Archive

Archive for July 15th, 2004

updates

July 15th, 2004
No comments

I’ve made a few updates to the sidebar, most notably the Daily Quotes section. It’s powered by a nifty script from quotationspage.com. It’s pretty straightforward, but it’s a little tricky to implement CSS formatting for it. That aspect isn’t mentioned anywhere on their site, so it’s kind of one of those “left as an exercise for the reader” sort of things. It wasn’t too tricky to browse the code (thanks to clean, standard code from the script author) to figure it out. In the spirit of sharing, here’s the CSS code I used:


.tqpHeader {
display:none;
}
.tqpQuote {
font-family: "Verdana", "Arial", sans-serif;
color:#333;
font-size:x-small;
font-weight:bold;
padding-left: 3px;
margin-top: -5px;
}
.tqpAuthor {
font-family: "Verdana", "Arial", sans-serif;
color:#333;
font-size:x-small;
font-weight:bold;
}
.tqpFooter {
display:none;
}

Yeah, I’m a bad person for hiding the title and footer they provide, but I’ve put their copyright credit in my new Legal Info section of the sidebar. If they don’t like it, I’ll put it back in.

And since I’m feeling kind of nice today, here is a link to the stylesheet I heavily edited to format this site. Don’t sell it and don’t claim it as your own. And cite me if you use it. That’s all I ask.

General

The Bush-Man Speaketh

July 15th, 2004
1 comment

“Activist judges and local officials in some parts of the country are not letting up in their efforts to redefine marriage for the rest of America, and neither should defenders of traditional marriage flag in their efforts,” Bush said in a statement.

…then isn’t it all the more reason to let the states decide? “…the rest of America” might want to pass a ban, but the other parts might not. It’s called Federalism, and Republicans used to support it. But I guess the Bush White House sees a difference when people want to extend equal rights. Thank God he wasn’t in office in 1964. “Let us preserve the Anti-Miscegenation Laws”, I can hear him arguing, “we’ve had them so long, and it’s a traditional American value.”

Would the American public have allowed the Constitution to be amended to read “Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union of a white man and a white woman. Neither this Constitution, nor the constitution of any State, shall be construed to require that marriage or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon any union other than the union of a white man and a white woman.” ? I think not. Why is this any different?

Random informative link: A series of lectures on ancient philosophy from the University of Washington. They’re easy to understand and presented well.

General