(no subject)

cyranocyrano's started a Fantasy Congress League and I've just joined up, you should too! From his journal:

I have created a Fantasy Congress Team and think that you should join me in the "Power Corruption and Lies" League. I already have somebody I don't know in the group, and I think there should be more '80s song references. (My team is Stand Down Margaret.) I've decided arbitrarily that my team should be equally composed of Republicrats and Democricans, and I ignored the independent.

My team's "Stand and Deliver", which is really making me want to stack it with every corrupt, money grubbing corporate whore I can think of. If I do Ted Stevens is totally sitting in the daddy chair. Or perhaps I'll just go with a bunch of devil may care mavericks who wouldn't hesitate to stick it to the man. Of course I have no idea who they would be at this point...

Anyway the website's interface is sucky at best and infuriating at worst so be warned. Still, it sounds like too much fun to pass up.

(no subject)

It would be great if I could look at the NJ ruling in favor of gay marriage without a certain degree of cynicism. However, knowing that the wingnuts are going to whip their cult into a froth with the fear of a gay nation is just crazy making. I mean what's so outlandish about this:

The State does not argue that limiting marriage to the union of a man and a woman is needed to encourage procreation or to create the optimal living environment for children. Other than sustaining the traditional definition of marriage, which is not implicated in this discussion, the State has not articulated any legitimate public need for depriving committed same-sex couples of the host of benefits and privileges that are afforded to married heterosexual couples. There is, on the one hand, no rational basis for giving gays and lesbians full civil rights as individuals while, on the other hand, giving them an incomplete set of rights when they enter into committed same-sex relationships. To the extent that families are strengthened by encouraging monogamous relationships, whether heterosexual or homosexual, the Court cannot discern a public need that would justify the legal disabilities that now afflict same-sex domestic partnerships.

How do you rationally argue against that?

That's that.

Well, first part of Chapter one of the bloody epic is finally posted, if you're interested you can catch it here:

Scale of Dragon, Tooth of Wolf

Go me!

Many thanks to lupin_fanatic/moonlightnrain for keeping me going and tirelessly editing the monster. Also to elo_sf, my greatest ever research assistant ;) And of course aelfsciene, tersa and rexluscus for letting me bounce ideas off of them and supporting my wild rationalizations....