Proposition 8

We, in California, are voting in November on a ballot issue regarding the protection of the definition of marriage, which is defined as between one man and one woman. There are some voters who are afraid to support the Proposition because they fear it will make them feel and/or appear to be prejudiced against gay people. In fact, the opposite is actually the case. Most Californians believe that gays are entitled to live their lives in any way they determine appropriate. After all, it is still a free country and gays have access to pursue their own happiness. They are wished all the success in the world as they do so. Civil unions, equity in probate and hospital visitation privileges, professional and personal opportunies, and every other available freedom are already afforded, providing them an equality of American life. It is not necessary to re-define marriage. The Interfaith Coalition defends the example God established in The Creation (with the first parents, Adam and Eve) as the standard to which society should look. This is the long-standing vision of idealism which has prevailed since the beginning. It is not unreasonable that society should uphold the standard upon which it was founded. Realistically, there may be variations in that society, which is an understandable outcome of differing human characteristics and life experiences. It is completely consistent to support gay people in their efforts to pursue the American dream, while at the same time support Proposition 8 in its attempt to maintain the standard definition of marriage as being between one man and one woman. I am expressing hope that all Californians would remind themselves to extend the same tolerance and acceptance towards us as they expect should be shown to them.

It has been a long, hard, sorrowful day following the train disaster yesterday in Chatsworth, California. As a regular Metrolink rider, the emotional anquish and devastaion hits very close to home. We all know our conductors; we are familiar with our engineers; and we are neighbors with our fellow passengers. The tragedy which occurred Friday afternoon, and which has been attributed to human error, reminds me of the caution that must be used when trying to understand the meaning of such a determination - human error. Faulty signals, engineer fatigue, surrounding conditions (wind, haze, glare, etc.) are all suspect in the overall analysis of possible factors responsible for the worst train catastrophe in Los Angeles history. We may never know the actual cause but it is not unlikely that a personal calamity, such as a heart attack, seizure, choking, stroke, or other untimely infliction could have contributed to the inconceivable mortification and devastating loss experienced in that tortuous moment when two trains collided with unspeakable horror.
There were no surviving witnesses on the either train or in the surrounding vicinity who were able to observed the Metrolink engineer's reactions or behavior in the moments preceding the disaster. While there seems to be no aspersions cast, it is still unfair that there should be any hint of implication without supporting facts to determine otherwise. Tragically, the engineer might have been the victim of his own terrifying medical emergency that unfortunately lent itself to those disasterous consequences of astromomical proportions. My heart is broken and my mind aches for the familes and loved-ones who will continue to suffer indefinitely. I pray for sensitivity and compassion on all the victims of September 12, 2008.