Dustin/Arcadian

So, you'd think that, having gone to RPI for 4 years, I'd know the best pizza in the area, right? Sadly, no... my favorite thus far has been NY Pizza in Menands, over by where I work. In other words, about a 15 minute drive from home. :(

On a whim, though, allardk and I tried Pizza DaVinci last night. New place, been open maybe a year. Turns out, they're really good - and, being on Hoosick street, not too far away. Good selection, crisp thin crust, good prices... now just to try their wings. Looks like we've got a source of gaming food after all.

Dear Honorable Senators,

I understand that you feel that you need to protect marriage. I understand that you believe that marriage is defined by the Bible, that the definition you use is shared by a sizable portion of the country (if not the majority), and that your definition is bound tightly to religion.

This, however, is exactly why people believe in the separation of church and state. Because, quite frankly, the law should never be used to enshrine religious definitions of legal contracts.

I understand that some people believe gay marriage to be an abomination before the eyes of the Lord, and that, therefore, the law should prevent it. However, according to the Bible, it's *also* an abomination before the eyes of the Lord to eat shellfish, or to wear clothing of mixed cloth. Tellingly, there's no laws against those activities.

I can understand if you believe that marriage is something far more important than, say, Kosher practices, and I'd certainly be willing to go along with that (no offense to my Jewish friends, mind you.) But if you want to state that marriage should be defined by the Abrahamic religions' views, stop and consider what that means. If we assume that the Abrahamic religions have a monopoly on the definition of marriage, then all other marriages are invalid. Not only the ones performed by a Justice of the Peace, but also every marriage for folks of other religions - every Hindu, Buddhist, etc. Just... gone, no longer counting, because they do not involve an agreement with or a commitment before the Abrahamic God.

Now, obviously, that is not happening. People are allowed to have non-Abrahamic weddings. People are allowed to have a Justice of the Peace marry them, or religious functionaries of other religions. Which means that, according to the law, the Abrahamic definition is *not* the sole definition of the legal contract we call marriage.

So, if we are able to reach that point, and make that decision - which I doubt many people, if any, would attempt to argue - why, then, does the situation change when gay marriage come up? The state can show no compelling reason as to why a particular religious belief needs to be enshrined in law in regards to a specific form of marriage. In the eyes of the state, it's a legal contract, plain and simple. Two consenting adults, acting under no duress, should be able to enter into a binding legal contract should they so desire. I am unaware of any other form of legal contract where the genders of the people involved is the deciding factor as to whether or not that it is legal. So, why then, does the state act differently in the case of marriage?

In regards to the concept of a "civil union" - all marriages are civil unions. If you want to go down that road and claim that a solemnized homosexual relationship can only be termed a civil union, then, frankly, all solemnized relationships should be termed as such. Remove the special title of marriage, and treat everyone the same. Which is, I believe, exactly what the Constitution calls for.

Thank you for reading this, and I expect to see you correct this issue when you reconvene in January.

( You are about to view content that may not be appropriate for minors. )

We find the people of our dreams
We find that they're not what they seem
I've learned that people come and go
I've learned that families break and grow

The paperwork from the lawyer showed up yesterday. Close to two years after I moved out, I'm finally divorced. It hasn't been particularly easy. Things have happened that, frankly, I never expected - and I'm sure I'm not the only one who feels that way.

I know that some people think less of me over what happened with my ex. Can't say as I blame you, all told - things were a bit messy, and a bit abrupt, and probably could've been handled better, by all involved. That said, I reiterate my stance that there were a lot of things that most folks didn't see, and those things heavily factored into the equation.

I've been told that there's a lot of things that have been said about what happened - things I supposedly did, things she supposedly did, etc. Some of it is total BS. Some of it is plausible, but nothing I've been able to confirm. So, my advice to anyone interested in what went on? If it seems like it might be out of character, or somewhat hard to believe, you should probably question it. It might not be true - or, it might be true, but there might be a very good reason for it. So, if something seems fishy - or if you're just curious about something - just ask. Really. I'd rather field questions and clear the air than have people be confused, or upset over things that aren't accurate. I just haven't publicly said a lot because I don't want to make people feel weird by airing dirty laundry.

As I've said before, I don't want to make people feel like they have to choose - I don't want to put people into that situation, nor do I want to "steal friends away" from my ex. If someone feels that they have to choose, or just feels upset about what happened, that's okay. I apologize, since it was never my intent to hurt or insult anyone (my ex included), but if that's how it is, well, then, that's how it is. They're your feelings, and folks gotta do what they feel they gotta to do. If anyone wants to talk about it, as I said above, I'm more than willing to do so.

However, I do want to make a request, and I apologize in advance if this seems a bit harsh. If you've got a problem with me over what happened - then that beef is with me. If you're upset at allardk over what you perceive was her role in this, then that's between you and her. If you're angry with the both of us over how things turned out, then keep it between you and us.

But under no circumstances should any of that be held against my daughter.

Let me reiterate. If you've got a problem with her parents, that's all well and good - but don't hold that against her.

(Comments locked for this post. Open comments will be allowed on my next one.)

allardk and I picked up Rock Band 2, thanks to the evilness of several Bostonians who shall remain unnamed for their safety. ;) But we're faced with a tough choice. We need a band name.

We're currently using "The Supernatural Not Included", a random name generated by the game - but we can't use it online, because someone else already is using it (go figure.) I tried to trot out the one that I'd been holding on to ("Kara Thrace and Her Special Destiny"), but, wouldn't ya know it, it's 3 letters too long. ::sighs::

So, we're on the hunt for a good name. :D In between unlocking new songs, and trying on new outfits. I now see how rockers can blow through so much money, when even the kilts run $4,000. ::laughs::

Edgar Allan Poe finally gets a real funeral.

Seems last week was a fluke. Ah well.

The score was 7-3, which is respectable, at least, unlike last season. Too bad they only took 15 shots at me, which is a horrible ratio. I normally average about a 66% save rate, so I was rather unhappy with myself.

Though, to be honest, I'm not sure we had a lot of chance against them. This place does five levels of skill, from expert (level 1), to beginner (level 5). (Levels 4 and 5 are beginner, with level 4 being a sort of "advanced beginner" rank.)

Now, at any game that requires someone to rate themselves, you're going to find players who rate themselves lower, so they've got an easier game - the sort of "big fish in a little pond" mentality. I'm playing at level 5. Technically, I'm not a beginner, per se - I've got about 8 years of soccer under my belt, counting AYSO, high school, and college intramural (with mngstar and chazari). But I've never been terribly good at it. It's also been 12 years since I graduated from college, so to say that I'm rusty is an understatement - and since I've only worked desk jobs since then, I'm a tad on the out-of-shape side too. In my prime, I might've been a level 4, but for now, level 5 is where I'm at. Especially with a sore ankle.

The other goalie from last night? Probably could comfortably be in level 4. He made some saves that were really great. But, okay, no biggie, you can argue for someone who's borderline level 4 to be in a level 5 league.

But the one girl who scored most of the goals against me? She pulled a bicycle kick in the last few minutes of the game. (FTR, she missed, but not by a whole lot.) IMO, nobody who even contemplates actually doing one of those during a game - much less pulls it off successfully and almost scores without injuring themselves - qualifies as a beginner.

Stickup in Troy

Now, a mugging in the city of Troy isn't really, in and of itself, too surprising. I mean, it's a city, and even when I was back in college, I knew it had problems. There were sections I avoided.

But this particular area? It's between a Washington Park and Sage College, it's a nicer section of town, a mix of college kids and expensive brownstones.

This particular spot? Visible from our front door. That particular time? About 5 minutes after allardk and I left to have dinner with taihlo and abookchick.

Color me unhappy.

Had one heck of a soccer game tonight. Not sure what was different tonight, but we were *all* in the zone. We start out with an early lead, they get tied up, and by halftime, I've had an amazing two shots on me. Two. In 25 minutes. My defence was *on fire*!

Second half was even better. We've got only 2 subs, the other team is rotating their entire lineup, but we're okay. We're golden. They're shooting on me, a lot more than before, but as the team name is "Not In My House," I got to say "NO!" multiple times. 9 more shots on goal, all denied. Dive, roll, scoop, block - it was like I was channelling the spirits of goalies past. I've got a great case of grass burn on my knees, and it feels awesome. In the end, we only tied, but, honestly, it totally felt like a victory. Not bad, having a great game after 12 years of not playing.

Here's to hoping that it's not just the equinox. :)

Or, well, Warcraft, to be exact. Sam Raimi has been tapped to direct a movie based on Warcraft.

Now, if all is right in the world (for certain values of "right"), it's going to include all the regulars - so I want to see Kevin Sorbo and Bruce Campbell in gleaming plate mail, Lucy Lawless in foot-long purple elf ears, and if we can't use CGI to turn Ted Raimi into a troll or goblin, then I'm gonna pout. :D

Though, there's a delay - seems he wants to do Spider-Man 4 first. Can we get that one called "Spider-Man 4: The Apology" after the last one?

So, allardk has a weird cat. Why, you ask? Well, for one, Oscar doesn't really like seafood. Shrimp, salmon... eh. Whatever. He'll eat seafood-based cat food, but the real stuff? He'll turn his nose up at them.

Bread, though? He's all over that. Little shit took a bite out of *every* scone on the plate when I made a batch at Kel's place. ::grumbles, mutters:: And gods forbid you've got the cheddar-jalapeno bread, he'll just about claw his way up your arm to have a bite. (Bread *and* spicy?!?)

So, I wasn't entirely surprised when, the other night, he started nosing around Kel when she started to snack on something. Not bread, not meat, not dairy... but fruit. The cat positively swoons... over dried currants. ::blink, blink::

Like I said. Weird cat.

Go here to vote.

As of this posting, "Serenity" has 85% of the vote.

So, I'm reading a new webcomic by Sarah Ellerton called Phoenix Requiem. I've read some of her other stuff, and I really like her artwork and writing, so I'm digging through the backstory.

There's a certain familiar element to it - Mysterious Man shows up in town, takes a fancy to Local Girl. Local Guy (who, of course, likes Local Girl, but hasn't had any luck with her) gets jealous.

Which got me thinking about jealousy. It's sort of a primal emotion - strikes a lot of people, in many cases without them even being fully aware of it. It can creep up on you, sour you before you realize quite what's bothering you.

M-W defines it pretty basically - being jealous is being "hostile toward a rival or one believed to enjoy an advantage." The thing is, jealousy is rarely a "clean" thing - it splashes, sloshes around, hits other targets. Typically, not just the rival, but the shared object of interest.

You don't see it in Sarah's story, but I'm sure we've seen it in real life. If it were Real Life, Local Guy would be cranky - not just at Mysterious Man, but also Local Girl, and probably even a little pissy when Random Friend drops by to chat and ask how life is.

Which, in a way, is rather counterproductive, in my eyes. I mean, sure, you're not expecting Local Guy to just ignore Mysterious Man, nor really be best buds with him or anything. But being a cranky prat to everyone else certainly isn't going to help his case any. Not only is it going to bug Random Friend, but it's also not going to endear him to Local Girl - in fact, it's more likely to make her want to spend *less* time with him, which means that, effectively, Local Guy's jealousy is pushing away the very person he wants to draw near.

Jealousy can have its place - you get riled up when you feel a threat to something you care about, and don't want to lose. If nothing else, it lets you know that something's important. But, let's face it, most of the time? The way we express it only ends up shooting ourselves in the foot, because it exacerbates the problem. (Or, creates a problem, since, if Local Girl doesn't really care at all about Mysterious Man, but Local Guy acts like a jerk, Local Girl isn't going to be too happy, now is she?)

FTR: I've actually been Local Guy, been the one who acted cranky - and learned, first-hand, what the results of that are. And that world's full of a whole lot of strife because of jealousy. We need to find different ways to deal with it, different ways of expressing "fear of loss" or desire without it being destructive.

Basically, I'm wondering what people's ideas are on failure thresholds. How many times, in essence, does an attempt need to fail for something to be decided to be a lost cause?

How many times should you try to paint a picture, before you're allowed to say that painting just isn't your forte?

How many times should you try to make a souffle using grandma's recipe before you can admit that you just don't have the knack?

How many times should you ask a company for clarification about something on their website before you can just write it off and believe they just aren't going to answer?

Does time span change the numbers, any? Is three times in as many weeks any different than three years, every January?

Does a difference in tactics alter anything? If you email the company, then write a letter, then leave a voice mail, is that any different than three emails?

What, exactly, are people's rough ideas for when you can declare something a lost cause?

Majel Barrett Roddenberry, 1932-2008

I have found a new decadence. It's a place called The Melting Pot. allardk and I went there over the weekend, and I can't say enough good things about it.

Their whole shtick is they're a fondue place. We decided to go all out, just to see what it was like, and it was totally worth it. First, they start you off with the cheese appetizer. Pick a cheese type (we did their southwestern one), and they'll show up a few minutes later with the stuff to make it right there at your table, on the little hot-pad in the middle. Beer base, grated cheese, salsa, jalepenos.... You get breads, chips, veggies, and apples to dip in. It was amazing.

Next, your salad selection. They've got this amazing garlic-wine seasoning powder that you can sprinkle on it - we both cleaned our plates.

Next, they swap out the fondue pot for a new one, this time filled with a bullion (of your choice, they've got a selection), and a plate of uncooked food (meats & veggies). Skewer what you want, drop it in the bullion, and cook away. When it's ready (a minute or two later), pull it out, use one of the selection of sauces they offer (the cocktail sauce is *amazing*), and nosh away.

When you're done with that, out comes the chocolate fondue, with fruits, rice crispie treat, marshmallows....

'twas a might expensive, and probably more calories than I really needed... but *SO* good.

Good news and bad news. The good? I placed 3 orders last night that should get me about 95% restocked for soapmaking (and other stuff too, got bath gel base, etc.) I still need to get a few more things (mostly herbs and essential oils - I really need to make a shopping list for that.)

The bad? It left me with a very bruised wallet. The amount of stuff I ordered will last me a long time (probably several years' worth of churning out stuff), but the up-front costs were a bit higher than I'd have liked. (Didn't help that I'm branching out to experiment with a few other things that were fairly expensive.)

Still, dealing with rough calculations, I can make the break-even point fairly easily. Fairly cheap for the soap, and all the other stuff heads straight to profit. (Of course, that'd be assuming that I actually, you know, *charge* for this stuff, instead of giving it all away as gifts.) I need to do some research so that it's a competitive price, but, so far, so good.

The reviews of the new Guns n Roses album might not be all that hot, but, thanks to the band, the Dr Pepper is on the house.

Get your free coupon on Sunday.

It seems like I've got some new reading material at my apartment. I got home yesterday to find both the October and November issues of Field & Stream tucked into my mailbox.

That'd be awesome, except... I never ordered Field & Stream. In fact, I don't think I've ordered a magazine subscription in over a decade. And yet, here are two magazines, addressed to me, making me wonder how, exactly, I wound up in this situation.

There's an article on yahoo that basically says that the Catholic bishops are getting ready to duke it out with Obama regarding abortion.

( Read more... )