Siena + Toast

Prop 8 discussion of the Defintion of Traditional Marriage

noreply@blogger.com (Siena and Toast) — Thu, 11 Dec 2008 04:30:00 +0000

We received a great email from "BB" in response to Episode 78 of our Girl Meets Girl podcast. It was a long email and we're posting it, along with our responses, in parts over a few weeks. The first section dealt with Democratic Statutes and those posts are in two parts, first one here and second one here. The third post was on the Race Factor. And now, this is a discussion on the Definition of Traditional Marriage.

Our words are in boldface.

Definition of Traditional Marriage
This leads into the next subject of definition. Before I begin, allow me to simplify the premise of traditional marriage; which is the whole premise of Proposition 8. The formula is simply expressed as A+B=C.

Allow me to use literal semantics on this hypothesis against your legal references.

Examples

a+B=C (a = woman marital/legal status) (Common Law Doctrine of Coverture)

A+b=C (b = a male slave) (Dred Scott vs. Sanford)
This case wasn't about marriage. It was about a slave's right to sue for their own freedom. It illustrates how the definition of "citizen" has changed to include more people, not less.

a+b=C (whereas both a & b are interracial) (Loving vs. Virginia)

A+B1=C (King David, Old Testament reference of polygamy)
A+B2=C
A+B3=C

In all of the aforementioned legal cases, when applied to the initial
formula, have not discounted or disproved the premise of A+B=C.

True, but that doesn't weaken the case for "gay marriage." More on that soon.

This definition of traditional marriage has been in existence for thousands of years and is not a recent 20th century trend.

True, and again, this doesn't weaken the case for "gay marriage."

Now here's why.

In regards to the first assertion: that the legal cases "have not discounted or disproved the premise of A+B=C."

The initial premise does not have to be discounted or disproved for gay people to be able to get married to each other. Think: if gay couples can get married, does that prevent heterosexual couples from getting married or revoke heterosexual marriages ? No.

The purpose of introducing these cases was not to discount or disprove A+B=C. Why? Because it's unnecessary. Gay people who get married do not prevent heterosexual people from getting married.

In regards to the second assertion: That "this definition of traditional marriage has been in existence for thousands of years and is not a recent 20th century trend."

First of all, not that it's a substantial argument on its own (and we'll get to that next), but same-sex unions have been in existence for thousands of years and aren't a recent 20th century trend, either. Of course it may not have been called "marriage," which is an English word, because it wasn't part of English society, but same-sex couples have existed and their unions have been recognized in cultures around the world throughout history.

But you were talking about opposite-sex unions, not same-sex ones.

So they've been around a long time. Is that a real reason to preserve anything?

War and pestilence have been around too, but nobody says that's a reason to keep them around. Why? Because an existence of thousands of years alone isn't really a reason to preserve something.

But I think I know what you're getting at.

It would be a shame to have the quintessential image of man and wife joining in holy matrimony, infused with its edifying archetypal emotional, spiritual, and cultural significance, to be forsaken and forgotten by society at large.

Yes it would. I agree.

I love tradition and doing things the "old-fashioned" way. The smell of a wood fire is one of my favorite things. Not because I consider a wood fire as morally superior to an electric light bulb, but because it evokes feelings of ancient tradition and long history.

Good thing the time-honored wood fire is still allowed by the same law that also allows electric light bulbs.

Good thing time-honored marriages between people from the same race and culture is still allowed by the same law that also allows marriages between people of different races and cultures.

And good thing time-honored marriage between people of the opposite sex would also still be allowed by the same law that would extend the marriage right to couples of the same sex.

The law has changed it definitions to allow more ways to light a room and allow more forms that marriage can take. Not less.

In closing this segment of our discussion, to give us a better perspective on this issue, here is an excerpt from a speech delivered by Mildred Loving on the 40th anniversary of the Loving vs. Virginia decision, which made it possible for people of different races to marry without punishment under federal law in the U.S., beginning in 1967.

"My generation was bitterly divided over something that should have been so clear and right. The majority believed that what the judge said, that it was God’s plan to keep people apart, and that government should discriminate against people in love. But I have lived long enough now to see big changes. The older generation’s fears and prejudices have given way, and today’s young people realize that if someone loves someone they have a right to marry.

Surrounded as I am now by wonderful children and grandchildren, not a day goes by that I don’t think of Richard and our love, our right to marry, and how much it meant to me to have that freedom to marry the person precious to me, even if others thought he was the “wrong kind of person” for me to marry. I believe all Americans, no matter their race, no matter their sex, no matter their sexual orientation, should have that same freedom to marry. Government has no business imposing some people’s religious beliefs over others. Especially if it denies people’s civil rights.

I am still not a political person, but I am proud that Richard’s and my name is on a court case that can help reinforce the love, the commitment, the fairness, and the family that so many people, black or white, young or old, gay or straight seek in life. I support the freedom to marry for all. That’s what Loving, and loving, are all about."

The full text of Mildred Loving's speech can be found here.

Prop 8 discussion of the "Race Factor"

noreply@blogger.com (Siena and Toast) — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 15:49:00 +0000

We received a great email from "BB" in response to Episode 78 of our Girl Meets Girl podcast. It was a long email and we're posting it, along with our responses, in parts over a few weeks. The first section dealt with Democratic Statutes and those posts are in two parts, first one here and second one here. The following is on the topic of the Race Factor.

Our words are in boldface.

If you sampled a group of average citizens and asked for their personal opinion of homosexuality, I truly believe you will get a wide variety of responses. In order to clarify your examples of racial inequality I performed my own informal, unscientific survey of 20 people. These individuals ranged from all walks of life across the entire social and economic continuum. I asked them a simple question, “Do you think gays are considered a race or a minority?” Usually an inquiry worded in this fashion would cause the responder to answer in one of the two choices. But the greatest response I received was “neither.” I did get a couple of answers to minority, but upon further investigation they stated that gays were in the minority (overall numbers) as oppose to gays are a minority (ethnic group).

Gays are a minority because they are in the minority. Gays are not a race. A "race/ethnic group" is only called "a minority" if they are in the minority. Chinese people are not called a minority in China. In the United States, they are. So, gays are not a race, but they are indeed a minority. That's a fact of numbers. It's not up for an opinion survey.

With some of these folks I took the next step to interject examples of racial injustice. I used the Rosa Parks illustration. Because the majority of respondents in my survey did not associate homosexuality with race they saw no connection whatsoever. Although a number of people acknowledged struggles for both gay and civil rights groups, they still did not equate them as racial partners. In fact, with some African Americans they were perturbed by the idea of interconnecting the two. One respondent said “Rosa Parks was asked to move because she was black. Had she been a gay white woman no one would have said anything at all and left her alone.”

Actually, Rosa Parks wasn't asked to move because she was black. She was asked to move because she looked black, she didn't pass for white.

Here's the thing: Gay people pass for straight. In all kinds of institutions and situations, gay people can pass for straight. Discrimination against gays can't be enforced effectively much, because there's no way to see gayness.

Gays get into the military, the cubicle, the carpool, the football team, the pulpit, and nobody knows that their co-worker, accountant, teacher, neighbor, coach, or student, or bus-rider is gay, because gayness cannot be seen.

There's only one institution where gayness can be seen, where gay people cannot pass for straight. It's marriage.

Predictably, this is the one place where discrimination against gays is being attempted in such a forceful way.

Herein lies the fundamental element that separates the two factions. Most proponents of traditional marriage do not see a correlation between sexual orientation and race. Race by standard definition is based upon genetic physical characteristics while sexual orientation, according to some, involves behavior influenced by passion. According to this design both heterosexuals and homosexuals fit this definition of orientation. As far as defining race from a scientific or anthropological perspective, that is another argument in itself. Social construct and cultural relativity has modified the traditional definition of race to fit the current trends and attitudes. No doubt there still needs clarification on this matter and I will concede that it is well beyond my scope of intelligence.

Please understand that I am not discrediting your examples. I only address this because if gays want to use racial arguments to promote their cause they must take the time to inform and educate average citizens that they belong as a class of race. I would be interested to hear your results if you decide to undertake a similar survey. Perhaps you can find some studies or results on the internet.

Gays do not belong as a class of race, and the soundness of racial arguments does not require that they do.

Everyone knows the gay population is in the minority, the same way everyone knows the black population is in the minority. Both gays and blacks are a minority population. This status as a minority is the correlation between sexual orientation and race.

Proponents of "traditional marriage" who claim not to see this correlation are most likely intelligent and shrewd enough to realize that acknowledging it would reveal the bald-faced discrimination of their stance.

By the way, this minority vs. majority issue is also why many see wisdom, justice, and nobility in the ideals of democracy, wherein:
"The rights of minorities do not depend upon the goodwill of the majority and cannot be eliminated by majority vote." (from The U.S. Department of State's website under the heading What Is Democracy?)

Prop 8 discussion of "Democratic Statutes" cont'd

noreply@blogger.com (Siena and Toast) — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 04:01:00 +0000

We received a great email from "BB" in response to Episode 78 of our Girl Meets Girl podcast. It was a long email and we're posting it, along with our responses, in parts over a few weeks. The first installment was here. Now, here's the second in this series.

Our words are in boldface.

Personally, I am offended by the actions of State Attorney, Jerry Brown. He stepped beyond the bounds of his office to change the title of the initiative from “California marriage protection act” to “Eliminates the right for same-sex couples to marry.” This is a classic reversal of the USC/UCLA analogy I stated in the previous letter; using a negative over a positive. “Let’s beat USC, oh and by the way let’s support UCLA” and vice versa. When people inquire my stance on Prop. 8, I tell them I fully support it. Inevitably, the next statement is “So you’re against gay marriage.” My reply is “No, I am for traditional marriage.”

Let's take this seriously. Let's really think about this logically here.

If a man says to you, "So you're against XYZ marriage," and your reply is, "No, I am for traditional marriage," what is reasonable for that man to then deduce about you?

I'd say the following is reasonable and logical:
1. You do have something against XYZ marriage, even though you started your answer with the word "No." Otherwise your full answer would have been, "No, I'm not against XYZ marriage."
2. You probably do not recognize marriage can be available to "XYZ" and "traditional" couples both, but think it can only be available to one or the other. Otherwise, your answer would have been, "No, I'm not against XYZ marriages; and I'm not against traditional marriages, either. Neither prevents the other." This is where the USC/UCLA analogy breaks down. In USC/UCLA competitive sports, winning means the other team loses. In the case of a right to marry, just because XYZ wins the right does not mean others lose theirs.
3. You probably have a very specific but unspoken picture of what your term "traditional" means. Otherwise, your answer would have been, "No, I'm not against XYZ marriage; I'm for traditional marriage: arranged, dynastic, racially pure, polygamous, politically/financially strategic. I'm just for traditional marriage."

Let's stop and realize that people who are "for traditional marriage" include gay couples. Think about it, when you celebrate a wedding, it doesn't mean you withdraw support of any other married couples. Winning the right to marry is not a win/lose game. It's about trying to include more people, not exclude.

Let's also remember, "traditional" covers many pictures of marriage. People married for economic, political, and family loyalty far longer in our history than they've married for love. How many people reading this had great-grandparents or grandparents in arranged marriages, or picture-bride marriages? Probably many. I do.

The word "traditional" is almost meaningless because of the number of traditions there are. And when put into this accurate perspective, what becomes evident is the folly of claiming a supposed "traditional" quality as justification to champion just one, and only one, extremely recent idea of marriage, to the exclusion of all other, much older, and even more traditional incarnations of this institution.

Brown is trying to deceive the electorate that they will violate human and civil rights.

If there is a sex requirement that prevents you from obtaining a marriage certificate for you and your fiance, does that mean this requirement violates civil rights? According to the prohibition of discrimination based on sex, it does. There is no deception.

As I previously stated the original wording in the initiative has no direct reference to gay marriage.

You're right. It doesn't. More on this soon.

Once again, this is only about defining the institution of marriage between a man and a woman; plain and simple. Even if Proposition 8 passes Brown’s wording has left the door open for a legal maneuver to challenge. I am disappointed that both Brown and Gavin Newsom use their political positions to create policy and laws without due process. They are just creating a greater chasm between the two factions and adding gasoline to the fire.

Once again, as you said, the initiative had no direct reference to gay marriage. In fact, here's the wording. Prop 8 was to amend the Constitution of the State of California to include the following words: “Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.”

No direct reference to gay marriage.

The United States Constitution used to refer to slaves as "other Persons" (Article 1, Section 2, Paragraph 3). No direct reference to slavery, but everyone knew what these words meant, and they knew the conditions they were designed to enforce. The choice of words made it easier to discriminate, but didn't do anything to actually eliminate discrimination. (For more info, see this article on the 'three-fifths compromise.')

The lack of a direct reference to gay marriage doesn't mean it has nothing to do with gay people. Just like the lack of a direct reference to slaves didn't mean the Constitution had nothing to do with supporting slavery.

The irony is that there was a time when the gay community told government that it had no business what went on in their private lives; now it craves validation from them.

I think what the gay community craves is not validation, but equal treatment under the law, and wisely so. It's a positive thing when citizenry stands up for it's rights instead of remaining silent, while subtle creeping discrimination continues to build and morph into overt and ugly oppression.

Remember there are many things in a free society that are neither forbidden nor facilitated. Legal scholars claim certain actions are considered to be none of the law's business. But I can tell you firsthand being married does not give me any more liberty rather I am entrenched with more restrictions; both legal and otherwise.

Gay couples recognize this more than most. They've been forced to. They've had to pay extra money and spend extra time learning about and assembling contracts that legally enforce these restrictions which protect their rights, including hospital visitation, child and spousal support responsibilities, the list goes on. What most heterosexual couples have taken for granted, gay couples have had to pay extra for in every way.

Prop 8 discussion of "Democratic Statutes"

noreply@blogger.com (Siena and Toast) — Sat, 08 Nov 2008 20:09:00 +0000

We received a great email from "BB" in response to Episode 78 of our Girl Meets Girl podcast. It was a long email and we'll post it, along with our responses, in parts over the following days and weeks. Here ya go with the first in this series.

Our words are in boldface.

Hey Toast and Siena,

I listened to your podcast and found your arguments to be provocative and stimulating. But in the process of fair debate, allow me to offer a rebuttal. First of all, I apologize for the length of this correspondence; I will probably send this as an attachment so it doesn’t take up too much memory. I want to convey my responses in a clear and concise manner. Once again, I will continue to engage in dialogue without rage and hate. My intent is to be respectful.

Allow me to readdress a few items where I did a poor job communicating my position.

Democratic Statutes
Your arguments regarding democratic statutes were well presented. You are correct that there were laws in our history which violated basic human rights. Fortunately, they have been remedied. My initial question to you is what defines a civil right? I am presenting this from a layman’s perspective. I am not well versed in Constitutional Law so our discussion is strictly on a basic level of understanding.

I believe most citizens comprehend an intrinsic perception of civil rights. One definition I found is civil rights is the fundamental freedoms and privileges guaranteed by the 13th and 14th amendments and subsequent acts of Congress including the right to legal and social and economic equality. I will presume that we are in accord with this interpretation.

Thank you again for explaining your thoughts on this important topic. I genuinely appreciate the time and effort it takes to communicate your perspective, and additionally, the civility with which you do so.

Now, on to the exchange of ideas!

I'm no Constitutional lawyer either, but the following definition of "civil rights" stood out for two reasons. From Cornell University Law School:

A civil right is an enforceable right or privilege, which if interfered with by another gives rise to an action for injury. Examples of civil rights are freedom of speech, press, and assembly; the right to vote; freedom from involuntary servitude; and the right to equality in public places. Discrimination occurs when the civil rights of an individual are denied or interfered with because of their membership in a particular group or class. Statutes have been enacted to prevent discrimination based on a person's race, sex, religion, age, previous condition of servitude, physical limitation, national origin, and in some instances sexual preference.

Regarding your belief that most comprehend an intrinsic perception of civil rights: I think most people think they know what a civil right is.

Here are the two reasons this Cornell definition was especially notable, though:
1. It acknowledges that civil rights are a mental construct, and not actually intrinsic as legal rights. Only when it's an "enforceable right or privilege, which if interfered with...gives rise to an action for injury" is it a "civil right." In other words, if people don't have a civil right, it's because it doesn't exist. Even if their situation is unfair, it is a situation held together by law, and they cannot claim a civil right has been violated, because that civil right does not exist to be violated.
2. This definition also acknowledges that statutes preventing discrimination based on what it calls "sexual preference" are in effect "in some instances." These statutes are not universal, but to me, this only means that our laws can be made more fair.

Finally, to comment on the definition you offered, it's important to note that civil rights also include freedoms granted through court decisions, such as Brown v. Board of Education, and not just acts of Congress.

What happens when we apply civil rights to institutions? You made a reference to the Little Rock Nine which is a good example. They, meaning the students, challenged the interpretation of the 13th & 14th Amendments. No doubt, both their civil and human rights were violated based upon the premise of race.

Now in today’s free society I question where civil rights come into play. Some questions come to mind. If I want to attend Harvard or Stanford and do not get accepted are my civil rights violated? If I want to work as a member of Congress and show up the next day ready to work and they deny me is that a violation as well? My point is that within certain institutions there are regulations as well as restrictions involved.

Responding to your examples, and the question "were your civil rights violated?" The answer is: it depends. If you were denied based on qualifications, then your civil rights were not violated. If you were denied based on one of the "protected" things, then they were violated.

And again, let's remember: just because civil rights are not legally violated does not mean that justice carried the day. When women had no civil right to vote, when people had no civil right to marry "interracially," their civil rights were not being violated either. Their fight was not to enforce, but to gain a civil right.

As to your point that within certain institutions there are regulations and restrictions, I heartily agree! Regulations and restrictions are beneficial, logical, and fair - as long as they aren't solely based on a person's race, sex, religion, age, previous condition of servitude, physical limitation, national origin, or sexual orientation - but rather on qualifications.

Whether we agree on this or not marriage in itself is not a right but rather an institution bestowed by society.

Again I agree with you on this. Marriage itself is not a right. No one person has, or should have, "the right to be married." There has to be another person wanting to marry them, and there are other requirements, listed here by the California Department of Public Health. Marriage is not a right per se and there are regulations.

Just as I do not have the right to demand Harvard or Stanford to admit me due to poor academic standards or for Congress to allow me to write laws and represent people without going through the formal election process.

Now if there is a violation of human rights then there is a problem. If laws were written to prohibit my guarantee to fundamental freedoms and privileges then they should be addressed. Currently, in the State of California there are no laws to prohibit gay marriages or activities.

Prior to November 4, 2008, this would have been true. However, on that day, the majority of the electorate voted (53% to 47%) in favor of adding the following words to the State Constitution:
“Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.”
Although legal action surrounding the validity of this becoming a reality remains ongoing, if this is written into the Constitution, it would indeed prohibit gay couples from marrying in the State of California.

A final point on civil rights as it relates to "sexual preference," and this point is crucial.

There is a widespread argument against legalizing protection of gays from discrimination based on their sexuality. It is this: being gay is a choice. The argument goes that because it is a choice and because it is a changeable behavior, unlike one's sex or the color of one's skin, it does not warrant protection from discrimination.

This argument is why so many are so invested in studies on whether sexual orientation is a result of biology or social environment/choice. If studies show it's biology, then gays deserve civil rights. If studies show it's choice, then gays do not deserve civil rights.

I think this argument is interesting, but that it's a little misguided. Here's why: religion is a choice.

Whether or not sexual orientation is a choice (and the evidence is plentiful on the side of nature over nurture), one's religion is most definitely a choice, undeniably so.

The fact that one's religion is a choice does not make its followers open to discrimination on that basis, or on the basis of what religion they choose. Religion is an intensely personal thing, the following of which does no criminal harm.

Sexual orientation, too, or sexual preference, if you would like to call it that, is an intensely personal thing, and does no criminal harm.

Although disciples of one religion may want to convert disciples of another, they recognize the democratic wisdom of protecting those others' rights to practice as they choose. They recognize that protecting the rights of others also protects their own. Protecting rights does not mean they agree with another religion's doctrine, or that devotee's religious beliefs and convictions. It simply means they honor that devotee's right to practice in a way that suits his soul or her spirit, without legal persecution or oppression.

The same concept applies to gay rights. Standing up for gay rights does not mean you agree that being gay is spiritually correct; nor does it mean you support the belief that their choice is right, true, or best. It simply means you recognize their right to make that choice, and to live in a way that suits their soul and spirit, without legal persecution or oppression.

Thank you again for coming forward to discuss your point of view on this important issue. Your doing so is a great opportunity for many of us to clarify our own thinking.

Blessings to you and your family.

On Prop 8

noreply@blogger.com (Siena and Toast) — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 21:56:00 +0000

CALIFORNIA -- A vote for Prop 8 would have the effect of preventing gay couples from getting married in the State of California by amending the constitution to include these words: “Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.”

When people elaborate on a planned vote in favor of Prop 8, you'll often hear the same types of comments.

1. "Don't get me wrong, I don't hate gays at all."
2. "That IS the definition of marriage, that’s all: a man and a woman."
3. "Marriage is the last stand, the last vestige to defend, for traditional values."
4. "I just want to validate my own definition of marriage, I’m not attacking gays.”

Let’s give these comments serious consideration.

1. "Don't get me wrong, I don't hate gays at all."

There is a difference between hate and unjust/undemocratic statutes. The absence of hate does not mean that therefore, just and democratic ideals are being upheld.

What are democratic ideals? The following is an excerpt from The U.S. Department of State's website under the heading What Is Democracy?

The rights of minorities do not depend upon the goodwill of the majority and cannot be eliminated by majority vote. The rights of minorities are protected because democratic laws and institutions protect the rights of all citizens. In a democratic society, majority rule must be coupled with guarantees of individual human rights that, in turn, serve to protect the rights of minorities...
THE PILLARS OF DEMOCRACY include: Majority rule. Minority rights. Equality before the law.

Let's not confuse hate with undemocratic laws. Just because you don't hate doesn't mean you're upholding the ideals of democracy.

And unjust policy does not mean someone is a hater. In fact, a society can cherish people and still subject them to oppressive laws.

William Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England is frequently quoted as the definitive pre-Revolutionary War source of common law, which treated wives like this:

If the wife be injured...she can bring no action for redress without her husband’s concurrence...though our law in general considers man and wife as one person, yet there are some instances in which she is separately considered; as inferior to him, and acting by his compulsion. And therefore all deeds executed, and acts done, by her...are void...the disabilities which the wife lies under are for the most part intended for her protection and benefit; so great a favorite is the female sex of the laws of England.

So great a favorite, but the law failed to recognize any of her deeds or acts. No hate, only injustice. Another example from more recent times: picture someone very kindly offering to show Rosa Parks to the back of the bus. No hate, only injustice.

So hate isn't the issue with Prop 8. Of course the absence of hate makes things more pleasant. But whether or not you hate someone doesn't affect their rights.

When the topic of gay marriage comes up, many people who say they'll vote against it also insist that they don't hate gays.

But laws are not about emotional reactions; they’re about creating, maintaining, and perpetuating a democratic, just, and fair society.

So what does hate or non-hate have to do with Prop 8? Nothing, really. You don't hate gays. That's nice. Do you vote for unequal, unjust, undemocratic policy against them?

2. "That IS the definition of marriage, that’s all: a man and a woman."

Actually, "what marriage is" is not so simple, simple-minded, or solid; definitions are not immutable. The fact is, definitions have changed and do change over time. Marriage in Colonial and Early America meant:

...the husband and wife are one person in law: that is, the very being or legal existence of the woman is suspended... For this reason, a man cannot grant anything to his wife, or enter into covenant with her: for the grant would be to suppose her separate existence; and to covenant with her, would only to be to covenant with himself....

This version of marriage is now obsolete. But it impacted the definition of other things, too.

The U.S. prevented women from voting for 144 years. Voting was always understood to be something only men did. Women had never voted before, and there was no campaign to change that for the first 72 years of our country. The campaign, once begun, was itself 72 years long. It was a state-by-state process. The 19th Amendment allowing women the right to vote was ratified only 88 years ago. Think about that. 144 years compared to 88 years. By historical standards, a woman's right to vote is a new thing.

But already, most people are proud that our laws protect it. The state motto of Wyoming is "Equal Rights," because Wyoming was the first state to grant women suffrage under its state’s law. And now, women vote everywhere in the U.S. Voting's definition changed and is now something that both sexes do.

There are some people who still believe traditional women shouldn’t vote; there are still some who believe in white supremacy and that "interracial marriages" are wrong.

But marriage for "interracial couples" remains a protected right. Our laws don't sentence people to prison for it. That was what happened, legally, before 1967. It's another traditional definition worth thinking about. Here's a timeline:

1883 Because both the white and the non-white spouses were punished equally, the U.S. Supreme Court upholds anti-miscegenation laws, in Pace v. Alabama, as being constitutional

1959 Seventy-six years later, another couple, The Lovings, are sentenced to prison in Virginia, for their unlawful "interracial marriage"

For the next 8 years, rulings against The Loving's right to marry include the following: "Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, Malay and red, and He placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with His arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that He separated the races shows that He did not intend for the races to mix." (for a Biblical basis of this view, Google "the curse of Ham," Genesis 9:20-27)

1967 U.S. Supreme Court, reversing earlier decisions, upholds The Lovings' right to be in an “interracial marriage” as a right protected under the U.S. Constitution

In other words, the definition of marriage changed again. Today, campaign ads urging people to protect "traditional marriage" use pictures of “traditional” couples, including “mixed race” couples, as if that’s the way it’s always been.

Speaking of the way things have always been. Keep in mind, The United States itself was a revolution, something that had never existed before. The ideals that The United States were founded on are not about keeping things the way they've always been. They're about making things better, and better for more people. The fact that definitions have changed is a by-product of that.

"Citizen" used to mean white male. "Negro" used to mean slave, and then, non-citizen. "Married woman" used to mean legal non-entity. "Marriage" used to mean people "from the same race and of opposite sexes."

Definitions are not immutable; they change and change again. And it's good that they do.

Because definitions should not be used to rationalize undemocratic laws.

"Disabled" means "not able" or "less able," but does that mean we as a society say disabled people should continue to have less access to public facilities because after all, that's what the definition of disabled is?

No, we don't use definitions to serve undemocratic policy. We use democracy to serve all citizens with equal access and equal treatment under the law.

So the comment that "that's what the definition of marriage is and it's always been that way" is first of all essentially false, and second of all, like the issue of hate, a distraction from the real issue of whether a law is worthy of our democratic ideals.

3."Marriage is the last stand, the last vestige to defend, for traditional values."

Gay rights is indeed big news these days. But other things to defend most definitely still exist.

In the Bible, there are over 300 verses about social justice, and who and what to defend. Here are just two short passages from Isaiah.

"cease to do evil, learn to do good; seek justice, correct oppression; defend the fatherless, plead for the widow"

"Woe to those who make unjust laws, to those who issue oppressive decrees, to deprive the poor of their rights and withhold justice from the oppressed"

Notice it doesn't say, be good. It says, "learn to do good." In other words, good is something you have to study and be educated and informed about. It takes time and effort to learn. It’s possible to want to do good, and not know how, because the learning hasn't been completed yet.

Also notice it says, "correct oppression." Don't just not oppress. Do something to correct oppression. In other words, circumstances and conditions should be improved. Help people more. Help more of the people. Correct oppression. Learn to do good.

Today's political landscape has indeed been dominated by the issue of “same-sex marriage,” but marriage is far from being a last vestige to defend, even according to the Bible.

Domestic abuse victims need protection. Homeless people, wounded veterans, families struggling under health care costs, single parents taking two or more jobs trying to raise their kids as best they can, all need help. Kids in foster care. They're all worth defending.

Marriage is clearly not a last vestige to defend, even by Biblical standards.

4."I just want to validate my own definition of marriage, I’m not attacking gays.”

Democracy is not about every citizen getting everything they want; it's about every citizen having the responsibility to protect the rights of all, which include their own.

We all want what we want. But a democracy is not about every individual being able to get everything they want. That's not democracy, that's being a spoiled brat. Democracy is more insightful and broad-thinking than being able to get everything you want.

There's a quote on the U.S. Dept. of State's website under the heading Citizenship: Rights and Responsibilities. It goes "Freedom means responsibility, not freedom from responsibility."

The website lays it out:

An individual's exercise of his rights is also his responsibility to protect and enhance those rights--for himself and for others. Even citizens of well-established democracies often misunderstand this equation, and too often take advantage of rights while ignoring responsibilities. As political scientist Benjamin Barber notes, "Democracy is often understood as the rule of the majority, and rights are understood more and more as the private possessions of individuals and thus as necessarily antagonistic to majoritarian democracy. But this is to misunderstand both rights and democracy."

"I only want to validate my own definition" as part of one's reasoning comes from either ignorance, or a wish to live under an authoritarian government that agrees with and enforces that person's own personal views exactly.

Our forebears, however, came to this country because it strives to be democratic, and not authoritarian. The pride we have in our soldiers who risk their lives overseas comes from the belief that they fight not to conquer, but to liberate. They fight to protect other countries, and although this is a selfless act, it also protects our own. If one country is allowed to be oppressed, we are all in danger of oppression. If one minority is allowed to be oppressed, we are all in danger of being oppressed.

The electorate, as the American philosopher Sidney Hook expressed it, is "the ultimate custodian of its own freedom." American theologian Reinhold Niebuhr said: "Man's capacity for justice makes democracy possible, but man's inclination to injustice makes democracy necessary."

You as a citizen should and you do have the right to affirm and validate a definition for yourself, as long as your actions do not deny others their equal rights according to the laws of our democracy.

As for the laws of our democracy, we know they are imperfect. Winston Churchill said "Democracy is the worst form of government except for all the other forms that have been tried." Our nation and state are not perfect. But we are making it more so.

It's a better world today for women, for African-Americans, for the disabled, for gays, and even for white males, who can now marry a woman of another "race," have a public restroom that accommodates his disability, or choose a female running mate for Vice President.

The U.S. has made a lot of progress, but it had to be made. People had to make and build that progress. Our country had to learn to do good, to correct oppression.

The pictures of slaves being sold legally in our nation's photo album are real. In The Library of Congress, there are real pictures of grandmothers legally imprisoned because they picketed for suffrage. Today on the internet, you can watch 65-year old Dr. Terrence Roberts share his first-hand account of being a 15-year old student, escorted by U.S. Army soldiers into the formerly segregated Central High School of Little Rock, Arkansas.

These things are uncomfortable, but they're facts of our history. So are the corrections we’ve made, the facts of our history. We did the right thing and corrected oppressions.

But not all of them.

Today, any Californian with a vote is being urged to cast their vote to deny rights to a minority population.

Well, this is indeed the story of America. You may not be one to attack, condemn, or be unfair to a gay person...to their face. But let me ask you this.

Would your vote do it for you?

The right, the responsibility, and the opportunity to learn to do good and correct oppression is yours.

We'll see you at the polls.

An Oppossing View re/ Prop 8

noreply@blogger.com (Siena and Toast) — Thu, 16 Oct 2008 19:00:00 +0000

This is an email we received on October 16, 2008, which explained this person's reasons for supporting "Prop 8."

Proposition 8 was a proposition to amend the Constitution of the State of California to include the following words: “Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.”

This would, of course, in effect eliminate the right of gay couples to marry.

We genuinely and deeply appreciate this person's willingness to communicate, with civility, their opposing view. It's a great opportunity to listen to a fellow citizen speaking from the heart, and to engage in serious and thoughtful discussion.

++++++++++

Greetings Toast and Siena,

Aloha. I truly understand and appreciate your passion over Prop. 8; it what makes our political process great. But you are erroneous to think that Prop. 8's main directive is to abolish gay marriage. The primary thrust among its supporters is to reaffirm the definition of marriage between a man and a woman. Plain and simple. But therein lies the fundamental difference.

You ask any pro Prop. 8 supporter and that is the first answer you'll get. It's not this misguided "witch hunt," "gay bashing" that opponents have conjured up. Of course, you'll always have idiots like Fred Phelps distorting the picture. By taking an objective look at the semantics there is a dramatic difference in the approach as well as the emotions involved. Remove rage from the debate and you'll be able to understand how and why people support this initiative.

The battle over marriage is one of the last vestiges for conservatives as well as traditional families to defend. That is why churches are so passionate about this issue. Folks truly believe that the standards have changed and are infuriated that one vote can overturn the will of four million. These are the same folks who believe in the mantra that times can change but values remain the same. So you are correct that it's a battle over ideologies.

Although you girls are probably not sports enthusiasts allow me to interject a simple analogy. Take for instance the local USC/UCLA rivalry. If you ask a fan of either school what is your primary motivation for attending games I guarantee their first answer would be that they want to support their team. The ancillary response is that they want to beat their opponent. It's rarely the other way around.

So when my gay friends attack me and say that I'm an intolerant bigot, my response is very simple. I just want to reaffirm what I believe is the true definition of marriage. There is no hatred involved or intense distain; it's just what I believe. And I'm confident that many other supporters of Prop. 8 share the same way of thinking. I don't hate gays, I just want to validate my position. It's not about beating the enemy, it's all about supporting the team. Far after this election is over hopefully we will continue to care and respect each other.

But even as a proponent of Prop. 8, I will concede that a two thirds vote from the electorate will be difficult to achieve.

Thanks for allowing me to state my opposing viewpoint. Let's just end by saying that we agree to respectfully disagree. Nothing has changed in terms of my support for the two of you. I truly believe in Makena and I hope you make your mark in the music world. All the best in upcoming concert at the OC Pavilion.

Sincerely,

Tried and True Haupia Recipe

noreply@blogger.com (Siena and Toast) — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 00:26:00 +0000

Mahalo to mel, a listener of our Girl Meets Girl podcast, for testing and then sharing this...

TRIED & TRUE HAUPIA RECIPE

ingredients:

1 14 oz can or 12 oz can coconut milk (frozen or not)
? add water to coconut milk to bring total fluid to 2-1/4 c.
(i.e. if 14 oz coconut milk, add 4 oz water
if 12 oz coconut milk, add 6 oz water)
6 Tbsp sugar
4 Tbsp cornstarch
1 packet knox gelatin

instructions:

1. mix dry ingredients together in a pot (3c. or bigger)
2. add coconut milk and water
3. cook on MED heat until it thickens, about 15 minutes, stirring constantly, non-stop. do not let it boil.
4. when thickened, pour into an 8x8 pan
5. refrigerate overnight

addn'l note:
- if using a 9x13 pan, make 3 recipes

Siena's Birthday Party

noreply@blogger.com (Siena and Toast) — Fri, 09 May 2008 22:28:00 +0000

Hey! Wow, haven't posted to this blog in soooo long! Dang!

Well, this is a great occasion to do so. It's Siena's birthday today and we just wanted to post up the program for her birthday party.

Here ya go.

Coming Out

noreply@blogger.com (Siena and Toast) — Tue, 20 Nov 2007 17:15:00 +0000

This is a guest post written by Bonnie, which is part of a series on the subject of coming out.

My coming out story. . .Where to begin? You spoke about hind sight and how everything about the past somehow becomes clear once that realization surfaces. It is true. I look back to grade school, junior high and high school and can understand the feelings that were so confusing at the time. But, I sure as hell would not go back and relive any of it. Everyone I’ve ever known, every experience I’ve ever had, has made me who I now am. Still incomplete, a work in progress, but not walking backwards.

I married young, too young, and pregnant. Twenty years old and thought I was ready for anything. NOT! But, at least I was doing things right in the end. Getting married, starting a family. Being normal. Well, a week into my marriage I knew I was not where I wanted to be, and I was in that place for 16 years. A year and a half after having Matthew I gave birth to Mark. Two kids in diapers, married to a man I didn’t love, very poor, this was my hell on earth. And heaven at that same tim e! I loved my boys! I still love the buggers.

I went through a lot of stages in those 16 years. My very domestic stage where I froze and canned and baked and crocheted. My drinking stage, where I went out too often and drank too much, trying to escape the pain. Then there was my I can live like this stage, shove everything under a wall of self resolve. Well, that didn’t work either!!

So, about 14 1/2 years into the marriage I found the right therapist. The wife of our family doctor. Dr. Deena Schaffert, God love her! A real life saver. About my third session I finally spoke the words, “I think I’m gay”. Deena says, “Well, it’s about time. I’ve been waiting for three weeks for you say that.”

It was a difficult year and a half. Staying married while knowing, finally, that I was gay. I had a HUGE crush on a very straight friend. Not the first time, either. Like so many other times in my life I drew strength from my Faith. One foot in front of the other, putting the boys first as much as I was able. With the help of God and Deena I was able to see myself unmarried and surviving on my own. The thought of surviving financially on my own was a fear that weighed on me like an anvil. It was the fear that kept me married.

I had started my own photography business and it was growing. I came out to my husband, got a lawyer and filed for a divorce. Being poor has one advantage. We had nothing to argue over. (Custody of the boys was never an issue) We just had to split up the bills. In Indiana it’s no fault divorce, child support is based on income in a fairly uncomplicated formula. My ex reacted very civil, he knew for a long time that our marriage was not good. We actually had an amicable divorce. I’m not saying there were no problems, no pain. But, knowing so many horror stories about other people’s divorces, this was a walk in the park.

I guess so far this has really been my escape story as much as my coming out story. There is a story connected to each person I have come out to. My siblings, my parents, my sons, my friends, new friends that I make. The story continues.

I am blessed in so many ways. My family has stood by me. My friends have stood by me even though some have religious issues with homosexuality. My sons love both Karen and I, and respect us as their mothers. Our little Elizabeth loves her Tutu and her Oma.

I have the love of my life, my soulmate. We have 15 years of memories and God willing many more years of memories to come. My favorite place on earth is Karen’s right shoulder, no matter where in the world that shoulder is. To rest my head there, standing, sitting, lying, doesn’t matter, I am at peace.

Bonnie

A Coming Out Story

noreply@blogger.com (Siena and Toast) — Tue, 06 Nov 2007 00:36:00 +0000

This is a guest post written by Jonnie, which is part of a series on the subject of coming out.

I think coming out is a process. I'm almost 50 and I still have an awkward moment now and then.

When I was a boy, I fantasized about other boys (sexually), but knew it was considered wrong and kept it secret, other than a neighbor boy who was sexually wired the same way I was. It was about sex (and very tame at that), not role playing, or relationships, or love.

But as far as spending my time, talking and watching TV, I was always hanging out with girls. The girl next door was at one point wife material. Later it turned out I discovered she's a Lesbian. I never saw it; all the Tomboy stuff I thought was totally cool. In fact her Uncle and his boyfriend used to visit her parents. I NEVER knew they were boyfriends and Gay, they were just Uncle #1 and Uncle #2. I was so stupid.

When I got into Junior High, I figured it was time to grow up and quit fantasizing about boys. And then in PE class, there was the open showers and locker rooms and so I had a head full of visuals to fantasize about, but kept quiet about all of it. I finally rationalized it that if it was just in my mind, and I didn't do anything with anyone, it was okay.

So this went on and on and on, I didn't date or even mess around. The when I was 21 I had my first adult Gay sexual experience. It was liberating!

Now there were bars and parties and gatherings of people like me. For once I actually found a place I belonged. It was wonderful.

As far as coming out to family, I told my Mom first, but I can't remember how she replied. I think she was more upset when I got my ear pierced because of what people would say.

I suspect she did not talk with her Brother and Sisters or friends, so I guess it was just too much for her to handle. I can't remember telling my Brothers either, or their reactions; however one of them told me only recently that Gay men are all pedophiles.

So now in this story I'm in my late 20's, I'm not considered so cute or young anymore, and I'm tired of the guys I had been around and dated.

However a Gay bar was still a nice place to get a drink and not have to pretend.

One night at the bar, and obviously I wasn't looking for a boyfriend, I met this cool guy who was just out of the Navy and going back to college. He was living on a shoestring budget, no fancy clothes, but smart, warm and really handsome/cute. He is so normal and wholesome, and I thought wow, I'd like to see more of him. The next day we met on the cliffs about the beaches of La Jolla and talked and watched the gliders - we just clicked...

6 months later I moved in with him. And now 20 years later I can tell you he's the very best thing that ever happened to me.

You can share bits and pieces, all, or even a summary of my email - just don't publish my actual email address please.

Mahalo, malama pono and a hui hou!
(thank you, take care and see ya later)

Oceans of Aloha,
Jonnie and Earl

Grammy Preliminary Ballot

noreply@blogger.com (Siena and Toast) — Tue, 30 Oct 2007 17:08:00 +0000

We found out on Thursday, Oct. 18, 2007, that MAKENA was on the preliminary ballot for a Grammy Award for Best Contemporary Folk/Americana Album. Preliminary ballots are voted on by Voting Members of The Recording Academy (NARAS: National Academy of Recording Arts & Sciences) and are due on Nov. 7, 2007. The top five in each category will be considered official "Grammy Nominees." Voting will then take place again and the winners will be announced at the 50th Annual Grammy Awards on Feb. 10, 2008.
Grammys are given in various "Fields" and "Categories" of music and audio production, including spoken word and music videos. Here's where MAKENA appears in the Grammy classifications:

Field 14: Folk
Category 69: Contemporary Folk/Americana
Entry #114: MAKENA

A Japanese-American Coming Out Story

noreply@blogger.com (Siena and Toast) — Mon, 29 Oct 2007 01:29:00 +0000

This is a guest post submitted anonymously, and is part of a series on the subject of coming out.

Hi,

We wanted to respond to your request for stories...I don't know how to explain this story. It is but it isn't. Anyway here it is. J__ met my grandmother (who only spoke Japanese) when she was well into her 90's. She lived in a rest home and we would go and visit her every so often. When she was still able to walk we took her out for lunch. When she wasn't as mobile anymore we tried to take her favorite food from the okazuya (Japanese delicatessen). Grandma was always kind to J__. I was amazed that she remembered her although she met her so late in her life. One day we were sitting with her and she reached over and put my hand and J__'s together. She put her hand over ours, closed her eyes and seemed to say a prayer. We weren't sure what she was doing but felt like she was saying I know and it's ok. We thought it was pretty cool. Grandma was cool. We will always treasure that memory.

A Coming Out Story

noreply@blogger.com (Siena and Toast) — Mon, 22 Oct 2007 00:45:00 +0000

This is a guest post written by amanda, which is part of a series on the subject of coming out.

My coming out story is I feel a little complicated…

I knew I loved women in a "funny" way or perhaps more than I "should" when I got caught kissing an autographed photo of Miss Ohio. I was probably 7 or 8yrs. at the time and my older brother, the one who found me, laughed, teased me and threatened to tell my mother…”Amanda was kissing Miss Ohio!” The whole experience was not good. And let me just say that Miss Ohio is nooot a very good kisser…real firm with the lips.

Arrg.

Fast forward through middle school into high school. I developed a very strong crush on my best friend. I don’t think I was really aware of these feelings. I just knew when she smiled or looked at me I felt different…like I didn’t have knees and could walk through walls…

THE MOMENT I probably knew I was gay/lesbian came the night…no i think it was the day after she died. My friend died in a tragic car accident (I wasn’t with her). I was incredibly sad like most of her friends, but I could NOT keep it together...I cried and cried and cried…and cried in the counselor's office. Again, a normal response given the circumstances, but it was
EXTREME. Even I had an awareness in the moment that I was grieving something deeper here...

THEN my spinal cord injury happened (same year, 1 month later). Not that it necessarily needed to but this pretty much stunted the coming out process altogether…I couldn’t move, feed myself, felt routinely violated in the physical sense. My thoughts narrowed and I was much more concerned with ideas like feeding myself and going back to school.

(interesting side note…looking back I can definitely identify several crushes on cute nurses/therapists : )

i believe social messages were and still are mostly that disabled people are like old people...weak, frail, broken bodies not sexual beings.

For the remaining 2 years of high school and up through college I had a boyfriend (don’t ask me how that happened, I’m still not sure myself)…I will just call these the secondary latent years…

I remained pretty closeted to myself up to my 4th year (yikes) of graduate school…there was no specific event that made me come out to myself. I think it was the fact that I was turning 30 and realized I’d never really dated anyone I felt connected to..and I would LITERALLY now walk into walls when a cute female intern would walk by and say hi.

arrg.

i’m not sure why but coming out to myself has been the hardest part. My greatest fears have always been doing something to hurt or disappoint my family.

Today I can see that in some ways by having a spinal cord injury I felt I’d already done this…my accident was truly an accident but I couldn’t undo the fear and pain they felt as they watched me recover. I felt telling them “I like the ladies” “I’m a lesbian” would be unfair to them. They’ve grown up with traditional, Catholic, small town values and would fear again for my safety in the world…

I FINALLY realized however the person I was being unfair to was me…I really didn’t know what my parents' reactions would be and deserved to be free to express myself and feel love. (uh how’s that for parenting yourself?)

I came out first to my closest friend. I picked someone safe and easy. I could tell this friend I’m
into f-in cows (which just for the record, I am not…who is? Wait don’t answer that…). I could tell her anything about me and I knew that it would be okay. Still scary though.

Then, I came out to my closest family.

I came out to my brother first as we drove up to his place to celebrate my 30th b-day. He was neither surprised or disappointed…I mean gee he already knew about Miss Ohio…his response was just that he loved me and I was/am still his sister.

My parents, I came out to them separately. I told my mom in person over breakfast at a local restaurant…my dad I had to write a letter. I could wear a rainbow flag jumpsuit or knickers and I still don’t think he’d get it. I love my parents. I know they love me. I will just say they were/are conditionally supportive. That is, in words they say nothing’s changed, they
love me the same…BUT their general response is to ignore it.

i know i will be veeeery worried about bringing my first girlfriend home…it could spell disaster in all directions arrrg!

I am a bit late to the coming out process so in some ways I think I’ve had it easier. I’ve been able to take my time and come out to family and friends (people who i know are receptive). There are a few people I have not told: my Fishing Buddy Bill, Grandparents, and some members of my extended family…devote Catholics.

My “strategy” is to tell people when it feels right or like when we’re both ready.

Otherwise it’s just too painful not to feel heard.

I guess my general words of advice are it’s okay to not be out as quickly as you might like. While politically I agree it is necessary to help pave the way for everyone…it’s okay to have some self-compassion and protect your heart.

it's just not worth risking negative reaction w/o support.

okay, and as a good friend of mine would say...and that's that. there you have it.

thank you both for the opportunity to share some of my
thoughts on this important topic.

peace!

amanda

excerpt from "Noxema, Old Sheets, and Me....Underneath it All"

noreply@blogger.com (Siena and Toast) — Tue, 16 Oct 2007 05:47:00 +0000

By: Siena Lee Copyright 2005

The Ritual
Looks like frosting...not buttercream, because buttercream would be off-white and this is white-white, like chalk or liquid paper. I hold the cobalt blue jar up to my nose and take a long, deep breath. The familiar cool of the eucalyptus scent fills my lungs and instantly calms me. I take a comforting scoop with my left hand and with my right, I start my ritual, carefully dabbing and smoothing this salve on my face. Noxema is the frosting of my Soul.

Standing barefoot on the cold, dark 1940’s hardwood floor of the bathroom, I look down and see my five year old little toes:

My color this week is hot pink - Barbie hot pink nail polish! My toes are almost perfect but I smudged my big toe and chipped my middle toe on my right foot. I try real hard to wait till they’re dry. I do! I don’t move at all! I just sit there and blow on my feet and shake out my hands like my Aunty does. My flawed toes are so lucky cause they get to touch the perfect, shiny floor.

I like watching my Grandma look at herself in the bathroom mirror. She’s so pretty! She is really good at putting that white stuff on her face. She doesn’t get it all over and out of the lines like I do when I color. I am not very good at coloring. Sometimes I go a little outside the line and I try to scrape the crayon color off with my nail so no one knows I made a mistake. But my grandma can always tell.

She has a million jars on her table, but she only uses two. One is dark blue glass and the other is white with a green cap. They both have white stuff in them. She uses the one with the green cap first cause she always says, “Never go to sleep without taking off all your make up...it’s bad, you know.”

My grandmother’s voice still rings in my ear...this, her first beauty commandment. It wasn’t until I was 7 years old that I was initiated and given my first blue jar of Noxema. My grandmother was the one who taught me all about beauty - physical beauty. From day one, I learned how to not scuff my patent leather shoes, how to check to make sure the seam in my tights was straight, and how to endure the pain of tight but perfectly secured and braided hair. She was always fixing, straightening, and prettying me up in hopes of hiding the evidence. Although she never once said a word, I believe she knew about the sexual abuse that was going on. Her constant and driving need to fix me gave her away. But it also taught me later in life how to mask the mess I was inside.

May Day
I have a flood of memories of being little, hiding behind my Grandma’s leg and strangers saying, “Oh, what a pretty, pretty girl!...so nice her skin...so white!” I knew what they were saying and I never liked it. It made me want to hide even more. I wanted to go where no one could ever see me. They were lying anyways...just liars!

I was 11 years old when I first felt the rush of being seen and liking it. This was new to me. I was chosen for May Day court and in Hawai’i, that’s a big deal! As part of the court, you get to have your dress made, you get to miss class and learn a beautifully choreographed hula, and you get to wear flowers from head to toe all day long!

We all stood patiently , yet excitedly behind the library door. Standing by our escorts, in a line formed two by two, we waited. Wearing our island colors, we represented the beauty and tradition of our culture. I look down at my dress...perfectly pressed white, all white for Ni’ihau. A sudden flush of fear runs through me as I realize I can’t possibly wear white...of all colors, they asked me to wear white! They must know ! And suddenly, I am soaked in shame...a shame so red, it stains me, my dress...

“Get ready..smile!”, the distinct, cracking of the librarian’s voice snaps me back to innocence and beauty. The double doors open and rows of parents, family, and friends line up on both sides, taking photos, flashes going off, left and right. I am seen. I am safe in my fairy tale. My white rose and baby’s breath haku lei and banner are my shield...I stand behind my armor of white and smile. I am beautiful!

That day, I skip home in my dress carrying a bouquet of flowers and gifts and cards from friends. Nothing can ruin this. Today is MY day! For a moment, I feel invincible. I unlock and open the front door and instantly, the smell of cigarette smoke and the grease of fried bacon rob me of my day. Grandpa is home early. All of me sinks to the floor, the wood floor, searching, searching for a crack in the veneer of the wood to hide in, rest in. I look down at my dress and see dirt and the stains of grass on the edge of my hem. I feel the familiarity of my pretty shell again as my spirit leaves and hides in the pores of the wood.

Old Sheets
Old sheets...there’s something about old things that bring comfort: an old t-shirt, baby blanket, an old teddy bear, . The sheets were old...ready to be thrown in the trash or at least make their way to the Goodwill bag. But it’s difficult knowing what to toss, what to keep, when to throw something out, you never know if you’re going to need it. Frankly, I would have been terrified for anyone else to have the sheets, no matter how much they needed them. The memories the sheets held...the words, the smells, the weight, the heaviness and sounds...the tears.

As I lay there, empty, endless tears stream from the corners of my eyes, like a well-fed river after an unexpected storm, overflowing to the tiny bowl-shaped space in my ear. I keep all my secrets there. But I can feel the warm tears trickle down from my ears when my secret space can hear no more, take no more...and they fall to the sheets, these old loyal sheets that catch them for me...each thread doing their part. I separate myself and hide my Soul in my heart, where I crouch down in the corner and rock myself back to strength. With my shell on automatic and my Soul safely hidden, my heart was kept strong. It has kept me alive.

Hiding Places
There are all kinds of places to hide. So many in one person alone. You don’t have to go anywhere. You can just hide in one of the many rooms of the Self. By the time I was 7, my favorite places were the bowl in my right ear and my heart. My heart space could always hold more, so I usually started in the bowl and ended up in my heart. But there are other places too, like the floor boards...that’s when it’s really bad and I have to leave my poor body way up there. I try to pull everyone down here: my Spirit, my Soul, my Heart. ...hiding in the floor until it’s safe to come out.

Starfish
My parents left before I was a year old, leaving my brother and me to be raised by my grandparents. My Dad would visit often, flying in from Hilo to spend select weekends with us. I close my eyes and I am there.

It’s nap time and I am 3 years old. My Dad is singing me to sleep. With his guitar, he strums and sings a song by Terry Jacks, “.....goodbye michelle... my little one....you gave me love and helped me find the sun....” he sings it slow, low, soft, laid back...I look at him and my little self is a sponge, soaking all of him in-his voice, his scent, his clean, brown skin, the color of freshly baked cookies. I don’t know the words so I try to speak to him with my eyes.

He keeps singing, softly, slowly, “we had joy... we had fun... we had seasons in the sun...”

I look at him and the big black pools of my eyes say, “can you hear me? can you hear me, Daddy? don’t leave this time...take me with you, Daddy....I promise I’ll be good...don't leave me here, Daddy....”

I hear my Dad, “...but the stars we could reach....were just starfish on the beach.....” but he can’t hear me.

That moment gave me the best hiding place to date: music. Music was perfect because I could hear a song and hide in the notes. I could sing a song in my head and hide there... anytime, any place, anywhere. I could rest under the chorus, the verse, or bridge. It would take 20 years from that time with my Dad when I was only 3 years old, to be reunited with my voice...to find parts of myself I secretly tucked away and forgot.

Thursday
Propped up on my bed, I run my hands across the smooth cool of the baby pink sheets. 310 thread count-egyptian cotton-$59.99! How can that be? I hear a swooshing sound and I look over and see my cat playing in the heap of clothes lazily strewn on the floor from the night’s gig...good gig tonight! Good showing! My partner in life and music walks in and sweetly sorts through the mess, isolating the pretty chocolate brown hand beaded halter made especially for me. She carefully lays it over the chair and as she turns and walks away, I say, softly, “thank you, Sweetheart”...and I look in her direction and love her deeply and fully with my eyes. I feel safe. I feel beautiful. I am very aware of my core, my heart beating strong, my body tired from the gig, but my Spirit so alive. I feel her like a breeze, flowing gently through me, swirling freely, in and out of all my hiding places, past and present...along my skin, caressing my heart, gliding up my legs and along my back.

From the bed, I look over at all the guitars in the room. Even when no one is playing them, they speak to me, they resonate and cleanse and wash away all the layers...all the lies, the deceit, the pain, the facades, the shame. They tell me, “I’m sorry...I'm so sorry”. Had it not been for the wood, the strings, the beautiful curves, sounds, and melodies, I would not have discovered what was underneath.......me... me still hiding... me with a voice... me with something to say... something to write... something to sing. They washed everything away.... Well, I suppose everything except for this thin layer of carefully applied Noxema on my face. I stand up and walk to the bathroom to wash it off.

"The Reason"

noreply@blogger.com (Siena and Toast) — Thu, 27 Sep 2007 02:34:00 +0000

One of the great pleasures and privileges of being working performing musical artists is meeting so many different people and hearing their stories. Sometimes a little about their lives, sometimes a lot. It's humbling, the things people will tell you when moved in their hearts by words put to music. We've heard the good, bad, and ugly, and it can bring up the age-old question of "Why?" Why do "bad" things happen to good people?

"Everything happens for a reason." But what is that Reason, and is it a good enough one? What reason can warrant tragedies in the lives of good, upstanding people who literally wouldn't hurt a fly?

One answer could be: at least that person's hardship can offer the hope of empathy for some other future sufferer, who will experience compassion because those who have gone before can more truthfully say, "I know how you feel; I've been there." And that is a valuable thing.

But why is there any suffering at all? If no one suffered in the first place, then no one would need that specific kind of compassion, anyway. If no one ever felt sad, no one needed help, no one felt despair, we humans wouldn't have to experience or do things like offering or receiving comfort, and help, or feeling a renewed sense of hope because of someone else caring.

Maybe that's a clue to The Reason.

". . . Earth's the right place for love:
I don't know where it's likely to go better."
~ from "Birches," a poem by Robert Frost

Courage: San Diego Mayor Jerry Sanders

noreply@blogger.com (Siena and Toast) — Sat, 22 Sep 2007 14:53:00 +0000

San Diego Mayor Jerry Sanders held a press conference Wednesday afternoon (9/19/07) announcing he will sign a resolution, approved this week by the city council, supporting marriage for same-sex couples. Mayor Sanders, a Republican, previously said he supported civil unions only, and not marriage for all couples. "I have decided to lead with my heart, to do what I think is right, and to take a stand on behalf of equality and social justice," Mayor Sanders said. "The right thing for me to do is to sign this resolution."

-- excerpt from an Equality California newsletter dated Thu., 9/20/07.

-- you can read Mayor Sander's statement here.

L.A. County Fair, Day 2

noreply@blogger.com (Siena and Toast) — Sun, 09 Sep 2007 14:11:00 +0000

Opening Day of North America's Largest County Fair

noreply@blogger.com (Siena and Toast) — Sat, 08 Sep 2007 05:17:00 +0000

Great Spirit was smiling down on all of us today who were at the Pomona Fairplex for the first day of the L.A. County Fair. A summer heat wave with temperatures above 110F broke just several days ago, perfect timing to bring perfect county fair weather our way, with highs in the upper 80s, and a pleasant breeze blowing all afternoon.

We had fun playing music of course, but also visiting the petting zoo, and enjoying the sights. Getting ready to do it all over again tomorrow and the next day...see you at the fair!

Double Whammy!

noreply@blogger.com (Siena and Toast) — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 07:35:00 +0000

Benefit events. People coming together for a greater good and being blessed themselves in the process. We had the privilege to contribute to two outstanding benefits this past week.

One for Animal Acres, a farmed animal sanctuary and compassionate living center in Acton (about 45 min. north of LAX).

And another just tonight for TreePeople, a group that inspires the people of Los Angles County to help nature heal their cities, in Beverly Hills. (Yep, 90210 is their actual zip code.)

Both of these events were filled with people who were so gracious, dignified, and fun-loving, all at once. What a blessing to be among them and in Nature. Looking back on the experiences, it felt like the whisper of a more whole, healthy, and balanced future. For ourselves, the environment, American society, and the global community.

As an example of that optimism, here's an excerpt from the Animal Acres Gala program:

"...we are winning the fight for farmed animal protection. The past ten years has ushered in victories I never dreamed possible.
Florida and Arizona voters, by overwhelming majority votes, banned the use of gestation and veal crates. Twenty-five farmed animal shelters have been opened from coast to coast.
Chicago banned the sale of foie gras. Vegetarian food sales have skyrocketed, becoming the fastest growing sector in the food industry. Smithfield, the largest pork producer, announced it is phasing out gestation crates. The United Nations issued a report stating that cattle cause more pollution than cars.
We are up against powerful billion-dollar industries, but the truth is prevailing. I now believe that, in my life time, we will see an end to cruel factory farming, and the beginning of a new ethics for animals once thought of only as "food" - and it is YOU who are making this possible.
Thank you for joining me to bring in the era of compassion for ALL beings."
-- Lorri Bauston, Founder and President, Animal Acres

And just tonight, The Full Moon Hike sponsored by TreePeople was a sell-out, with the vast majority of hikers being first-timers. This organization is growing and reaching more and more people. And we're two of them!

What a blessing to be a part of these worthy causes. Blessings work both ways. Wham, Wham!

How To Enjoy Cleaning

noreply@blogger.com (Siena and Toast) — Tue, 07 Aug 2007 05:43:00 +0000

With August, we entered a phase of writing new material for MAKENA's first album of all-original songs. What does this have to do with cleaning? Read on...

So much of our lives are taken up by cleaning. Shower/bathe, brush teeth, wash car, vacuum, dust, do dishes, clear table, scoop litter boxes, laundry, on and on. We do these sorts of things routinely, day in and day out. It never ends. Why? Well, it's obvious that we simply need to do them in order to keep our lives at least tolerable, and at most enjoyable. A pleasure. There's a great pleasure in walking through a clean home, especially if it's yours and you're relaxing in it. You feel clear, free to blossom, grow your life, nourish yourself and others. If the house still needs cleaning however, you may feel like something's hanging over your head, no matter how well-intentioned or charitable you might be feeling: "I really need to clean the bathroom." It's a little more difficult to relax and let your spirit flow with creativity.

Here's a thought: since so much of our lives are taken up by the task of cleaning, maybe that's an indication of our "job" as humans, in a larger way. Not just keeping things clean and clear physically, but spiritually, as well. Just as maintaining cleanliness of our physical body is a job that never ends, so it is with our spiritual bodies.

Morning meditation, meditative walks in the late afternoon, and contemplative journaling in the evening are a part of our routine, or "sacred schedule." It's private time that is the real work of creating and growing.

Because you can't force a plant to grow, make a child learn, or bludgeon a song into existence. All you can do, and all you need to do, is provide a clean environment with enough healthy nutrients and stimuli. Because growth, learning, and creativity happen naturally through the spirit of Life simply being allowed to be itself.

Clean because you're clearing the way for Life to grow you.

Goodbye to July

noreply@blogger.com (Siena and Toast) — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 17:34:00 +0000

MAKENA was the opening act for the big fireworks show in Redondo Beach this past 4th of July. We played for the small crowd that could fit in the tiny, circular "Top Of Tony's" bar, but thousands came to spend the holiday on and around that area of the Redondo Beach Pier. We finished our last set and began to break down the equipment just before the fireworks started. When they did, everyone in the bar got quiet and faced in one direction, looking out the uninterrupted floor-to-ceiling windows, grateful for the special third-story view. We stopped our work to join some others who had taken a seat on the floor. See, at the end of a long day in the sun, on the waterfront, and by this time - 9:00 p.m. - we'd all just let our hair down and gotten into a casual "hang loose" vibe.

It was a nice long show; lots of opportunities to hear the usual "oohs" and "aahs" and fun exclamations. What was unusual was we had a view of not only the fireworks show, but the pier far below and way in front of us; it extended out high above the ocean, with hundreds of people standing on it shoulder to shoulder. From our vantage point, they were a dark mass lit up in silhouette by moonlight and fire blossoms.

Something about seeing that mass of humanity standing, not talking, just gathered together to look up into the night sky, reminded you that all we really want to feel and see is light in the darkness.

Touchstones on the Journey of Faith

noreply@blogger.com (Siena and Toast) — Sat, 21 Jul 2007 22:47:00 +0000

MAKENA is a journey of faith. It always has been, for each of us, even before we met and formed MAKENA, before we knew our steps of faith would lead us here.

Sometimes this journey is damn scary. Well, exciting and thrilling might be a more positive way to put that.

But we've found that in the damn scary times, when we feel our faith needs a boost, it's helpful to use what we sometimes call touchstones.

A touchstone is an event, series of happenings, or coincidences, or even a moment experienced within yourself. But whether triggered by an outward event or an inward realization, it's a sign trying to tell you: even though things may appear precarious, you're right where you're supposed to be; have faith!

Faith and touchstones have led us through damn scary times more than once, and we know it'll lead us on. Get out your past touchstones, remember the times and moments when you've been reassured by a sign, a coincidence, a saving grace. Have faith!

Life Is About "Getting Ready"

noreply@blogger.com (Siena and Toast) — Sat, 14 Jul 2007 21:57:00 +0000

We recently played a 20 minute set for the 2007 Southern California 'Ukulele Showcase in downtown Los Angeles. Our rehearsal and performance for it was an extreme example of what's usually involved with doing this type of show. But like any other, the experience was also a microcosm of life itself: most of it involves getting ready, and only some of it is actually doing what you got ready for.

You see, this was an 'Ukulele Showcase, and we never use the 'ukulele in our music (although that'll probably be changing, as we're anticipating beginning work on two new albums shortly and are excited about expanding our sound and style.) So basically, we had to go back to the drawing board and practice and arrange things almost from scratch, which involved determining which songs would lend themselves best to the 'uke, getting used to the sound of this different instrument with our voices, and the repetition of attentive practice. There would be times in our set when we'd be switching from 'uke to guitar and back, so we also planned for and rehearsed that switching, too.

All this to say: it was much more than 20 minutes of practice and thought that went into a 20 minute show. But it was totally worth it! The show - even though it was spiked through with technical challenges arising from the sound system - was a blast for us and for the audience as well. All because we had taken the time to get good and ready for it. If we hadn't, those technical obstacles would probably have overtaken us and ruined the evening. But we had developed a foundation strong enough to handle the challenges. We had spent a lot of time "getting ready."

"The joy is in the journey."
"Happiness is not at the end of the road, it's all along the way."

In everyday life, there are all kinds of challenges that come up. Run-ins with difficult personalities, delays, malfunctions, illness, accidents. Big and small challenges we know we'll have to deal with because that's life. We just don't know exactly when, where, or what they'll be.

But if we focus on getting ourselves ready, developing a foundation that's strong and supple: physical, mental/intellectual, emotional, spiritual, in our relationships, in our skill-set -- we'll be able to handle the challenges, maybe even have a blast despite them, and not just while doing things, but in getting ready for doing them, too.

Have fun getting ready and we'll see you on the road of life!

Physical Gig Fitness

noreply@blogger.com (Siena and Toast) — Wed, 11 Jul 2007 17:40:00 +0000

I was motivated to get back in shape after hauling all our gear up 30 stairs numerous times for our gig on July 4th. Of course, some of it was quite heavy. It was a good reminder of what everyone already knows, but only some of us do consistently: exercise. Being physically fit sets you up for more, and easier, and more enjoyable success in everything you do.

Here's the part I love about that: everything. Think about it. Being physically fit involves your body, but also your mind and focus, too. Body chemistry. I'm not talking about being able to run a marathon or bench press a ton of weights. I'm talking about a body that's simply clean, clear, and strong enough to be helpful instead of a hinderance, as much as is possible. If you can help your body help you, do it! You'll be better at everything you do - mental and physical - and you'll get more enjoyment out of life.

And here's what I love about that: the concept it illustrates. There's a samurai maxim, "From one thing, know ten-thousand things."

Every aspect of our lives affects every other. Physical, mental, emotional, spiritual, relationships, career, finances, etc. - we give them distinctively separate names, but they all bleed and blend together because they affect one another in such pervasive ways. We are integrated beings and I love that by helping ourselves in one area, we automatically help ourselves in all the others. We can build inertia and momentum in our lives for positive change by beginning in just one area, knowing and noting how it helps in other areas. It all works together. And I love that.

Unfortunately, because I hadn't been exercising like I know I should've been, at first I was really complaining about those flights of stairs, but by the time I hauled the last heavy speaker up the last step, I was really thankful for the health I already did have to get the job done, and more importantly, the reminder about the power I have to help my body help myself!

Eat, exercise, and sleep healthy!

- Toast

Samurai Sexy!

noreply@blogger.com (Siena and Toast) — Sat, 07 Jul 2007 16:53:00 +0000

We've experience some harsh treatment lately. It led to thinking about "The Dark Side," and, as Yoda warned, how easy, powerful, and seductive it is. Because it's a natural feeling, the urge to strike back, throw down, and "show" the other person or party.

It sounds so corny, coming from the Star Wars films, of course, but also perhaps because it is just so true. There really is a feeling of power that exists when in a state of anger and wrath. I think a lot of the time, it's the reason people go to that state and start to make a scene, make a show of bravado and outspokenness. It makes the person feel powerful. There really is a natural tendency to stay in that state, too. It takes effort and vision to consciously and deliberately choose something else. The higher way.

The higher way: being aware and in control of one's self, which is genuine power, instead of lazily allowing one's self to be ruled by and steered by animal, or subconscious instinct.

Unfortunately, choosing to walk the higher way doesn't feel very powerful, if done in a half-hearted way. It feels wimpy and weak if acted on with only partial commitment. Gross. So not edgy, definitely not sexy. That is, unless you are totally committed to it in an extreme way.

Enter Samurai, Bushido (Japanese word translated as "Warrior Way/Path"), Jedi Knights, and Codes of Honor.

I think the great attraction of these "warrior societies" and "honor codes" is that is they are extreme enough to make integrity and the higher way feel sexy and edgy and powerful. Hey, Tom Cruise looked pretty good in it :)

- Toast