The Season 8 @ Home Biggest Loser

You are looking good today!

Saw this today after having breakfast with Tanya and Dara this morning and it made me laugh. :D

Gay Marriage Legalized In California

By LISA LEFF, Associated Press Writer

SAN FRANCISCO - California's Supreme Court declared that gay couples in the nation's most populous state can marry — a monumental but perhaps short-lived victory for the gay rights movement Thursday that was greeted with tears, hugs, kisses and at least one instant proposal of matrimony.

             

Same-sex couples could tie the knot in as little as a month. But the window could close soon after — religious and social conservatives are pressing to put a constitutional amendment on the ballot in November that would undo the Supreme Court ruling and ban gay marriage.

"Essentially, this boils down to love. We love each other. We now have equal rights under the law," declared a jubilant Robin Tyler, a plaintiff in the case along with her partner. She added: "We're going to get married. No Tupperware, please."

A crowd of people raised their fists in triumph inside City Hall, and people wrapped themselves in the rainbow-colored gay-pride flag outside the courthouse. In the Castro, long the center of the gay community in San Francisco, Tim Oviatt wept as he watched the news on TV.

"I've been waiting for this all my life. This is a life-affirming moment," he said.

By the afternoon, gay and lesbian couples had already started lining up at San Francisco City Hall to make appointments to get marriage licenses. In West Hollywood, supporters planned to serve "wedding cake" at an evening celebration.

James Dobson — chairman of the conservative Christian group Focus on the Family, which has spent thousands of dollars to get the measure on the ballot — called the ruling an outrage.

"It will be up to the people of California to preserve traditional marriage by passing a constitutional amendment. ... Only then can they protect themselves from this latest example of judicial tyranny," he said in an e-mailed statement.

In its 4-3 ruling, the Republican-dominated high court struck down state laws against same-sex marriage and said domestic partnerships that provide many of the rights and benefits of matrimony are not enough.

"In contrast to earlier times, our state now recognizes that an individual's capacity to establish a loving and long-term committed relationship with another person and responsibly to care for and raise children does not depend upon the individual's sexual orientation," Chief Justice Ronald George wrote for the majority in ringing language that delighted gay rights activists.

Massachusetts in 2004 became the first, and so far only, state to legalize gay marriage; more than 9,500 couples have taken advantage of the law. But the California ruling is considered monumental by virtue of the state's size — 38 million out of a U.S. population of 302 million — and its historical role as the vanguard of many social and cultural changes that have swept the country since World War II.

California has an estimated 108,734 same-sex households, according to 2006 census figures.

"It's about human dignity. It's about human rights. It's about time in California," San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom, pumping his fist in the air, told a roaring crowd at City Hall. "As California goes, so goes the rest of the nation. It's inevitable. This door's wide open now. It's going to happen, whether you like it or not."

Unlike Massachusetts, California has no residency requirement for obtaining a marriage license, meaning gays nationwide are likely to flock to the state to be wed, said Jennifer Pizer, an attorney who worked on the case.

The ultimate reach of the ruling could be limited, however, since most states do not recognize same-sex marriages performed elsewhere. Nor does the federal government.

The conservative Alliance Defense Fund said it would ask the justices for a stay of the decision until after the fall election in hopes of adding California to the list of 26 states that have approved constitutional amendments banning same-sex marriage.

"We're obviously very disappointed in the decision. The remedy is a constitutional amendment. The constitution defines marriage as a union between one man and one woman," said Glen Lavy, senior counsel for the organization.

Opponents of gay marriage could also ask the high court to reconsider. If the court rejects such a request, same-sex couples could start getting married in 30 days, the time it typically takes for the justices' opinions to become final.

Attorney General Jerry Brown, whose office had argued to uphold the ban, said Brown will work with Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and state agencies to implement the ruling.

The case was set in motion in 2004 when the mayor of San Francisco — the unofficial capital of gay America — threw City Hall open to gay couples to get married in a calculated challenge to California law. Four thousand wed before the Supreme Court put a halt to the practice after a month.

Two dozen gay couples then sued, along with the city and gay rights organizations.

Thursday's ruling could alter the dynamics of the presidential race, as well as state and congressional contests in California and beyond, by causing a backlash among conservatives and drawing them to the polls in large numbers.

A spokesman for Republican John McCain, who opposes gay marriage, said the Arizona senator "doesn't believe judges should be making these decisions." The campaigns of Democrats Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton said they believe that the issue of marriage should be left to the states.

Ten states now offer some form of legal recognition to same-sex couples — in most cases, domestic partnerships or civil unions. In the past few years, the courts in New York, New Jersey and Washington state have refused to allow gay marriage.

Outside the San Francisco courthouse, gay marriage supporters cried and cheered as news of the decision spread. Jeanie Rizzo, one of the plaintiffs, called Pali Cooper, her partner of 19 years, via cell phone and asked, "Pali, will you marry me?"

California already offers same-sex couples who register as domestic partners many of the legal rights and responsibilities afforded to married couples, including the right to divorce and to sue for child support.

Citing a 1948 California Supreme Court decision that overturned a ban on interracial marriages, the justices struck down the state's 1977 one-man, one-woman marriage law, as well as a similar, voter-approved law that passed with 61 percent in 2000.

The chief justice was joined by Justices Joyce Kennard and Kathryn Werdegar, all three of whom were appointed by Republican governors, and Justice Carlos Moreno, the only member of the court appointed by a Democrat.

In a dissent, Justice Marvin Baxter agreed with many arguments of the majority but said that the court overstepped its authority and that changes to marriage laws should be decided by the voters. Justices Ming Chin and Carol Corrigan also dissented.

California's secretary of state is expected to rule by the end of June whether the sponsors gathered enough signatures to put the amendment on the ballot.

Schwarzenegger, a Republican who has twice vetoed legislation that would have granted marriage to same-sex couples, said in a statement that he respected the court's decision and "will not support an amendment to the constitution that would overturn this state Supreme Court ruling."

___

Associated Press writers Terence Chea, Jason Dearen, Juliana Barbassa and Evelyn Nieves in San Francisco and Liz Sidoti in Washington contributed to this report.

Project or Person?

Hey there friends, family, and random strangers who read my blog whom I'd love to hear from occasionally, but it's okay, I understand that you're introverted and prefer to stay in the shadows of the internet; I have an announcement to make.

Thus far, my blog has had an overall "weight loss" theme to it.  When I started this space, I thought it would be a way for me to hold myself accountable on my journey to a healthier lifestyle.  However, in the past nine months, while it has served its purpose in that capacity, it has also done something I hadn't expected--it has started to define me, and I don't think I really want it to.

You see, I'm actually more than just my physical body.  It's not just about my exterior, yet somehow, I've allowed this to become a place to focus only on that, with small moments of other minor interesting details.  I take complete ownership of what it has become for me.  Perhaps you all don't feel this way, and that's fair.  But for me, I've just started to have this overwhelming sense that I've become more of a project than a person. 

This doesn't mean that I'm not going to continue working on a better way of living for myself, it just means that it's not what I want the focus of my life to be.  I'll still keep you guys posted on periodic progress and the occasional fabulous low-cal find, but I've taken down my weight chart, and I'm not going to blog daily about what food challenges I'm facing (though that really has slowed down a lot in the past few months).  Anyway, this declaration is probably more for my own therapy than anyone else's, but I've shared so much of myself with everyone in the past, I thought it only fair to share with you what I see for my future.  I'm not trying to be dramatic, I'm just trying to be the complete me.

Thanks guys!  I really love and appreciate you and all the support you've given me and that which is yet to come.  You're all awesome!

Happy Belated Anniversary!!!

"What America needs now, is a drink."  --Franklin Roosevelt (1933)
On Saturday mornings at 10am, I listen to a quiz show on NPR called "Wait Wait...Don't Tell Me," where they quiz different people on current events of the week.  One of the segments on the show is called, "Not My Job," where they have celebrities call in and answer questions on whatever the subject of the day is.  They recorded this on April 7th this past week, which incidentally was the 75th anniversary of the repeal of prohibition in the US.  They had Kim Cattrall on the show and they asked her about prohibition.  I'm embedding a link and, unless you want to hear her interview first, (which maybe you do) skip ahead to around 6:30.

The facts are really interesting, and the first one, I've even heard used today.  Basically that prohibitionists had a hard time refuting the fact that Jesus drank wine, so argued that it wasn't wine by our standards; really what he drank was more like what we would call grape juice.  I have a hard time believing that.  If Jesus was just drinking grape juice, wouldn't "When the master of the feast tasted the water now become wine..." (John 2:9) instead read, "When the master of the feast tasted the water now become juice.."  Was there no such word as "juice" in those days?  I don't know, I seems fishy, but maybe it's just me.  Any thoughts?  Listen to the audio clip.  ;)

I Smell Like "Classy Lady"

Yesterday I went shopping with my friend Kim.  I hate the mall, but I needed to get some new MAC eye shadow and some Lancome tinted lotion.  We were in Macy's and my friend kept saying, "What is that perfume?"  She was smelling something and really wanted to buy it, but we couldn't figure out what bottle it was coming from.  I unassumingly picked up a bottle with some stripes on it and smelled it.  "Mmm.  That smells good!"  I made her smell it.  "That's it!" she cried, "that's what I've been smelling!"  Turns out it was Burberry Brit, which I'd never heard of, but then again, I don't really keep up with too many perfumes.  We decided to each buy a giant bottle on the spot--$80, but well worth it.  It'll last a while plus, it makes me feel sophisticated, even when I'm chilling in my sweats on a Friday morning, having a "Grey's Anatomy" marathon and eating peanut butter and bananas.  I love my days off...

Do You Really Want to Help Me or Are You Just a Big Jerk?

I love Old Navy.  That is truly my favorite place to shop because it's the only place that sells a wide range of clothing sizes (you know what I'm sayin'?).  It's not a specialty place that my friends can't shop at (ie Torrid or eek, Lane Bryant--sorry you Lane Bryant shoppers).  I've never felt out of place there because I know they sell that double XL.  But then I went in yesterday and suddenly all that changed.

Maybe it's just me feeling particularly insecure with my outside appearance again (I caved and weighed myself the other day at Tanya's, but I'm not ready to talk about it.  I've been feeling really bloated and fat lately anyhow, but seeing the number just confirmed the damage).  Anyway, it seemed to me that I was getting the patronizing, "Are you finding everything okay?" question yesterday during my little outing.  I couldn't believe it!  I hate that s***t.  It's a horrible feeling.  Does anyone know what I'm talking about?  Let me explain. 

Whenever a "big" person enters a store that doesn't typically sell clothes in their size, one of two things happens; 1) they are either ignored completely, or 2) the sales person will say, "Hi" as they enter, then after they've had time to browse a minute or two, that same sales person, who is usually wearing one of the outfits hanging on the front window mannequin, finds their way over to them and with a very "I feel so sorry for you" look on their face asks, "Are you finding everything okay?"  I've been thinking about  it a bit, and I'm not sure which is worse, to be completely ignored knowing they likely won't be making a commission off me or feeling sorry for me because they think I can't find anything in the store. 

I think what was so hurtful about yesterday's experience was that I wasn't expecting it.  If I go into Express, or Limited, or some other store that I know doesn't have anything for me except maybe necklaces, then I can deal with it.  I'm prepared.  But, this was Old Navy!  My Double XL haven, and the sales people (both a guy and a girl) shot me this real worried look and said those awful words.  What really sucked was that they didn't have many Double XL items at that location and I really didn't find much "ok."  I wound up with a XXL tank and some rubber flip flops.   (I was shopping with Tasha and Jamie at Corona Crossings, and I normally go Moreno Valley).  Anyway, I hope this doesn't sound too bitter.  It was just slightly depressing.  *sigh*

This is Awesome!

Democratic Primary Results '08

Super Tuesday brought victory for Hillary Clinton here in California.  Whaa!

Vote Tomorrow! Yes We Can!!

I know, normally the whole celebrity endorsement kinda bugs me too, but I thought this one was so well done I just had to share. Sí, se puede.

I also really liked his South Carolina speech. This man is different than the rest...

CALIFORNIA: VOTE TOMORROW FEBRUARY 5TH!

The Last Day of This...brrr

I'm outta here in just about 7 hours!  No more bundling up when I walk Lily.  This wind chill factor is too much!  Hawaii here I come!