Same-sex marriage has been legal in California since May, when the state’s highest court found that a ban on same-sex marriage was unconstitutional.

Gay marriage opponents immediately started gathering signatures and got Proposition 8 on the ballot. Prop 8 would amend the state constitution by eliminating the right of these couples to marry.

Supporters of the measure (primarily the Mormon Church and other religious conservatives) have been pouring money into advertisements that suggest schools will be required by state law to teach kindergarteners about gay marriage.

These are extravagantly distorted claims and are clearly an attempt to scare undecided voters into supporting Prop 8. The fact is that the passage or failure of Prop 8 will have no impact on education in California. Jack O’Connell, the state’s public schools chief, said it himself this week, calling the ads alarming and irresponsible.

“Our public schools are not required to teach about marriage,” O’Connell said. “And, in fact, curriculum involving health issues is chosen by local school governing boards.“

Ted Mitchell, president of the State Board of Education, confirmed this.

“Let me be clear, there is nothing in California state law that would require the teaching of marriage and that will not change,” he said.

Though the state education code does say that instruction should “teach respect for marriage and committed relationships,” it’s not as simple as that, as Peter Schrag pointed out in a Sacramento Bee column last week. Local school districts must approve all educational materials before they enter the classroom, and parents have the right to opt out of sex education they find offensive.

The advertisements don’t stop at schoolchildren though. One online video put out by the Mormon Church (available online at preservingmarriage.org) essentially says if Prop 8 doesn’t pass, churches will be forced to accommodate gay marriage ceremonies, doctors morally opposed to homosexuality will be forced to artificially inseminate women in same-sex marriages and faith-based adoption agencies will be forced to allow gay couples to adopt.

Again, the fact is that the failure of Prop 8 would do none of these things. The legal definition of marriage in California has no bearing on any of these issues, and to suggest otherwise is misleading and contributes nothing of value to the debate.

Prop 8 is not about children or schools. It’s not about churches, and it’s not about doctors or adoption agencies. None of those things would change if Prop 8 fails.

This proposition is about amending the constitution to strip a civil right from an otherwise equal group of California citizens. That’s why Californians should look past the scare tactics and do the right thing: Vote no on Prop 8.

Californians have the opportunity to do something truly visionary at the ballot box on Nov. 4.

Proposition 1A authorizes the state to sell $9.95 billion in bonds to fund planning and initial construction of a high speed passenger rail system from San Francisco to Los Angeles. The measure allows the bond proceeds to supply only one-half of construction costs and requires the government to seek federal and private funds for the rest. Future bond measures would extend the network to Sacramento and San Diego.

This project, which has been in the works for over a decade, is exactly the kind of progressive undertaking state and federal governments should be spearheading. As California’s population continues to grow, its highways are becoming increasingly congested and its airports overcrowded. California’s transportation system is nearing capacity.

The plan presents a forward-thinking solution to the increasing squeeze put on California’s transportation infrastructure. Though it may seem like a daunting project, it’s not without precedent in California. In the 1950s and ’60s California invested a previously unheard of amount of money in public works projects, including approximately $10 billion in the highway system – largely paid for in bond measures such as this. For years after, California’s highway system was a model for the rest of the country and is historically considered a crucial factor in California’s prosperity.

High speed rail is the next step in that tradition. Gas prices will continue to rise in the coming years, further squeezing the budgets of California commuters. High housing costs surrounding cities are pushing more and more families to buy homes in “bedroom communities” an hour, sometimes two, away from work. A high speed rail line, interconnected with existing local transportation, would allow these people to work or relax during their commute instead of burning through petroleum on a crowded freeway.

The electric trains would help California fight global warming by taking cars off the road and planes out of the sky. The system is projected to save 12.7 million barrels of oil and 12 billion pounds of carbon dioxide per year by 2030 even with future improvements in fuel efficiency, according to the California High Speed Rail Authority.

California has traditionally been ahead of the curve when it comes it to public works investments and planning for the future, especially in respect to climate change. While the project is undoubtedly expensive, it’s an investment in our state’s future that our children will thank us for.

My name is Chrys Komodikis, and I am a student at the Graduate School of Management here on campus. I am writing to you as a passionate supporter of Proposition 1A – a vote on whether to issue a $10 billion bond to finance a modern high-speed rail system through California.

As I’m sure you know, the drive on Interstate 80, Route 99 in Sacramento or even through the maze down in Los Angeles is one of the top grievances among Californians.

Imagine a world where the logistics of a day trip to San Francisco from here are barely a consideration. A train ride from Sacramento to SF would become like today’s drive from Davis to Sacramento.

This is a solution to soaring auto fuel prices, aircraft delays, slow aircraft security checks and plummeting airline service. Most importantly, it is both the cheapest AND the fastest alternative for intercity travel – all at the cost of $17/person/year over the next 30 years! This is not a bad deal.

California is one of the most advanced societies in the world, and the fifth largest economy. A solid transportation system is key to maintaining our competitive advantage if we are to attract the best skills, minds and organizations to this state. If there is one area where we lag behind our competition (e.g. UK, France, Germany, Japan and now China), it is in transportation solutions.

I sincerely hope your publication speaks to this issue and recognizes the importance of an affirmative vote.

Thank you so much for reading,

Chrys Komodikis

Dear ladies, gents and lady-gents, I’m going to assume if you read this column last week that you deduced two things. The first is that I look like a tweaker in my picture. The second is that I’m a tad lacking in the common sense department. You see, I seem to have little of it.

Instead of telling you my favorite Beach Boys song (“Don’t Worry Baby” but “Kokomo” runs a close second) and how much I hope to change the world, I decided to just jump into this column business like a drunk into an icy lake on New Year’s Day.

People distill quite a lot of social value in a name. As in, “You look like a Kiki” (I do not) or “Guys named Chaz are either gay or douchebags or both.” I don’t know how true these generalizations are, but I do find them pretty entertaining. At least till I find a raging exception.

Names are full of character. And they’re great conversation pieces! Ever met a hot chick named Bertha? Me neither, but it could so happen! I take pride in the colorful names I’ve picked to protect the innocents that are my roommates. Like Ernestine, who’s excruciatingly excited about the release of the upcoming High School Musical 3, in which I’m sure the dude will take the chick to prom and it will be all-magical and then at the end of the night he’ll look longingly into her eyes, kiss her chastely on the cheek, drive home and not jerk off. Just like real life.

As you know, my name is Michelle. My mom says I’m special, some say I’m random, most don’t know how I’m able to function. Neither do I, for that matter. They say that being a dog is like walking into a room and then forgetting why you just did. I identify with that, I do, but I also do things like spill acetone on my computer, get caught movie hopping into Jimmy Neutron (I don’t know what I was thinking either), and getting pulled over for a DUI whilse sober. Take from that what you will about my driving skills.

In any case, it’s nice to know that I’m not alone in experiencing what it is to be a Michelle. See, there’s this chickadee who’s also named Michelle but who I swear isn’t me because she’s my blonde counterpart. She’s been called out for sleeping in the back of a 300-person lecture hall and has had seven bikes stolen as of the halfway point in her college career. This isn’t counting the one that was run over by an ambulance right before her eyes.

These are things, we agree, that could only happen to a Michelle because our fabulousness comes at a price. So it’s no surprise that when multiple Michelles kick it, lots of crap goes down. And our lucky friend got caught in the crossfire. We’ll refer to her by her stripper name in case this whole college thing doesn’t work out and the backup plan comes into play, in which case Mommy and Dad will be so proud. More about stripper names to come in the future, I’m sure.

So there are lots of trees that sap and birds who crap in Davis and this keeps the car washes in business and sometimes cars pick entirely the wrong moment to eat shit. Case in point: You can be jamming out to a cheesy Leona Lewis ballad in said car wash when you realize that nothing works and that you’re kinda screwed. And this is what happened to two Michelles and one Lipstick Athens last Friday.

Nobody goes to this car wash, but on the day we were pushing Swedie the Swedish Volvo out of the car wash, braving wind and the rain inside a bit like a sick Disneyland ride with Jiffy Lubers laughing at the three sad bitches in sundresses flagging them down for help, people were lining up at this joint like teenyboppers at a Jonas Brothers presale. We ultimately found our saviors in Asian Auto Care, and yes, I documented this occurrence with my camera.

If you frequently trip on things, embarrass yourself in front of large crowds and wander into ridiculous situations, you may be a Michelle. And baby, you’re in good company.

MICHELLE RICK enjoys meeting all kinds of people, but especially drunks who jump into icy lakes. If you happen to be one, please e-mail her at marick@ucdavis.edu.

Is this guy a drunken asshole or does he sincerely believe I look like a curvier Natalie Portman? Why don’t I ever meet guys who try knowing my name before we grind? Is this girl going to have sex with me or what? Let’s be honest, the dating market sucks. It is an inefficient, confusing and exploited market that needs to be fixed.

Ever since the 21st century’s introduction of contraceptives and longer life expectancy, our genetically programmed courtship processes have gone obsolete. Back in the good old days (early human days), finding a suitable mate was a faster and simpler process. Our early ancestors didn’t have the time or need for courtship processes that lasted longer than two weeks, let alone two years. Any form of ritual that could be interpreted as a courtship process was strictly for reproductive purposes. Our ancestors didn’t have to combine checking accounts or pay off mortgages three years after courting. The release of dopamine and oxytocin would keep them together long enough to raise a child, but there were no cultural or economic pressures to stay together further down the road. Back then, the mate was subjected to a much less arduous courtship process. Indicators of fit DNA, large investments of time and the ability to fetch those red berries you love at 3 a.m. are some of the mate’s obligations in proving his eligibility.

It seems like the mating rituals we are programmed for are present in modern days as vestigial impulses. Most of today’s courtship processes are more or less short-lived and may result in random hook-ups, embarrassing pick-up lines, incongruent intentions and lots of confusion. The main problem with today’s dating market is imperfect information; most people just can’t figure out the opposite gender. In the good old days there was no such concept of “fornication buddy” or “friend who is a girl,” these modern phenomena make it a challenging task to figure out another’s true intentions. Today’s women need more than sperm with superior DNA, they need … well, I do have a word limit so I’ll let you figure that one out. Why don’t we just ASK our prospective mates what their heart or penis desires? Apparently you can’t do that; it is against the rules of interaction. There is a convoluted method to picking up girls/guys, a method that must abide by the rules. Where do these rules come from? I am sure I can come up with some ad-hoc evolutionary explanations and still be wrong. These rules, however, exist and complicate things even more.

In a capitalistic economy, entrepreneurs capitalize and thrive on inefficient markets. In theory, entrepreneurs would have already taken advantage of the broken dating market, fix it, and make a boatload of money. This, unfortunately, isn’t the case. Nobody is trying to fix it, only exploiting it, and compounding the dating market’s inefficiency. Companies like AXE, Victoria Secret, Cosmo and Viacom leverage our dating insecurities for an effortless buck. Their marketing campaigns further distort our vision of an efficient dating market.

Nobody is trying to repair this broken market because it is much easier to just exploit it. Of course there is match.com eharmony.com and other matchmaking websites that are successful and make a healthy profit. These websites are on the right track, but have hardly solved the problem. Meeting people online isn’t for everyone, just like some people prefer not to shop online. We need to create an efficient dating market for these people. Imagine a dating world where you can meet someone in places other than work or an alcohol-abundant house party. Where reading the mind of the opposite gender isn’t harder than reading Shakespeare while drunk. This world I speak of is possible. It may take some serious consciousness raising or a really clever entrepreneur.

LIOR GOTESMAN wants to hear your plans on how to fix the dating market. Or you can just complain about it with him at liorgott@gmail.com.