at one point there is a bartender selling beer.  later, you find yourself weaving around some fountain and before you know it, some random judge is reaching over his bench and pointing a finger, presumably signaling that you are being sentenced, and your sentence is through the next door. what is through the next door? hell. it gets hot. literally a temperature increase.  there is fire all over. the room is full of a large devil and many small devils that are laughing and screaming all over the place. at least there is a happy ending right around the corner. oh wait, no there's not, when you leave that room, there are fake explosives and then the ride is over (btw, if you want to see it, there is a fair/poor youtube video of it). 

so technically, the ride ends in hell. which is fine by nellie and i. we are comfortable there and are able to laugh at the experience. but what about the children? nellie and i as adults couldnt even understand what was going on. but at least we were able to laugh about it and walk away unscathed and realize its just disney being crazy like they were with the pink elephants in dumbo. but a child? they just sit there silently, wide-eyed staring at all the craziness, soaking it all in. here is what they gather from that. there are scary, cigar smoking weasels in some city called london. stuff blows up for no reason. beer is good. and anytime an old person points a finger at me it means i have to go to the hot room with the scary, red-faced, horned man with all of his scary, pointy tailed rodents. no wonder children hate going to their grandparents house. and its all at the happiest place on earth. (note to reader: this in no way is some sort of blog post about how disneyland should shut down that ride. not at all. im not crying here and pleading for the children. i dont have any, so frankly i dont care about them...thats not entirely true. but im really not that worried about them and their response to this ride. if it were my kids, id let them go on. well, for sure if it was a niece or a nephew id let them go. im the worst uncle.)

we then went on pinocchio.  also traumatizing for children.  but at least in this one there are voices that are somewhat narrating and letting you know whats going on with the story.  which is good because children are turning into donkeys so somebody better be telling these little kids what the heck is going on.  going through hell is bad enough without being told why, but turning into a donkey without knowing the reason is worse.  anyways, the reason i bring up pinocchio is because rottentomatoes.com had it rated as the number 3 animated film of all time - number 1 being 'toy story 2.'  i love the toy story movies.  its amazing that a sequel is supposedly better than the original.  i dont dispute it.  the original is number 4 on the list.  both are just so good though.  they make me happy.  and so do their rides at disneyland. 

so at first i was surprised by pinocchio being so high on the list, but then while going on the ride, i realized that its actually a pretty powerful and amazing story with lots of great themes.  you have the always loyal conscience in jimmy cricket.  never leaves pinocchio's side.  always there and always trying to help him out; temptations from the real world; lying of course; second chances; of course there is the whole traumatizing part about the boys turning into donkeys.  and it is really freaky, but its also very powerful imagery of these boys getting caught up in temptations and then vile habits and addictions to the point where they are no longer able to choose for themselves and they are literally bound and taken captive and into slavery by this lifestyle; pinocchio narrowly escapes because his always faithful conscience barely bails him out; he gets in more trouble, but ultimately saves his father/creator that always loved him and never gave up on him.  

its a pretty remarkable tale.  it all made sense to me and i realized how great of a story it is when i was on the ride.  granted, seeing it so high on the list the day before made me wonder what other people saw in the show and then the ride reminded me of the many powerful themes from the story.  but again, just like 'mr. toads,' im an adult and im thinking and processing the themes of the story and the ride.  im getting a completely different experience than the children.  the children are just sitting wide-eyed thinking that they are going to hell and if they somehow escape that, they will just be turned into a donkey anyways.  such a happy place.  

cheese dome update

since this post seemed to be such a hit amongst readers, i thought id give a quick update on everyone's favorite wedding gift. turns out that we did receive one. nellie's cousin nikki bought us one. she bought it back in july but wasnt able to make it to the wedding so we didnt get it until sometime in september.

so i was thrilled to receive it of course. i have wanted one for quite sometime and since one hasnt been effectively used since 1962, i was excited to put ours to use. it performed beautifully. it helped mold our cheese faster than if we had just left it out on the counter. i left it out all day and when nellie and i got home from work our house stunk like moldy cheese.

nellie: gross. the house stinks. why did you leave the cheese out?

me: what are you talking about?  i left it in the cheese dome.

nellie: right. but you arent supposed to leave it out.

me: so we put it in the cheese dome in the fridge?

nellie:  well, no.  you leave it out, just not all day.

me:  oh.  right.  just during parties and holidays.  

nellie:  exactly.  

such a useful gift.

one other update really quick on the pancake warmer:

we have church at 8 am. i know, its just absurd. i dont know how families with young children pull it off. wait, yes i do. they dont.  they miss the first half of sacrament meeting. nellie and i barely make it there. usually thats because nellie doesnt want to get dressed in the morning and is kicking and screaming when im trying to put her shoes on. (thats not true. shes great at getting dressed. wouldnt that be terrible if it was true though? marriage nightmare #43.  sandwiched right in between your wife getting emotional and breaking down once a month for no reason and her nitpicking you on bathroom etiquette.)

anyways, because of early church, we usually dont have time for breakfast and when we get home we are hungry, but its only 11 am so we are still in sort of a breakfast food mood. so we have been making waffles almost every sunday after church. we have had them for about 4-5 straight sundays.  its a good little tradition.  but do you know how many times nellie has busted out the pancake warmer? thats right - zero.  granted, i know these are waffles and not pancakes, and the warmer does call for pancakes. but i believe the real reason is because nellie forgot that the thing even exists. why? because no rational human being ever thinks to use a pancake warmer. and you know what? nellie is rational.  shes not #43 from above.  

so in theory these items are a great idea, but in reality, you are just hungry and you plop the extra waffles on a plate and you start eating without thinking of anywhere to store the waffles.  why would you?  a plate gets the job done just fine and anything else would be absurd.  unfortunately, you cant make money off the real world. which is why these registry people are so evil.  in the real world you put your extra waffles on a plate.  but you already suckered her into buying 12 plates for her family of 2, so you cant sell her another plate.  so you create the pancake warmer.  they know women will see something and envision themselves using it and buy it, but then get home and never find a purpose for it or forget they own it.  but in the meantime at least it they will have a happy husband who gets to look at the items every day and wonder what sorts of other 'useful in theory' purchases are in store in for him.  

lost angels of anaheim

every once in awhile ill blog about sports for the reading pleasure of no one. i think about sports constantly and follow them religiously. nellie is beginning to realize this. there is always something going on. college football goes from the end of august to january. by then, college basketball is underway with march madness approaching. during that time, the euro soccer leagues are going on and they are usually finishing in april and may and help fill in the gap until baseball season is underway for the rest of the summer.

anyways, im no sports writer or critic. but i am a fan and the angels are on my thoughts, so ill throw in my two cents in case anyone cares. which im sure no one does. but yes, i am an angels fan. and i think a true one at that. ron took us to angels games when we were young because he didnt want to deal with la traffic and crowds at dodger stadium. now that im older, i realize how ridiculous both of those are and i would do the same thing too with my children. in the meantime though, i started following the angels ever since 1986. i wasnt always the best fan. when the nation fell out of baseball, i did too. but i do feel secure claiming my fanhood all the way back to 86, maybe 87.

now that i have established myself, ill vent. we lost again to the red sox. its completely ridiculous. i hate the red sox. as do many angels fans by now. and like many fans, i hate the so called 'red sox nation.' perhaps its just jealousy because the red sox are so well represented in every part of the country. go to an angels game and youll hear just about as many cheers for the red sox as you will the angels. which is frustrating. look, you didnt win a world series for 80-some-odd-years. we all rooted for you to win it back in 2004. you pulled it off and broke 'the curse.' before you were lovable losers (see: chicago cubs), now you are the trendy bandwagon team with obnoxious fans and a payroll similar to that of your new york counterparts. so own it. my team wanted to be the dodgers and take over la so we admitted it and added it to our name. you probably wont admit it, but since you are becoming like your east coast counterparts, we'll just call you the boston red sox of new york, because that is what you have become.

that was ridiculous rambling that didnt really make sense. the frustrating part about the series was that the angels lost the series. boston didnt win it. we were the better team and played poorly. my friend chris gave a rundown of his thoughts on some players on the team. i actually disagree with him on a few of the players. but here's my thoughts:

garret anderson: you were great. an angel legend. thanks for the memories. youre washed up. here's the door.

vlad: i didnt think he had a terrible series. better than past series. he was patient at the plate. didnt have an incredible power series, but did do great at getting on base. of course, i love the guy. he's the equivalent of raul on real madrid. he can do no wrong.

howie kendrick: i used to be high on this guy because i was buying into the hype that he was an amazing young talent and the future of the franchise etc. but i thing im off the bandwagon now. i dont think its possible to have a worse series than howie kendrick. its not just that he did poorly, he looked utterly lost and had zero confidence the entire time. amazing young talent rises to the occassion and lives for their first playoff experience. he's always hurt during the season and no one with a 'bright future' like they say he has, would commit so many errors in the playoffs and swing like theyve never seen a baseball before. he's nothing special. we have been waiting for his 'emmergence' for a couple of years now and if he was truly a star he would have stepped up by now and for sure at least once during the series instead of being a liability the whole time. he's a decent player and thats all. he's not filling any big shoes any time soon, if ever.

starting pitching: chris didnt seem to think we have a number 2 guy, but i think santana was solid this year. he did have a shaky start in the playoffs when he gave up 5 runs in the first inning, but then he shut the red sox out for the next 7 innings. i think he's legit. our rotation isnt bad. one of the best in baseball. our three starters for the playoffs: lackey, santana and saunders i think match up as well or better than any other team out there. it was the poor hitting and defense that did us in. not the starting pitching.

scot shields: yes. there is just one 't' on his name. chris is anti-scot. i like the guy. perhaps he was the losing pitcher in the deciding game 4, and it may seem like he has lost games for us a lot, but he's as good of a set up guy as there is out there. he can throw forever. legend has it that in a college game he threw 260 pitches. for anyone not familiar with baseball, thats ridiculous. 100 pitches is about average for pitchers these days. 130 is a ton. 260 is nearly criminal unless you have a rubber arm. if you watched game 3, were you sweating more when shields was pitching or when k-rod was pitching?

which is my next guy: k-rod. let him go. he wants a ton of money and he's not worth it. if scoscia had ANY confidence in k-rod at all, he would have brought him in to pitch to the red sox in the 9th of game 4. if k-rod was really that lights out and shields wasnt and scoscia knew it, he would have brought k-rod in to ensure the angels get another at bat in the 10th inning. he didnt. he knew that his chances were as good with shields than with k-rod. plus, k-rod is a wuss. he will only pitch one inning a game. just 3 outs. its not like he would come in and pitch the 9th and then the 10th if there was one. so scoscia had to stick with shields. whats more valuable, a guy that will pitch forever if you ask him or someone that will only do 1 inning max? plus, it usually takes him an hour and 3 walks to get those 3 outs. i dont need that. he wants 10 million a year, let the mariners or some desperate team give it to him. i hope we dont.

last guy: mark texeira. again, chris says we have to get him. so does my nephew and bro-in-law. im not so sold. he's good. great defensive skills. he played really well in the post season. im not saying hes bad, i just dont know what we want from him. we always wanted a BIG bat to help out vlad, and he's not that. he's got a good bat, but be honest. vlad is on par with david ortiz and manny ramirez. at least in his prime. is a vlad/texeira combo nearly as intimidating as the ortiz/manny combo was a few years ago? not remotely. texeira is good, but he wont punish you. which is what manny and ortiz did. if you refused to pitch to manny or were afraid and you walked him, ortiz would punish you because you had to pitch to one of them. if you tried to pitch to manny, then he would punish you. again, texeira is good, but i dont think he's worth breaking the bank. maybe im wrong. i just think that for the money he will want, plus the money k-rod will want, the angels could get a super star that is more intimidating than vlad. thats not their style though. they'll pursue what they have and try and keep texeira.

anyways, those are my ramblings. if you made it this far, you must really love the angels or be my wife because im even getting tired of typing this.