Sex, Sex, Sex: Got your attention? Well, sex is coming your way on the wings of the November ballot.
Married sex is normally a boring subject, but on November 4 it’s one of the hottest issues, to those who have an intense fear of it.
Love and marriage go together like a horse and carriage, like the song says. But some churches that consider themselves upholders of the moral high ground are heatedly pushing Prop. 8, which would make gay marriage unconstitutional in California.
On the Beat
What next, one Santa Barbara Mormon woman asked me, “Sex with animals?” So goes the level of political discourse in California. Surprisingly, perhaps, in supposedly liberal Santa Barbara, a majority of church congregations support Prop. 8, according to Mark Asman, pastor at Trinity Episcopal, who’s opposed to the measure. As I’ve said, intolerance reaches its height on Sunday mornings. (Maybe they’re just animal rights activists.)
A group of local pastors and rabbis opposed to Prop. 8 plan a press conference today, Thursday, October 16, at noon at Trinity Episcopal.
Some backers of Prop. 8 argue that homosexuality is a chosen “lifestyle,” conveniently ignoring scientific evidence to the contrary. They claim to be “protecting” marriage, but their arguments often reveal basic homophobia and fear. Live and let live is not in their gospel.
Nor in the gospel of some Prop. 8 opponents: The Santa Barbara woman quoted above added, “This is so emotionally charged, especially when every morning we find that our ‘Yes on 8’ signs — not just mine, my neighbors’ and friends’ too — have been stolen in the night again at the hands of those who proclaim to be on the side of tolerance.”
Speaking of intolerance, a gay Catholic priest in Fresno was ousted as pastor and faces possible defrocking for delivering a sermon opposing Prop. 8. The church seems to view homosexuality as something sent from the devil.
Poli-Tricks: Meanwhile, the question is whether Tony Strickland’s big-bucks, big-sleazy media campaign can beat Santa Barbara’s Hannah-Beth Jackson for the open 19th District State Senate seat. Venturan Strickland masquerades as an environmentalist, but it turns out that he voted against a slew of energy conservation bills while in the Assembly. Jackson is pushing environmental issues.
Scofflaws: It’s hard to say which is the biggest group of lawbreakers: the cell-phone-while-driving folks, or the ones blasting the neighbors with gas-powered dirt blowers. The illegal blowers are very good at blowing dirt from one property to the next. On the phone front, a friend noticed a driver apparently holding a conversation with a cell phone in her lap, figuring, I guess, that the cops wouldn’t notice.
On the Market: Chris (Back to the Future) Lloyd has taken his main Montecito manse ($11.3 mil) off the market for remodeling but listed his gated three-fireplace smaller pad for $3.6 mil, according to the L.A. Times.
B&B Buzz: Santa Barbara’s Simpson House Inn has long been lauded as the town’s best B&B — best in the West by most surveys — but now Coastal Living mag has rated Santa Barbara one of its top 10 bed-and-breakfast towns. It also mentions the more affordable West Beach Eagle Inn.
Hire-a-Whistleblower: Most public agencies are loathe to hire a known whistleblower. Who wants to take on a guy who might expose your no-nos? But Santa Barbara County’s Mosquito and Vector Management District has hired Brian Passaro, fired by the Coachella Valley mosquito-fighting district after he publicly told of alleged misconduct by the general manager, who then resigned under pressure. S.B. folks are paying Passaro $82,000 a year to be general manager, recognizing not only his talent but ethics.
Stolen From a Church: Kim Collins is trying to recover his acoustic bass and two amplifier rigs, stolen from the stage at the Free Methodist Church last week. He’s at Wingspan10@aol.com.
Max’s Cabaret: Those fascinated by 1920’s-era nostalgia may want to head for Santa Barbara’s Marjorie Luke Theatre when Berlin’s Max Raabe brings his Palast Orchester there Friday, October 17, at 8 p.m. The program, sponsored by UCSB Arts & Lectures, also includes Cuban rumbas, elegant tangos, and modern pop.
Citizen McCaw: All four Santa Barbara screenings of the Wendy McCaw-News-Press documentary Citizen McCaw last week had good audience turnouts, along with many requests for the DVD, reports co-producer Rod Lathim. You can order the DVDs online at citizenmccaw.com for $25, he said. Coproducer Sam Tyler said some of Wendy’s friends who didn’t want to be seen at the screenings have been begging him for copies of the doc, reports blogger Craig Smith.
Fleeting to Fresno: Will Fleet, fired by News-Press owner Wendy McCaw a few years ago while on his honeymoon, caught on as publisher of the McClatchy chain’s Bradenton, Florida, Herald and now has been named publisher of the Fresno Bee. It’s also a McClatchy paper. Getting bounced by Wendy apparently hasn’t hurt Fleet’s career.
Related Links
Barney Brantingham can be reached at barney@independent.com or 805-965-5205. He writes online columns throughout the week and a print column on Thursdays.
Print friendly
E-mail story
Tip Us Off
iPod friendly
Comments
Bookmark This
Previous Month


Comments
Discussion Guidelines
Regarding "Whistleblower", here is a more detailed news article, one of a series of dozens of that sordid history there, about the new General Manager hired by Mosquito & Vector Management District of Santa Barbara County (a Special District, not a County agency):
http://www.mydesert.com/article/20081011...
David_Pritchett (David Pritchett)
October 16, 2008 at 12:32 a.m. (Suggest removal)
And regarding Proposition 8 on the ballot, the local video documentary and reaction to the State Supreme Court ruling, and subsequent marriage ceremonies in Santa Barbara last spring, is now playing on cable TV, channel 17, including a replay on TV-17 at 1100 Thursday morning (just before the news conference noted by Brantingham)
"Let Santa Barbara Ring, Marriage for All" an episode of Off-Leash Public Affairs.
Video link to view any time, description, and cable TV-17 schedule:
http://www.offleashpublicaffairs.net/200...
Remaining TV-17 replay schedule
10/16/2008 Thu. 11:00 AM
10/22/2008 Wed. 02:30 PM
10/24/2008 Fri. 07:00 PM
10/29/2008 Wed. 12:30 PM
11/02/2008 Sun. 08:00 PM
David_Pritchett (David Pritchett)
October 16, 2008 at 1:18 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Why is Pritchett always given a pass when violating use policy by promoting his website and amateur videos Web admin?
AShaw (anonymous profile)
October 16, 2008 at 9:15 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Thank you for observing that intolerance goes both ways, whether it is intolerance of the imposition of the gay lifestyle on society, or intolerance of religious lifestyle, traditions, morals and beliefs.
AShaw (anonymous profile)
October 16, 2008 at 9:20 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Should be called Proposition H8! Stealing lawn signs is wrong but truly pales in comparison to the discrimination and hate implied in the bogus save the marriage rhetoric of this Proposition. Even if in the bizarre fantasy world of these religious nuts marrige between animals and humans were next, how would that detract from, much less destroy, my marriage? For the record I am opposed to marriage between species but I do not think it warrants a constitutional amendment!
Noletaman (anonymous profile)
October 16, 2008 at 5:15 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Just curious, but what exactly is the 'gay lifestyle' that's being imposed? All the gay couples I know seem to have different lifestyles. If 8 fails, will I get to pick the gay lifestyle I want, or will one be selected for me at random? And if 8 passes, can I force some of my gay friends to live my hetrosexual lifestyle?
Rich (anonymous profile)
October 17, 2008 at 12:38 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I heard the gays caused the stock market to crash and really are the reason the Greenland ice sheets are melting.
Considering all their lies and innuendo, that might as well be in the ads for the vote-yes position.
David_Pritchett (David Pritchett)
October 17, 2008 at 8:21 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Followup question: I keep hearing about how this is a 'slippery slope'. If we let a man marry a man, then next he'll want to marry his brother, or two men, or a dog. Before you know it, we'll have packs of dogs showing up at Churches insisting on their legal right to marry.
That being the case, who is going to protect us from the inter-racial lifestyle? I mean, in the good ol' days, white people married white people, and black people married black people. Hey, don't get me wrong- whatever people do in the privacy of their own home and all that. But think about the children! You just have to read Obama's books to see how difficult it is to grow up bi-racial.
Those poor kids are outsiders everwhere they go! Shouldn't someone do something to protect children from the lifelong pschological scar due to the confusion of having parents of different races???
Rich (anonymous profile)
October 17, 2008 at 8:47 a.m. (Suggest removal)
It would be nice if people wouldn’t cite one example of bad behavior on the part of one member of the targeted group as some kind of supposed evidence of anything. Some gay activists are intolerant, yes. Pointing that out proves nothing.
The debate is not over individual behavior or individual harm, the debate is over the rights of an entire group of individuals. It has been repeated by a number of the usual suspects in this and related threads that "progressives" or gay rights supporters are more intolerant than the anti gay marriage people. What is the evidence of this, please? Are gay rights advocates trying to pass laws limiting Christians (or anyone’s) freedom to marry, to be free from discrimination, to carry on their lives as they see fit? I see no efforts to limit the free exercise of religion, to limit your free speech rights, etc. People should be absolutely free to hold and express bigoted ideas. Just don't try to encode those bigoted views into law.
Supposedly some Christian heterosexual folks feel their families and their children are threatened by gay marriage. How exactly does this threat play out? What exactly are the effects of this threat? All I’ve heard are vague generalities and skewed, factually incorrect citations of a few individual court cases pasted from an anti-gay marriage website. (FYI: don’t believe everything you read on the web; check sources, do a little research.) So, the harm seems to be that a few litigious individuals will bring stupid lawsuits. Yeah, so? That already happens. What is the harm here, really? Some mythical notion of “traditional” marriage is changed…why aren’t these folks making a big deal out of divorce, adultery, single parent households—these also change or affect the notion of marriage. Apparently gay marriage poses an especially dangerous threat. What exactly?
alexquinn (anonymous profile)
October 19, 2008 at 8:55 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Post a comment