gripes.

i can't say i'm feeling too rosy about the upcoming election either. however, pestering your friends who don't understand or care about the repercussions of electing bush (although it bothers me that law students can be so naive) is pointless. it only divides and makes social outings miserable. i learned that as a first year, when peaceful lunchtime discussions would escalate to screaming matches. after being appointed the president of the queer student organization on campus, i've learned a lot more is at stake than i thought. (i had to get a little more educated in order not to look like a completely ignorant hack, which was pretty much what i was when i went in.) a lot of amazing LGBT faculty members came forward and offered their support, advice, and knowledge.

- the current incarnation of the republican party is not just after marriage rights for gays and lesbians - they want to prevent any legal recognition of same sex relationships whatsoever (look this up on andrew sullivan's blog - i'm too lazy to search for the relevant posts). i know i'll get skewered for saying this, but andrew sullivan is one of my favorite bloggers, an independent thinker, and an expert on same sex legal relationships. i plan to ask him to speak at school in the spring.

- three supreme court justice spots are most likely up for grabs, including the ever so level-headed sandra day o'connor and the liberal-leaning john paul stevens. anyone who says that the president does not affect domestic policy is on crack. with a republican senate, who knows what will happen. i can't say that i am personally invested in the abortion debate specifically, but it is something i feel i must stand by, as roe v. wade isn't just about "the right to abortion" - it is about the scope of privacy rights, something that the current administration has little regard for in general. and who knows what will happen to lawrence v. texas, another "sphere of privacy" case. those damned social conservatives want to paint it as a "right to homosexual sodomy" case, when it really is a "don't bother me when i am at home and having consensual relations" case.

- our new director of public service law has been embroiled in a battle over domestic partnership benefits in new york city since her partner fell ill and finally passed away. they were not eligible to get domestic partner benefits and had to pay $700 a month for cobra. this is just disgusting. hearing about it on the news is one thing, but when it's up close and personal, it really just hits you in a different way. to make a long story short, our mayor is now suing, because the city council overrode his veto on a new bill that says that new york city can only do business with contractors who give domestic partnership benefits. i can't stand people who want to sit around barfing up legal arguments on why this is allowable. i don't care. this is an attack on families, which is just wrong. really, don't even try it. at some point, legal arguments must end, and common sense must start. compassionate conservatism my ass. anyhow, you start a "discussion" with me on this topic, and i will be tempted to send your name to various people in the administration, which, by the way, is queer friendly to say the very least. i am *that* pissed off. i won't do it, but it's been crossing my mind.

a fellow student, someone who had recently come out confided in me that she felt betrayed by her friends. you wouldn't know that she was queer. in fact, she blends in quite well with the over-privileged, feminine socialite, westchester/long island scene that often dominates our school. she told me that she was hurt that these people couldn't understand why she felt so scared about the election and who brushed off her fear as an "overreaction." "do these people care about me?" she asked. and i replied, "yes, but they don't understand, so stop trying. it will only make you angrier." more than just a few of the queers on campus have come up to me telling me that they will actually cry if bush is elected. i wonder if the rest of the fucking school knows about this.

every time i hear: "but the FMA will never pass!" or "you're just blowing things out of proportion!" or "why are you so angry?" i feel like i'm talking to a flaming idiot. what may happen is important, but it is the simple fact that sexual orientation has been demonized and used as a political tool by the republicans... it's just fucking wrong! so what if kerry mentioned that cheney has a lesbian daughter! she's running her father's election for crying out loud! she's a public figure! and all kerry did was mention her name. he's not harrassing her like the "dear mary" folks. when republican alan keyes called mary cheney a "selfish hedonist" the cheneys were silent. YES, HE WENT ON THE AIR AND CALLED MARY CHENEY - PERSONALLY - A SELFISH HEDONIST. now lynne cheney is getting her panties in a bunch because kerry mentioned something we already knew! does ANYONE see that lynne cheney has made a tactical move to make the democrats look bad rather than just "speaking as a mother"? are you all SO STUPID?! hello! can i have what you guys are smoking?

sometimes, i don't like being in positions of responsibility, because i actually have to take responsibility and do so without losing my temper or laying into someone. i have to listen and not go on a rampage. i'm getting very close to losing it. i now know why people in the innocence project are so passionate about their work (it's people's lives!) and why the holocaust restitution clinic is such depressing work. "holocaust restitution" is a fucking oxymoron in and of itself. most people don't know about these things, but those who do... well, they have to just truck on and not get pulled down by the sheer difficulty and emotional nature of the work. and the fact that most people just simply do not care.

and this is why i don't talk politics at school anymore.