July 30

I haz…

New windows!!

This is such a huge deal to me. See we bought this house almost three years ago now. We had been trying to buy my sister-in-law’s house, which was newer. We lived there for two years, paying their mortgage and keeping up the house under an informal “rent-to-own” contract. Three years ago in July we were set to close, and the day before the closing they pulled out of the agreement to pay the down payment for us. Suddenly forced to come up with $3500 and fast we panicked, searched all over, had an appointment to meet with a place that gives lower income people down payment assistance. A few days before the appointment the very nice loan underwriter called us.

“I have to tell you something,” she said. “You need to know it, but I’m not supposed to tell you.”

“Okay.” I was scared at this point, who wouldn’t be when facing all the stress of a mortgage?

“The current owners of your residence owe significantly more on it than they are trying to sell it for and to buy it you have to take on the full debt, or they have to pay it down to the price they want to sell you the house for before the mortgage goes through.”

“How much more?”

“There’s more.”

I don’t remember being able to speak at that point. The house was obviously being yanked out from beneath us since the asking price was pretty much at the limit of what we knew we could afford (despite what other people said we could afford).

“The house is also currently in foreclosure.”

So for two years we paid on a house, kept it up, for close relatives, and to this day we 1) cannot say how much of the money we gave them actually got paid on the mortgage (my aunt who has managed rentals now and then in Vegas said that it took 5 to six months at least for them to just start the paperwork on a foreclosure, and my father was foreclosed on and it took them three years from when he defaulted to when he was evicted. 2) The relatives badmouth us behind our backs and blame us for them losing their house.

After what was quite possibly the most harrowing time in our lives (two kids, a dog, no car, and relatives who had just dicked us over threatening us because they still were trying to get us to buy the house and we couldn’t) we found a four bedroom two bath with a big yard right across from the school. By the skin of our teeth we bought it and moved in… and were promptly broke. We’d spent so much time and money on the other house, and on moving that financially and emotionally once it was ours we pretty much collapsed.

This house was built in 1900 and was last renovated in the late 80s some time. It’s not unlivable by far, but it does need work, a lot of little work and a few big things, like getting the roof redone. The walls are permanently dirty, there’s next to no insulation (common in old houses), the linoleum needs replacing and the carpet is stained, among other similar things.

But it was everything we wanted, hell it came with a basketball hoop in the backyard and dog house nicely sized for our dog. It had the garage Jason wanted, the yard space for a garden and the windows that I wanted (as an aside, Jason and I are both prone to bouts of depression which are reduced by our house having good sunlight and us having outdoor activity space). And it has character. I cannot picture myself any other place.

But we also didn’t have money to do anything about the condition of it either. So after almost three years we replaced two windows, which three years ago seemed absolutely impossible. One of the windows is 118 inches wide, so when I say “two windows” the actual space of those two windows is more like five windows.

We’ve reached a point when we want to do something with the house, or we need to fix a leaky faucet (speaking of which, we do) we actually can do it. Maybe not immediately, but paint, floors, faucets, and yes, even windows, are possible. And it feels so good.

July 28

Book Sale!!

Jewish Family & Vocational Services is having a book sale Sunday August 3rd, 2008 from 10 a.m. until 6p.m.

Information of donating books is here. More information about the sale is available here (pdf).

Proceeds benefit the JFVS.

Category: Personal | Comments Off on Book Sale!!
July 22

GUD Issue #3 Preview

GUD issue 3

Once again GUD is hading out free samples from their upcoming Issue #3. My sample story is “Lacerta – Named by Johannes Hevelius” by J.M. McDermott.

I was a little disappointed, because it’s a poem, and I am horribly picky about the poetry I enjoy. However, the poem reminded me strongly of “Saturn in G Minor” by Stephen Kotowych (Writers of the Future volume 23), altogether not a bad thing as the story didn’t strike me as hard as some of the fiction near it, but has stuck with me more than tales from that volume that I liked more.

This short, short poem captures the stars and the song of poetry, and damned if it isn’t a little bit sexy.

Category: Personal | Comments Off on GUD Issue #3 Preview
July 18

Guest Blog: Clamour Underbridge by Rev. Jim Hensley

Jim is a friend of mine who writes a column for The Letter, Louisville’s GLBT newspaper. I really enjoy his essay and asked if I could share. Below is the Clamour Underbridge for July. Past articles can be read at http://clamourunderbridge.typepad.com/clamour_underbridge/

~M

Without Further Ado…

CLAMOUR UNDERBRIDGE

What’s in a Name?

Wedding bells are ringing in California for same-sex and opposite-sex couples.  The clamour is deafening.  You would think it would all be anti-climactic since California already had statewide domestic partnerships.  You would be wrong.  It seems that the little song I learned from Sesame Street is correct.  “One of these things is not like the others.” The Supreme Court of the state of California did not find any logical reason to call “an officially recognized and protected family” one thing for same-sex couples and a different thing for opposite-sex couples.  It’s the name that matters.

The Supreme Court of California failed to address the entrenched and entangled relationship legal marriage has with religion and the churches.  We’ll come back to that.  It’s important.

Let’s hop in the way back machine for a moment and revisit the clamour from another Supreme Court decision.  That one was Loving v. Virginia.  Ring a bell?  It’s from the Supreme Court of the United States and was handed down in 1967.  That decision struck down the Commonwealth of Virginia’s marriage laws that were based on race.  Anti-miscegenation laws were all the rage back in the day.  It was ever so necessary to protect the sanctity of marriage from interracial couples.  Kentucky’s last bite of the miscegenation apple was in 1932 when our legislature, in its wisdom, forbade marriages between whites and “negroes or mulattoes.”  Co-habitation was also illegal.  The punishment was $1000 fine (big money for 1932) and 12 months imprisonment if done “knowingly.”

Here’s what the “activist” court of 1967 said when they overturned the bigoted marriage laws of Virginia, Kentucky and a number of other states:

Marriage is one of the “basic civil rights of man,” fundamental to our very existence and survival… To deny this fundamental freedom on so unsupportable a basis as the racial classifications embodied in these statues, classifications so directly subversive of the principle of equality at the heart of the Fourteenth Amendment, is surely to deprive all the State’s citizens of liberty without due process of law.  The Fourteenth Amendment requires that the freedom of choice to marry not be restricted by invidious racial discrimination.  Under our Constitution, the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual and cannot be infringed by the State.

The outrage was tremendous.  Inter-racial marriage interfered with “God’s arrangement” of the races on separate continents.  God “separated the races” and “did not intend for them to mix.” It was all very predictable and very sad.  The great state of Alabama fought back by waiting until the year 2000 before taking their inter-racial marriage law off the books.

How very much like the denunciations and outrage over the California Supreme Court Decision?  “God made Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve.”  “Gay Marriage… The Final Abomination.” How predictable and very much beside the point.  Marriage is a civil contract enforced by the state and entered into between two parties.  “God” is rarely invoked to co-sign loans, liens and other contracts.  How odd that this one requires the Almighty’s seal of approval.

It’s all in the name.  Marriage is something that happens in church.  California and a few other states (Vermont, Connecticut, New Jersey, New Hampshire, Oregon, Hawaii, the District of Columbia, Maine, and Washington) tried to keep the church crowd happy by separating church marriage from state civil unions or domestic partnerships.  It’s not working.  Civil unions and domestic partnerships don’t convey the rights and responsibilities of marriage and are mostly ignored by Federal agencies, disapproving businesses and other groups that have a heterosexist agenda.  And in the state of California it was very clear to the Supreme Court that a domestic partnership was separate and unequal to marriage.

Let those wedding bells ring.  The clamour is music to my ears.

~~

While he is co-pastor of Progressive Pathways Fellowship in Louisville at www.progressivepathways.org, opinions expressed by Father Jim do not usually represent the official policy of the church.  Email for Father Jim or Clamour Underbridge may be directed to fatherjimppf@gmail.com. Visit http://clamourunderbridge.typepad.com to post your story about the Queandom or leave a comment.

Category: current events, Personal | Comments Off on Guest Blog: Clamour Underbridge by Rev. Jim Hensley