This one, this month, is for my adult friends; my young companions will want to skip these particular musings and return next month.

I rarely intrude myself in the day to day politics of the human world; one, because I am not part of that world, although I hover on the cusp with alarming regularity, and two, because politics in the long run are an incredibly unstable vehicle to hang a society on. Humanity is much more complicated than most pundits and purists would have you believe, and the idea of a born-again, pro-life NRA-member conservative sitting down and enjoying a meal and a laugh with an atheist, pro-choice pacifistic liberal is not as far-etched as the television stations and newspapers (some with a vested interested in keeping the classes divided; controversy sells more newspapers and air-time, after all) would have you believe.

Having immersed myself in a seething mass of humanity for the ten years I had my own theater at Six Flags America Fright Fest, I can state with certainty that individuals who hold diametrically opposing world views can come together and enjoy the company of one another without engaging in the blood sports that seem to pass for current political debate. All it takes is the ability to look beyond our differences at the values that we hold in similarity. This sounds ridiculously simple, but dropping all defenses and simply acknowledging that all can agree to disagree on most viewpoints is not a difficult thing once one puts ego, fear, prejudice and other barriers on the table for later collection. (If one wishes; some find it more than beneficial to leave them behind all together, but that's a discussion for another time...)

Nevertheless, even with an enlightened attitude, one can encounter prejudice in the most genial of circumstances. I have spoken in the past of mothers seeing me approaching and quickly placing their hands over their children's eyes, assuming (without knowing my intentions, or observing their young one's reactions) that I am a frightful presence and will cause anxiety in their offspring. I've pointed this out many times in the past; please forgive me for repeating myself. The fact is that the parents are reacting to their OWN fears, and projecting those fears on their children. (And oftimes it's a self-fulfilling prophesy; if you slap you hand over a young person's eyes, they are immediately going to become agitated: "What's going on? Why can't I see? What's happening...?")

I've spoken in the past on how I approach a timid little soul: entirely on THEIR terms. I keep my distance, offer my hand, speak softly, get down on their eye level, and let THEM make the choice. Oftimes they are won over; sometimes they are not. Too often adults, attempting to intervene in the situation before it is completely played out, will offer useless bits of wisdom designed to help calm the child's fears, but often having the opposite effect: "Oh, he's not real." (Of course he is; he's standing right in front of me.) "Oh, he's just make believe." (Again, what part of 'he's standing right in front of me' are you having trouble understanding?) "Oh, he's just a man in a costume." (Oh, that's SO reassuring; he's not a real ghost, he's only a scary man in a scary costume. Thank you for the morale boost...)

(And although I'm certainly self-aware enough to realize that my...um...rather STRIKING features can be intimidating to small people, I wish to point out that right jolly old elf, Santa Claus, also has this difficulty. As well as clowns, Easter Bunnies, people on stilts, knights in armor, ad infinitum. Anything out of the child's normal frame of reference can be disturbing. That's why grandparents and older people are often met with the same fears...)

The parents try and intervene, but often fail at what they do because they don't understand. They are doing something wrong, but with the absolute best of intentions.

Remember that last phrase; we will return to it.

There are other times I've experienced prejudice first hand at the actions of adults. Most often this occurs during the October Season. While I enjoy the Halloween holiday and all its traditions, certain conservative congregations and denominations across the country (and around the world, for that matter) consider Halloween a 'Satanic' celebration, a 'dark' holiday, and find the traditions controversial and unseemly, if not outright blasphemous. I have explained in the past that those who enjoy the feel of the leaves crunching under the feet, the smell of the crisp cold October air, and the sensation of the mist rolling through the pumpkin patch while creatures dance around bonfires in the night do not embrace darkness - they simply aren't afraid of it. Sadly, in my opinion, some people cannot separate the medium from the message, and cannot allow themselves to enjoy the exhilaration of the Autumn Time.

Some years ago, while I was performing at the Norristown Zoo in PA for their Halloween event, I overheard snatches of a conversation between two employees, both wearing somber expressions. I asked what might be the matter, and one said," We have some protestors outside the gate."

Protestors?

"Yes; a local church. They believe Halloween is evil and shouldn't be celebrated, and are picketing outside the main entrance."

I nodded, "I see.I'll be right back." I started off.

"Where are you going?"

"Why, to talk to them, of course."

And I did. I met a rather large gentleman outside the gate and engaged him in a discussion. He was soft-spoken but firm in his beliefs; polite; an absolute gentleman in all respects. I also remained polite and courteous, as was my want. We drew a bit of a crowd as we discussed our beliefs concerning the holiday. (He did seem surprised that I was able to quote scripture back to him as readily as he was able to quote it to me.) Our conversation lasted several minutes; at the end, we shook hands and went our ways.

Neither had changed the other's mind one bit, I'm certain, but we had remained civil, cordial, and respectful, and I think that went a long way to softening perceptions on BOTH sides o the argument. It was a meeting on whatever common ground we could agree on, and it wasn't remotely unpleasant, which bolstered my opinion expressed at the beginning of this essay.

But...I still believe the people protesting were wrong. I think it well and good to hold your own beliefs, and I will defend your absolute right to express those said beliefs whenever you wish; but to try and impose your beliefs or exert your will onto others is, again in my opinion, a disrespectful waste of time and energy.

And yet again, I believe those people were doing something wrong, but with the absolute best of intentions.

Which brings me to something here in on the Lost Coast (and in all of California ) called Proposition 8.

For those unaware of what has been happening here for some time, last year the California Supreme Court struck down laws that kept gay couples from marrying each other, finding this practice discrimination, and against the Constitutional right of equality for all. Dismayed at this, various groups sponsored an amendment to the state Constitution called Proposition 8, which would forbid gay marriages. The Proposition passed narrowly last November, and after a hearing before the California Supreme Court once again recently, was allowed to stand. (Take note: the court was not asked to decide the correctness of the amendment, but whther it followed the established procedures and could be enacted. It was, in my opinion, a very narrow ruling.)

Obviously, to myself and others who believe in equality and freedom for everyone, this was very disappointing. There was much heat generated, with misleading advertisements, news bulletins, debates, vandalism, and general animosity and rancor on both sides. It was the most expensive election campaign in California history, with much of the money coming from outside the state. I find it shameful, but like much else with this debate, that is simply a matter of individual opinion.

What is offered as fact?

Those who support the right of gay marriage do so under the simple doctrine that freedom means freedom for all, not just some. Unless it is intended to incite violence or mayhem (such as shouting "FIRE!" in a crowded theater), everyone has the right to express their beliefs - which is why the KKK and American Nazi Party are allowed to hold parades and march just as often as the World War II Veterans and the Daughters of the American Revolution. No one has the right to SUPRESS such speech; you DO have the right to ignore it, disagree with it, and offer YOUR opinion on it - just as long as you don't censor the other's right to OFFER it.

Rights for one are rights for all.

Those who oppose gay marriage, in my opinion, have no logical reason to offer in their defense, save for religious and personal anecdotal offerings. But no two religions agree on everything (otherwise there wouldn't be so many denominations in the world) so who to we use as an arbitrator. Regardless, in the United States we are offered the choice of freedom FROM religion as much as freedom OF religion.

I have seen printed tracts (usually from the abominable Jack Chick Publications) that opine that Catholics are in league with the powers of Hell, attempting to control the world, and the Pope himself is a satanic emissary. What if in some Fundamental section of the country; say in the southern Bible Belt where Baptists and other Fundamentalist denominations hold sway; they decided to vote on whether or not Catholics could marry, using their religious beliefs as political arguments.

Ridiculous, you say? But that is what happened here.

There are also those who offer the fact that the gay lifestyle is perverted, or an abomination, or unnatural. But once we get past the squeamish squishiness of what they might do in the bedroom together, what can these offer in respect to an "unnatural lifestyle". That it's against nature? Humans have been flaunting their dependence on nature since glasses, dentures, heart valves, stainless steel kneecaps, hearing aids, toupees, razors (for shaving beards) and artificial limbs were created. We create vaccines so that children do not die of childhood diseases; surely this is "against nature". Should we allow them to die to preserve natural order?

It is because they cannot bear children without artificial aid? What do we say to straight couples, infertile women and men, who face the same situation? That THEY cannot marry?

There are those that argue that "Civil Unions" are as good as marriages, and gay couples should be happy to accept those and leave marriage to "tradition". But Separate But Equal has not been the rule since Ruby Bridges walked into William Franz Public School on November 14, 1960. It simply cannot happen in a country dedicated to freedom for all.

One wonders what all the fuss is about. Why should someone else's lifestyle impact on another's? Are we not a nation of proud individuals, declining to be in lock-step with anyone else? Other than some vague wording about how this will have an affect on society (something the critics never entirely spell out), what is the objection? Morality? But morality is incredibly ill-defined in the best of circumstances, often not being black or white, and humanity's ethics have a way of shifting when the situation turns the spotlight on their own behavior. (And if you don't believe that, witness an example of a firm defender of law and order be pulled over for speeding and bullied by an overzealous police officer, or watch the stern anti-drinking-and-driving advocate try to slide behind the wheel of their vehicle after a bit too much celebration…people are far more tolerant of their OWN hypocrisies than they are of their neighbors…)

Even the religious argument holds little water when examining closely the scriptural lessons taught by the gospels. Christ held those that passed harsh and unmerciful judgments on others in the highest contempt (his language pillorying the Pharisees is often hair-raising) and quite often put forward the idea that the SUPREME judge, God himself, would be the one to make the final decision, and all trust in that decision should be put into his infallible hands. Until that time, love your neighbor as you would yourself, judge not that ye yourselves will not be judged, never set yourself against a man who wrongs you, and other radical bits of philosophy…

My friend Ms. Tina is an incurable optimist, and I bless her for it; the world is short too many of these. She believes that ANY day can be a good day, and happiness is a choice you make each morning. She believes that fully. But it is also understood that the universe can be coldly impartial to happiness and compassion, and that anyone who finds however small a piece of happiness in the vastness of this temporal plane should clasp it too them dearly always, and anyone who would try to LIMIT this precious supply should find themselves ashamed.

I have no doubt that the people opposing gay marriage, and in favor of Proposition 8, believe themselves to be good, upstanding, deeply passionate and honorable people, and I will not take them to task or quarrel. But in this instance they are off the mark as far as they can possibly be.

They are doing something wrong, but with the absolute best of intentions.

But the best of intentions pave a road to a dark, searing and desolate domain, and all who help place the mortar and brick on that highway should pause and think carefully.

In closing, I offer something light and sardonic to hopefully amuse and cause thought and discussion. This short, satirical musical was written in response to the original vote, and became one of the most popular pieces of film on YouTube. I offer it to raise a smile in the midst of heated argument:

http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/c0cf508ff8/prop-8-the-musical-starring-jack-black-john-c-reilly-and-many-more-from-fod-team-jack-black-craig-robinson-john-c-reilly-and-rashida-jones

No doubt there will be some who disagree with my opinion, and wonder why someone not even human would concern himself with a political issue. As I stated in the beginning, I am hesitant to do this at any time. But I found this one time when silent sadness would no suffice.

Humanity is not restricted to the human form, nor should it be.

And if you disagree, please feel free to engage me in discussion; I am more than delighted to oblige. But let it be calm, and rational, and courteous; anything else would be mere sound and fury, and signify nothing.