Oshidashi [押し出し]
| Game 143: September 8, 2007 | |||
| Red Sox | 5 | L: Daisuke Matsuzaka (14-12) | 86-57, 1 game losing streak 29-12-5 series record Magic number: 15 |
 Orioles |
11 | W: Jon Leicester (1-1) | 61-80, 1 game winning streak 17-26-2 series record |
| Highlights: Oshidashi is the term for walking in a run, something Matsuzaka did twice in the third inning of this game. It was derived from a sumo move (kimarite) which translates to frontal push out. Matsuzaka was pushed out after serving Scott Moore a meatball for a grand slam with two out in the third; the pitcher has become too familiar with American cuisine. David Ortiz granted his team an early lead with a two-run homer in the first. A trio of doubles in the second plated two more runs, but the third-inning assault by the Orioles sealed the fate of the game and the starter. | |||
I was spared watching the entirety of this game thanks to my friends’ wedding. The last time I missed a game because of a wedding it was also against the Orioles. These match-ups are one of the more dreary divisional contests (except for when Daniel Cabrera decides to have a hissy fit), so I don’t mind missing bouts against the Charm City club.
My friends have been together for seven years and I have known them for about two. There was a softball accident that prevented an elaborate engagement trip to Bermuda, but the proposal was (of course) accepted despite a lisped delivery because of a broken jaw. They make one of the most joyful and dedicated couples I have had the pleasure and privilege of knowing. Going to games with them is always enjoyable, even when frigid April winds assail the fans on Opening Day or the Gobi-like sun beats down on the bleachers in July.
The ceremony took place in the mid-afternoon on the beach. Unlike the trying conditions at Fenway we have endured, the weather was perfect. The gathered family and friends followed a Native American tradition of whispering a wish to a butterfly and releasing it to give our desires wing. More than a few of the monarchs made themselves at home on the bouquets and wedding decorations.
The wedding party entered to Fiona Apple’s version of “Across the Universe” and exited to the Standells’ “Dirty Water.” They chose everything so well.
Until May 17, 2004 they would have been denied the right to be married because they both happen to be women.
I have never understood denying same-sex couples the rights and privileges granted to opposite-sex couples. When I lived in Hawai‘i I made signs and stood alongside my gay and lesbian friends to protect the constitution, which at that time did not prevent same-sex marriages. In 1998, however, the constitution was amended to specifically prohibit the word marriage to apply to non-heterosexual relationships. Those denied marriage can engage in Reciprocal Beneficiary Relationships.
How romantic. The term sounds more like a technical biology term than something that encompasses the depth and breadth of human emotion.
If anything, I believe that including couples of the same gender in the institution of marriage enhances the very idea of that bond. Straight people are so inured to the concept of our relationships being valid legally and socially we have taken it for granted until recently. Divorce rates had been climbing since the 1970s but are now declining because heterosexual couples wait until truly believe they are ready to commit themselves.
For those like my friends, the wait is over. And it is from them we can learn, and unlearn, what marriage is.
Two minds greater than mine express more eloquently what I have tried to say here.
Let me not to the marriage of true minds
Admit impediments. Love is not love
Which alters when it alteration finds,
Or bends with the remover to remove:
Oh, no! it is an ever-fixéd mark,
That looks on tempests and is never shaken;
It is the star to every wandering bark,
Whose worth’s unknown, although his height be taken.
Love’s not time’s fool, though rosy lips and cheeks
Within his bending sickle’s compass come;
Love alters not with his brief hours and weeks,
But bears it out even to the edge of doom.
If this be error and upon me proved,
I never writ, nor no man ever loved.
— William ShakespeareCivil marriage anchors an ordered society by encouraging stable relationships over transient ones.... Marriage also bestows enormous private and social advantages on those who choose to marry. Civil marriage is at once a deeply personal commitment to another human being and a highly public celebration of the ideals of mutuality, companionship, intimacy, fidelity, and family. “It is an association that promotes a way of life, not causes; a harmony in living, not political faiths; a bilateral loyalty, not commercial or social projects.” Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479, 486 (1965). Because it fulfils yearnings for security, safe haven, and connection that express our common humanity, civil marriage is an esteemed institution, and the decision whether and whom to marry is among life’s momentous acts of self-definition.
— Chief Justice Margaret H. Marshall
Goodridge et al. v. Department of Public Health et al.
