Thursday, August 28, 2008

I want my baby-back baby-back baby-back ribs.

We had the sonogram today. I was expecting it to be an emotional time, but was unprepared for the ways in which it was emotional. There was the first rush of joy and love when the baby first appeared on the screen, and then I would get all choked up at odd moments. It went like this:

Tech: here's the baby's hand, and you can see there's all five fingers...
Me: Huh. That's really cool.
Tech: And here is the spine and the ribs...
Me: My baby has ribs! (sniffle sniffle).

For some reason, just seeing the intricate, delicate bones that make up the spine and the ribs really brought it home -- this complex, impossible organism is really and truly developing right now, and it's a combination of me and the woman I love, and it has RIBS!

It also has my chin, which is sad for the little guy/girl. Though my sisters look pretty good with the chin, so if it's a girl we're okay, and a boy can always grow a beard.

You can see the pictures here:
http://flickr.com/photos/skullhead/2805727313/in/set-72157606319204394/

Wednesday, August 27, 2008

Colander sweet colander.

So we had a wonderful rain storm last night, complete with peals of thunder and flashes of lightning. It was absolutely beautiful. Me, Jess, and almost-baby snuggled in bed, safe and warm under the covers, and listened to the rain tap on our roof. Since my dad and I repaired the roof, we could actually enjoy the rain instead of fearing it!

Then when we woke up, we went to check out the nursery (the room directly under the roof repair). The good news is that it's not leaking where we fixed it.

The bad news is it's still leaking on the same wall, it just moved over a little bit. So now we're looking at maybe replacing the whole roof.

You know, when we bought this house we thought it had a newly repaired, non-leaking roof, a dry basement, and adequate drainage systems. Since then, we've shelled out nearly $7,000 to make the house live up to what we were sold, and we're nowhere near done.

I'm trying to keep positive about this, but I honestly don't know where the money will come from to fix this. I don't really want to outfit our baby with fins and a SCUBA suit so it can sleep in the nursery.

Tuesday, August 26, 2008

Diary:This is for reals.

I have now felt the baby kicking in Jess's belly. Since it's still a little early, I could barely feel it: it was like a gentle tap on my fingertip, almost imperceptible, my kid telling me "I'm still putting myself together."

We've been lying in bed with the baby monitor, just listening for kicks and the occasional snippet of heartbeat. I can't believe that this is happening to me -- it seems so improbable that I get to be a father. I'm slowly realizing that my father probably felt like this, too -- like a kid in a costume, pretending he knew what he was doing, faking it until it became real.

This is going to be fun.

Wednesday, August 13, 2008

Rant: Gay marriage.

I figure I'll just use this blog for reviews, rants, and diary, and just label each entry thus. That way hypothetical readers will know what to skip.

Gay marriage. The only reason we keep having to debate it in this country is that the morally bankrupt Republican leadership -- those guys who will sell out our children's education, our environment, and our health to the highest bidder -- have established themselves as the moral compass of the nation, because they hates them some gays and some abortion. The great lie, which has worked very well for them, is that they represent the interests of the middle and lower classes because of this religious platform. Anybody who is paying attention can see that the Republican leaders couldn't care less about the poor or the middle class -- just look how we've fared with eight years of Dubya.

Nevertheless, the Repubs have gotten a lot of mileage out of the idea that opposing gay marriage, and legislating against it, is something our government should be doing. And in typical fashion, the Democrats have fought the debate on the Republicans' terms. No one has the stones to say what should be said, which is this:

The government has no business legislating what gender of people can enter into this government-recognized union. None. There is no other contract that the government ratifies in which you're allowed to exclude people by gender. The movement in this country has ever been toward equality and more rights for more people, not selectivity and fewer rights for fewer people. It's madness. It's not even Sparta.

The confusion comes from the fact that the word "marriage" means two things: a union that is blessed by a religion, and a union that is recognized by the government. Thus some religious types think that if the government recognizes same-sex unions, that means somehow their religious covenant is tainted, because their God isn't down with gay folk. The obvious solution, then, is to separate the two: say, "look, any two people can have their marriage ratified by the government. If you want your marriage blessed by a deity, that's none of the government's business. That's the way it should be.

Of course, those who oppose gay marriage don't see it that way. The subtext of every argument against gay marriage is basically, "my God says you can't do this, make it illegal." But that doesn't work with how our government is supposed to operate, so they have to make other arguments, which are pretty easily debunked, should any politician have the huevos to actually address them. Breaks down like this:

Argument: Marriage is for procreation, therefore gay marriage violates the spirit of it.

Rebuttal: The government recognizes unions of people who either won't or can't have children: infertile couples, elderly couples, couples who just don't want kids. Moreover, plenty of people have children outside of wedlock. If you can have marriage without children and children without marriage, where is this inherent link between procreation and marriage?

Argument: Marriage creates the ideal, stable family unit: man, woman, and children. (This is the Catholic church's stance, and I saw it parroted by someone who is usually smarter than this. Kids, never let your church do your thinking for you)

Rebuttal: Half of these 'stable, ideal family units' end up in divorce. Not to mention the obvious fact that many family units are neither ideal or stable -- for every wonderful perfect nuclear family, there are dozens of abusive relationships, loveless marriages, etc. Two men, or two women, are equally as likely to be in a stable, loving relationship as are a man and a woman. As far as raising children goes -- well, it's a peripheral issue, but studies have repeatedly shown that children with gay parents end up just fine -- no more prone to neuroses than the rest of us, and no more likely to be gay themselves (almost as if you can't nurture someone to be gay or straight, like it's hardwired biologically).

And my favorite argument:
Marriage is a sanctified tradition -- its sanctity isn't tied to a specific religion, but to its status as an institution.

Rebuttal: Newt Gingrich, who spearheaded the Defense of Marriage act, is on his third marriage. Bill Clinton, who signed it into law, was notoriously unfaithful to his wife. Britney Spears was married for 24 hours. Yet no one (sadly) is arguing that politicians and pop stars shouldn't be able to get married. No one's arguing that anyone who gets divorced shouldn't get married again. No, we're only denying marriage to, say, lesbian couples who have been together for twenty years. The very fact that I could have met someone in a bar and married them the next day says a lot about the supposed sanctity of marriage.

So let's be real: the only reason people want to outlaw gay marriage is that they think their God isn't down with it. We don't make laws based on dieties' preferences, or the first Mormon president could outlaw Coca-Cola. It's not the way our country works.

So if you're an anti-gay marriage type, and you're still reading for some reason, just think about it: if you cast your vote for a politician just because they match your 'family values,' you're only fooling yourself. Jesus said to clothe the naked, feed the hungry, and care for the sick. Do you see Mr. Bush and his cronies engaging in any of those things?

Confusion!

Almost a month without a post -- my, my, my. I know exactly why, too: I can't decide whether this should be a blog to review movies and music and whatnot, or a blog about my personal life, or a ranting blog about random issues. Maybe it can be all of those things, since I'm not exactly trying to appeal to a specific audience.

So on a personal note: Jess is still progressing nicely with the pregnancy, and the nausea seems to be done for the most part. Pregnancy looks like extremely hard work, what with the fatigue, the body changes, the mood swings -- I think any guy who complains about his part of it (fetching random food cravings, doing housework) deserves to be kicked sqwah in the nuts.

My parents were here for about four days this past week, and it was a wonderful time. It's the first time I've been able to entertain my parents in my own house and feel like it was properly put together -- the first time they were here, we didn't even have the furniture in.

I felt like it put us on equal footing, somehow. Well, except that my dad knows way more about home care than I do, and I was perfectly happy to let him show me how to do some of this stuff. Looks like we might have actually fixed the leaky roof (knock wood). With that and the drain tile in the basement, there's a possibility our homestead is water-tight for the first time. Yay! And boo to the previous owner, for making us believe it was always thus.

To my fellow straight men out there who are scared by the prospect of marriage or baby-having, know this: the feeling you get of love and security when you're spooning with that girl you love? It doubles when you get married. And it explodes exponentially when that belly your arm is wrapped around has a baby inside of it. Give it a shot. Dumber people than you have made it work :-).