My So-Called Wedding
My husband and I were married three years three months and three weeks ago today. For both of us, our wedding day was the most important day of our lives. Not only did it take months of planning and cost a great deal of money but, in many ways, it also took a lot of courage. For, at that time, no state--not even (gasp!) Massachusetts--accorded legal recognition to same-gender marriages. Nevertheless we spoke our marriage vows before family and friends, and with the blessings of our clergy. Never was there a more glorious day, at least for us. As for the legalities, we felt then as we do now--a majority vote of any body politic does not a marriage make.
Not least because today is Valentine's Day, as well as my husband's birthday, it seems appropriate here to state the obvious: I have never loved anyone more, nor could I. We express our love in many ways both great and small, and tell each other "I love you" more times in a day than any couple I have ever heard. Our love is so deep and sustaining that I wish every person in the world could experience something even close. Our wedding was part of this love; its first formal expression, if you will. I don't need to explain its importance to anyone who has been happily married.
If there was any proverbial cloud on our wedding day (and it would have to have been "proverbial", because the sky could scarcely have been more blue) it was the absence of certain close relatives. There were all sorts of reasons given for these absences--it was just weeks after 9/11, the kids have school, or soccer, or some such things. We knew there were also other reasons, but we chose not to let it spoil our day. It should suffice to say that neither my husband nor I had ever experienced a wedding where so many close relatives of the betrothed simply did not show up. That said, it gave us profound joy that so many relatives did join us. Notable among this contingent was my Uncle Norman who, at 86, had cancer and heart problems so advanced that he had to rest for several minutes when climbing the stairs after our rehearsal dinner. When Uncle Norman said he wouldn't have missed our wedding for anything in the world it was more than just small talk; it was quiet, powerful proof that those who really wanted to be there, were. And this is what makes the rest of this story so interesting.
One of my nephews is having his Bar Mitzvah soon. He's been practicing for quite a while (tutored by his paternal grandfather!) and, no doubt, will do a fantastic job. His mother (my sister) and father will also do a great job planning a lovely weekend to celebrate his accomplishment. As it should be; a bar mitzvah is a huge event in the life of a jewish child and it should be celebrated by family and friends.
As luck would have it, one of my neices is having a dance recital soon. She's been practicing for quite a while and, no doubt, will do a fantastic job. Unfortunately her recital occurs the same weekend as her cousin's Bar Mitzvah, and her parents have decided to let her choose which event to attend. She chose her recital over her cousin's Bar Mitzvah. For the record, if I had a child, I don't believe I would have allowed her to make that sort of decision. When families live so far apart, as our does, any happy occasion should be reason enough for every member to do whatever is possible to attend. But also for the record, my neice is not my child, and her parents are good parents who can let their child do whatever they want. As she has.
My "Bar Mitzvah Sister" called me recently to discuss the choice that our "Recital Sister" had made. Bar Mitzvah Sister's opinion was not even slightly in doubt; she was not amused. I responded that I thought it was the wrong decision but that she should just try to get past it. In so doing, I reminded her that several family members did not attend my wedding and, though Bill and I noticed that fact, people did what they felt they must. At this, Bar Mitzvah Sister informed me that I could not equate my "so-called wedding" to her son's Bar Mitzvah. The rest of the conversation was friendly. I remember Bar Mitzvah Sister using the words "insulted" and "disgusted", but frankly, most of what I recall are the words "so-called wedding".
If my family shares one trait in addition to our good looks and incisive intellects, it's the uncanny ability occasionally to say things we might later regret, and it is to this defect that I will attribute her "so-called wedding" comment. I don't intend to spend time or space justifying the validity of my marriage. I'll just take the long view and just get over it. And I recommend this approach for my sister.
The focus of a Bar Mitzvah is the child who becomes an adult by accepting the teachings and responsibilities of Judaism. One of those principles is "Shalom Bayit", which implores Jews to look past certain transgressions for the sake of keeping peace in the home. Surely there is a connection to be made between one's home and one's larger family. Shalom Bayit is a worthy principle, among the very many which my nephew soon will take upon himself. Those who appreciate the solemnity of that occasion will be there. Among those present will be my nephew's two married uncles, Jonathan & Bill. I guess you could say we wouldn't miss it for anything in the world.
Sweet Nothings
If you use Nutrasweet or Equal brand sweetener (chemical name: Aspartame), please read further. My friend, Dave (who's a physician) was quite emphatic recently about the medical dangers of Nutrasweet.
I don't completely understand the science, but many physicians do and they say to avoid it like the plague. There is credible medical evidence, for example, that Gulf War Syndrome (from the FIRST Gulf War) is related to poisoning from Aspartame from Diet Coke that--under desert heat--broke down into it component parts: Methanol, ethanol and formaldehyde! This, apparently, is what happens also when it's added to hot coffee! Last night I drained and threw away a 12-pack of diet coke and some light yogurts, all with Aspartame.
If FDA approval is all the proof of safety you need, remember: first, Vioxx was rushed through the approval process and later pulled. Also the Chairman of GD Searle when Nutrasweet was approved by the FDA was Donald Rumsfeld who was, even then, a powerful Washington insider. No one has ever proven he unduly used this influence to get FDA approval, but claims to this effect have been swirling for years.
I asked my physician friend about Splenda and, while he couldn't cite any science to conclusively verify its safety (there ARE some detractors of that artificial sweetener, too), he said he's never seen convincing evidence of any dangers (as he has re: Aspartame).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspartame
http://www.dorway.com/jwnoasp.html
http://www.greenfacts.org/aspartame/l-2/aspartame-1.htm
Wife Beaters in the Crosshairs
As first reported by a San Diego NBC affiliate, Lt. Gen. (as in "LIEUTENANT GENERAL") James Mattis--a top U. S. Marine commander--was quoted as saying its "fun to shoot people". Well, it's nice to enjoy your work, but this may be going a bit too far.
Lt. Gen. Mattis made his controversial comments at a panel discussion in San Diego, saying, "Actually, it's a lot of fun to fight. You know, it's a hell of a hoot. I like brawling. You go into Afghanistan, you got guys who slap women around for five years because they didn't wear a veil. You know, guys like that ain't got no manhood left anyway. So it's a hell of a lot of fun to shoot them."
Don't he just make 'ya proud?
White Men on Parade
As I write this post, I'm watching the President give his fourth State of the Union address before Congress. Following, in no particular order, are my impressions of this event:
1. Watching Junior at his podium flanked by Fat Cat Cheney and a bulldog-like Hastert, it occures to me that the beltway culture they so loudly decry has, in actuality, been fertile ground for white men, just like them, who comprise the power elite. They just look so entitled sitting up there. Although not all State of the Union messages were delivered personally (Woodrow Wilson was the first modern President to present a verbal address; previous to that, the last verbal address was given by Thomas Jefferson), since the founding of our republic the image has remained the same: a parade of white, christian males as president, flanked by yet other white, christian males as Vice President and Speaker of the House. Hell, it's not MORNING in America; in some ways, it's still 1789! For some history of the State of the Union, check out this link: http://hnn.us/articles/1233.html
2. When will we have a President with the political guts to just submit a written State of the Union, and forego the insipid spectacle that has come to characterize the State of the Union? The President barely utters 50 words before his party stands to applaud loudly. It's childish and it doesn't even make good theatre. Honestly, purple fingers? Emotional hugs to loud and sustained applause? Even to those who claim this stuff is exciting, it has--read closely here--NOTHING TO DO WITH THE STATE OF OUR UNION.
3. Cheney looks bored. And mean.
4. Hastert looks mad.
5. The Republican attempt to dismember Social Security is a vicious smoke-screen. There may be funding problems over the horizon--the President should be well acquainted with these, as he has led this country to budgetary irresponsibility from the day he was appointed by the Supreme Court--but make no mistake, the assault on Social Security is no timid slap at the American worker. It is a full frontal assault that must not succeed. There already exist a host of ways that workers with means can save funds for retirement. There are IRAs, 401(k)s and other deferred arrangements, savings accounts, stock plans and more. But Social Security is the one last hope--last "safety net" if you will--of the American worker. Social Security is not, and should not become, just another program for those who are already able to sock away money. It is a pensioners program for the aged who, without it, would not be able to survive. It is a program for the surviving children of dead parents who, without it, could neither eat nor have shelter. If the program has grown extravagant over the years, then trim it back. But we must retain this compact between the people and their government that no American fall into penury on account of old age or loss of a loved one on whom they once depended.
6. I feel Bill Frist would be about the worst possible person to invite to a party--except, perhaps, the Republican Party.
7. The President's gratuitous attack on the righs of gays and lesbians to marry shows he lacks the reputed compassion of Jesus, whom he claims to much admire. And did I miss something? I heard him talk about the danger of same-gender marriages, but I'm not sure I heard the part about the danger of North Korean nuclear proliferation. Or, come to think of it, the danger of U. S. shipping ports or chemical facilities being vulnerably unprotected. Or about the inexcusable fact of 46 million Americans being uninsured in this richest of all lands. Surely those points must have been in there somewhere; I'll have to check the transcript.
8. Laura Bush always looks very beautiful in "Bush Blue".
9. Was Orin Hatch sleeping at one point during the speech? Or just praying? No matter. Both were inappropriate then and there.
10. Have either lawsuits or jury awards suddenly exploded exponentially? Have doctors suddenly become just that much more careless? Somehow I doubt it. Yet the President again mentioned that high medical malpractice costs are impacting the availability of good healthcare by driving doctors out of certain specialties. I find this to be interesting. If there has been no vast increase either in the number of lawsuits, the amount of jury awards or the overall carelessness of physicians, then to what must we attribute the truly exponential increase in malpractice insurance rates? I suggest it is the result of collusion between insurance companies who seek--in a manner learned well from our President--to preciptate a crisis, and then beat their breasts about its severity. I am here calling for a Congressional inquiry into this matter, and legislation to control the steep increase in medical malpractice insurance rates.