DW Fic: Of Discovery and Sacrifice (4/5)

Title: Of Discovery and Sacrifice (4/5)

Author: salienne

Characters: Doctor/Rose, Jack, various OC’s (I’d tell you which Doctor(s?), but that’d give a bit away :P)

Rating: PG

Beta: Thanks so much to lunaserenade, who managed to beta this while taking care of a new Doctor kitty and Master kitty. All hail!

Disclaimer: I don’t own “Doctor Who” or Jack or Rose anymore than I own my own TARDIS. Shame, that.

Spoilers: Through Doomsday

Summary: Post-Reunion. In an attempt to rediscover herself, Rose decides to leave the Doctor, but like all things, this decision is not without a cost.

A/N: Are you ready guys? Almost there. Just one bit left after this. I am sorry to say that I did mess up with the last chapter, though: I wanted to stick another section onto the end, and I didn’t. As such, it’s here at the beginning. I apologize if the flow is off, but I hope y’all will bear with me.

So, as always, enjoy, and comments are encouraged! Thanks so much to those who’ve been commenting! :D

( Nearly fifteen years have passed since Rose left the Doctor to find herself, and she has stopped crumbling. )

Chapter 1

Chapter 2

Chapter 3

Bloody hell...

Why I really dislike this country from time to time...

So apparently bans on gay marriage are constitutional in MD...

Choice bits:

The 4-3 ruling essentially sends the issue of same-sex marriage back to the state legislature and ruled that a ban on gay marriage does not discriminate on the basis of gender and does not deny any fundamental rights.

Just like banning interracial marriages does not discriminate based on race! :D

"In declaring that the State's legitimate interests in fostering procreation and encouraging the traditional family structure, our opinion should by no means be read to imply that the General Assembly may not grant and recognize for homosexual persons civil unions or the right to marry a person of the same sex," Judge Glenn T. Harrell Jr. wrote

.....But the Justice System is there to uphold civil rights, not protect the State's supposed interest in a "traditional family structure". That's the legislature's job, and as we've seen oh so many times, legislatures discriminate. And they do so under the guise of what's right for the citizens. That's what's happening here.

And even going the 'traditional family structure=good' route, single parents should then have their children taken away, as should divorced and then remarried parents. Hell, take the adopted kids too--it's not like they're with their natural, "traditional" family.

In rejecting the argument that the state's Equal Rights Amendment protected the rights of same-sex couples to marry, the court scoured the legislative and media record of the debate during the 1970s and concluded it does not apply.

The measure, which was passed by the General Assembly and ratified by voters, was not intended to address sexual orientation, the majority decided.

...Just like the Constitution wasn't meant to address the rights of slaves, foreigners, or women.

Oh, let me count the BS. -_-

There's a protest. I didn't hear about it early enough to go, but I really wish I had...