Graduated

I have a $150,000 piece of paper that is so large it will not fit in one of my suitcases and will probably be a carry-on tomorrow instead.

The CS diploma ceremony was the best thing ever. Lightsabers, a robotic bagpiper, and Mark taking my photo when I went up to shake his hand. Also, we all got Rickrolled. Win.

Now we all leave and it’s really, finally over.

It’s still sinking in…

Graduation

It occurs to me as I write this that tomorrow is likely the last time all of us will be together.

A lot has happened in the past four years. It seems like just yesterday that I was a freshman moving into Mudge and being scared at the big, scary school and all the new people and needing to fit in. Tomorrow all of us are going to walk across the stage and get a piece of paper that says, “You paid us lots of money, congrats.” and then we’ll all go off and get jobs or go to grad school or be bums on the street and pretending we’re pregnant to get money.
Even though I technically left all this last semester, it still seems awfully final this time. Before there was always the possibility of me visiting and everything being just like it used to be… midnight walks home from halfprice with friends, randomly going to Tim’s room for games at random times, having people stop by at any old time for any reason, going to events, being in groups where the most random and socially-unacceptable things could spontaneously happen…
College is so much more than an education, and no matter how many times people said that to me before, it never really sank in until now. Yes, I learned a lot about computer science here, but now somehow that seems far less important than the relationships that I’ve forged here. And now those relationships are going to be strained by distance and life pulling us all different directions. It feels like I’m losing the most important thing that has come out of these past four years.

I’m not really sure what I’m saying, so I suppose I’ll just wish everyone a happy graduation (and hope that it doesn’t rain tomorrow during the main ceremony) and hope that we don’t all lose touch with each other.

The right ruling

http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/opinions/documents/S147999.PDF

Under these circumstances, we cannot find that retention of the
traditional definition of marriage constitutes a compelling state interest.
Accordingly, we conclude that to the extent the current California statutory
provisions limit marriage to opposite-sex couples, these statutes are
unconstitutional.

Accordingly, in light of the conclusions we reach concerning the constitutional questions brought to us for resolution, we determine that the
language of section 300 limiting the designation of marriage to a union “between a man and a woman” is unconstitutional and must be stricken from the statute, and that the remaining statutory language must be understood as making the designation of marriage available both to opposite-sex and same-sex couples. In addition, because the limitation of marriage to opposite-sex couples imposed by section 308.5 can have no constitutionally permissible effect in light of the constitutional conclusions set forth in this opinion, that provision cannot stand.

Kudos to the California Supreme Court. Makes me glad to be living in a state with sane judges (and mostly sane politicians).

Can’t wait to hear the “Oh noes they’re destroying our families, or so we claim with absolutely no evidence to back up the crap we spew” responses that are sure to follow.

Allowing gay and lesbian couples to marry “will not deprive opposite-sex couples of any rights and will not alter the legal framework of the institution of marriage,” (Chief Justice Ronald George) said.

In addition, he said, the current state law discriminates against same-sex couples on the basis of their sexual orientation – discrimination that the court, for the first time, put in the same legal category as racial or gender bias.

He also noted that state laws and traditions banned interracial marriage until the California Supreme Court, in 1948, became the first court in the nation to overturn such a law. “Even the most familiar and generally accepted of social policies and traditions often mask an unfairness and inequality that frequently is not recognized or appreciated by those not directly harmed,” the chief justice wrote. “

Here’s hoping that either the case isn’t appealed or, failling that, that the US Supreme court refuses it. That court is filled with too many Bushlings right now, and the wrong ruling would set the US back decades as far as equality goes.
Edit: Never mind: The parties cannot appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, Herrera said, as no federal constitutional questions are at issue.

Edit 2: I’ve now had time to read over the “dissenting” opinions (which are actually “concurring and dissenting” opinions) and I can see many of their points. It seems that the dissenters basically reason that, “Since California already has domestic partnership laws that confer the same rights as marriage, at least at the state level, and voters have passed a law that reserves the term ‘marriage’ for a man and a woman, it is not the court’s place to redefine that term, in particular because there are already ‘separate but equal’ institutions in place.”
I actually mostly agree with that statement. However, I still think this is the right ruling, in no small part because people would have twisted a negative ruling to their own benefit, ignoring the very logic that would have led to that decision in the first place (such as using the ruling to argue against any rights for same-sex couples when that was clearly not the court’s intention). In particular, a negative ruling would have set a dangerous precedent for other states that currently do not give any rights to same-sex couples.

I wish the stupid fundies who’ll raise hell about this would give logical, thought-out arguments similar to these dissenting opinions instead of spewing garbage.

Stupid bigots

Stuff like this makes me so mad:

I also noted: “If marriage and the home deteriorates, the culture and society will be dissolved. From the very beginning, according to nature, history, tradition, and the Word of God, marriage has been between a man and a woman.”
Radically reconstructing the institution of marriage could readily become the defining issue of social justice in the 21st century, especially if such a radical change occurs through the abuse of power by activist judges. Destroying the institution of marriage will affect every person of every race, every family, every local community and state, every school district, legislature, courtroom, classroom and board room in America. Such a watershed issue cannot be diminished in its significance.

(Great response here)

I don’t even know where to start with this.

I have yet to see a single argument against gay marriage that doesn’t amount to “The bible says so.” or “God says it’s wrong.”
Well, I’m sorry, but (ignoring the fact that the quoted verses likely do not deal with homosexuality at all, but rather prostitution and sexual perversion) we are not a Christian nation, and you have no rights to impose your religious beliefs on everyone… especially because marriage (as far as the government is concerned) is a civil right. No one is arguing that every church everywhere should be required to perform all marriages… we do still have freedom of religion in this country (as much as you would hope otherwise, it seems). People are simply arguing that it is wrong to deny civil rights to two people purely based on gender. Done.

As for the exaggerated claims that gay marriage will destroy society, answer me this: How come Massachusetts still exists? How come people there haven’t self-destructed in a fit of family-pet-marrying, sibling-sodomizing sin? Why do families still exist there?
Hell, how come the country to our north hasn’t been torn apart by war and famine and general destruction with AIDS running rampant and “dangerous” homosexuals roaming the streets? (And, if anything, is doing much better than your good old US of A right now?)
No one has presented any evidence that expanding accessibilities to the rights that come with marriage has destroyed (or even hurt) anyone or anything. Stop making exaggerated, fictional claims.

All you bible-waving bigots are nothing but a bunch of dangerous hypocrites. Shame on you.

Moar PSO

Had an amazingly amazing run today.
Did a run of SS, saw Hildeblue x 2 and got Hildeblue Head x 2… but, even more surprising, also receieved Hildebear Head x 2.

Pix or it didn’t happen:



Also, my Fomar can now use his Striker of Chao. That (2x Shifta/Deband range) plus the Shifta Merge (2x Shifta range) plus the Fomar’s built-in bonus (2x Shifta/Deband range) makes Shifta do this:

Amazing :D
And that’s with only Shifta level 14. Can’t wait to see what happens once I get to Shifta 30.

The weapon is also generally cute. It’s an angry chao on a stick! :D

It makes cute chao noises when you attack with it too.

The universe must have a balance or something because this game session came right after I got extremely pissed off (at this, if anyone cares… ugh I hate fundies so much) and needed to vent some aggression against cute little Rag Rappies. It made me feel so much better, in particular because the first red box I ever saw in PSO BB was a Hildebear Head that the Ramar I was playing with took (I was playing with my Fomar back when he was level 25 or so) “for his other character.” I think that event put me off Forces for a while (hence why my Ramar got so far ahead in terms of levels). At least now I have friends I trust to play with (who have all been amazing and helped level my forces).