Mar 15
Ionian commented on SL Letter of the Day: One Word.
@54 Being kind to people isn't simply about fitting in.
Social graces that allow one to get through the day without either lying or being brutally honest are nothing new. They don't come naturally, but are pretty simple to learn.
For example, you can almost always get away with simply not answering a question. That's because a question like "What do you think of my engagement ring?!" isn't actually a request for opinion, it's an invitation to share excitement. Providing a literal, negative opinion is just pointlessly cruel. But there's no need to say you love it if you don't, just deflect: "So many different types of gems!" or simply "You must have been so excited when he gave it to you!"
Social graces that allow one to get through the day without either lying or being brutally honest are nothing new. They don't come naturally, but are pretty simple to learn.
For example, you can almost always get away with simply not answering a question. That's because a question like "What do you think of my engagement ring?!" isn't actually a request for opinion, it's an invitation to share excitement. Providing a literal, negative opinion is just pointlessly cruel. But there's no need to say you love it if you don't, just deflect: "So many different types of gems!" or simply "You must have been so excited when he gave it to you!"
Mar 14
Ionian commented on SL Letter of the Day: One Word.
Of course 100% honesty is unattainable, but obviously 0% is unacceptable. Where you draw the line in between is up to you.
I completely understand cutting things off with someone who chose to start things of with such an obvious, petty lie. I agree with @43: where do these people think this will end up? Either they are just looking for something short term, or anticipate that one of the first few dates will involve revealing a lie that will call into question everything they have presented about themselves so far. Not a great start for those of us who are primarily concerned at that stage with building trust.
On the other hand, it is most definitely a forgivable transgression, if you have the sense that you can trust him overall and the potential for a relationship seems worth it.
I completely understand cutting things off with someone who chose to start things of with such an obvious, petty lie. I agree with @43: where do these people think this will end up? Either they are just looking for something short term, or anticipate that one of the first few dates will involve revealing a lie that will call into question everything they have presented about themselves so far. Not a great start for those of us who are primarily concerned at that stage with building trust.
On the other hand, it is most definitely a forgivable transgression, if you have the sense that you can trust him overall and the potential for a relationship seems worth it.
Apr 29, 2012
Ionian commented on On "Bullshit" and "Pansy-Assed".
@44 "Baptists don't apologize to Catholics, Christians don't apologize to Muslims, and Buddhist don't apologize to the Hindu, so why should you apologize to assholes?"
Because they are kids and he is an adult. Calling bullshit on the hateful parts of the bible is something that needs to be done more, and criticizing religious beliefs that are hateful, harmful, or demonstrably wrong is not bullying. But the apology for the "pansy-ass" comment was well done.
Because they are kids and he is an adult. Calling bullshit on the hateful parts of the bible is something that needs to be done more, and criticizing religious beliefs that are hateful, harmful, or demonstrably wrong is not bullying. But the apology for the "pansy-ass" comment was well done.
Jan 14, 2012
Ionian commented on Canada: Terry Is My Husband Again... Or Will Be Soon.
@24 I think it is entirely appropriate to roundly condemn the choice of the government to argue in court that these 5000 marriages should be considered void. It is important of course to note that this was almost certainly a low-level decision, but there is also a lot to criticize in the PM and Justice Minister's initial responses - I can't imagine them being so dismissive for any other group of people whose marriages are called into question.
They absolutely get credit for ultimately coming to the right decision - to drop the argument and instead propose legislation that would assure the validity of these marriages. But if the public response to the initial story and their initial reactions had been entirely apathetic, they would have been much less motivated to do come to the right course of action.
They absolutely get credit for ultimately coming to the right decision - to drop the argument and instead propose legislation that would assure the validity of these marriages. But if the public response to the initial story and their initial reactions had been entirely apathetic, they would have been much less motivated to do come to the right course of action.
Jan 13, 2012
Ionian commented on Canadian Justice Minister: All Same-Sex Marriages "Legal and Valid".
@28 Of course the Justice Department develops government policy and drafts legislation. It's one of their primary functions; have a look at their website. And of course they consider the policy implications of what they argue in court. They act as the Government's law firm to represent the Government's interests. They are not at all impartial; you may be confusing them with the independent judiciary.
I would agree that there wasn't a policy consideration undertaken in this case, which was a failure of how it was handled.
What should have happened is the lawyer in question would have recognized the fantastically bad publicity and iniquitous outcome that would result from a strict application of the common law dual domicile rule. The Minister or Deputy Minister (or possibly even the Prime Minister) would have been briefed, and realized that the best way to remedy that would be through legislation clarifying the validity of the marriages.
In the end, all of that did actually happen. It just happened after the issue was unwisely brought to court.
I would agree that there wasn't a policy consideration undertaken in this case, which was a failure of how it was handled.
What should have happened is the lawyer in question would have recognized the fantastically bad publicity and iniquitous outcome that would result from a strict application of the common law dual domicile rule. The Minister or Deputy Minister (or possibly even the Prime Minister) would have been briefed, and realized that the best way to remedy that would be through legislation clarifying the validity of the marriages.
In the end, all of that did actually happen. It just happened after the issue was unwisely brought to court.
Jan 13, 2012
Ionian commented on Canadian Justice Minister: All Same-Sex Marriages "Legal and Valid".
@14 They do get credit for the fix, which is needed to bring clarity to the law and assurance that these marriages are legally valid.
But they also can be rightly condemned for first arguing in court that those 5000 marriages were void (though that appears to have been a very low-level decision, since neither the Justice Minister nor the PM appeared to have been properly briefed on the issue.) The proper response on recognizing this problem would have been to announce the fix, rather than throwing all of these marriages into a day of doubt.
They can also be fairly criticized (as Dan did excellently yesterday) for a rather cavalier response when this first came up, focusing on "not reopening the issue" without affirming the validity of these messages or saying anything that would have conveyed an ounce of concern for the persons affected.
But they also can be rightly condemned for first arguing in court that those 5000 marriages were void (though that appears to have been a very low-level decision, since neither the Justice Minister nor the PM appeared to have been properly briefed on the issue.) The proper response on recognizing this problem would have been to announce the fix, rather than throwing all of these marriages into a day of doubt.
They can also be fairly criticized (as Dan did excellently yesterday) for a rather cavalier response when this first came up, focusing on "not reopening the issue" without affirming the validity of these messages or saying anything that would have conveyed an ounce of concern for the persons affected.
Jan 13, 2012
Ionian commented on Canada's Conservative Government Turns My Husband Back Into My Boyfriend.
@174: The courts are independent of government, but the Attorney General certainly is not; he reports to the Prime Minister, and government lawyers absolutely do take into account government policy when making arguments in court. The Justice department is essentially the Government's law firm.
That's not to say that I think that this was a conscious policy decision at high levels - the PM and Justice Minister clearly had the responses of someone who had not been briefed. But to fail to recognize it as a significant policy decision at low levels is quite extraordinarily poor judgement.
That's not to say that I think that this was a conscious policy decision at high levels - the PM and Justice Minister clearly had the responses of someone who had not been briefed. But to fail to recognize it as a significant policy decision at low levels is quite extraordinarily poor judgement.
Jan 12, 2012
Ionian commented on Canada's Conservative Government Turns My Husband Back Into My Boyfriend.
@153 "Responsible" does not in any way describe the Government's course of action here. I agree with your analysis that private international common law principles are problematic when applied to Canadian same-sex marriages where one or both parties wasn't resident in Canada prior to the marriage. (That will almost certainly include the marriages of some same-sex couples resident in Canada after the marriage.)
Upon a government lawyer figuring that out, they would have several courses of action available. They could conclude that such an inequity would of course be prevented by the application of the Charter, and therefore not bring the argument forward in court. They could prepare draft legislation to provide clarity that the marriages are indeed valid. They could even conclude that the marriages are invalid, and try and break the news in a controlled manner that attempts to convey some minimal level of respect for the parties involved.
But it takes a bloody cold, heartless bastard to simply assert the invalidity of 5000 marriages in court without any conception of the ramifications or regard for those affected. Both political astuteness and human decency would have ruled out the path that the government chose.
More...
Upon a government lawyer figuring that out, they would have several courses of action available. They could conclude that such an inequity would of course be prevented by the application of the Charter, and therefore not bring the argument forward in court. They could prepare draft legislation to provide clarity that the marriages are indeed valid. They could even conclude that the marriages are invalid, and try and break the news in a controlled manner that attempts to convey some minimal level of respect for the parties involved.
But it takes a bloody cold, heartless bastard to simply assert the invalidity of 5000 marriages in court without any conception of the ramifications or regard for those affected. Both political astuteness and human decency would have ruled out the path that the government chose.
Mar 16, 2011
Ionian joined My Stranger Face
The Stranger
RSSSeattle Art & Performance Quarterly
A complete guide to Seattle's current art, film, dance, and theater season.
Facebook
Twitter
When I was in my mid-20s, I had a 2 year long period of underemployment and general lack of ambition, beginning with a broken foot. I didn't need to be indulged or coddled during that time, and no one else had the responsibility or ability to break me out of my rut. TSTQ isn't helping her husband by enabling a toxic environment.