On the Islam in School Thing in England.

You know, where the kids were asked to pray toward Mecca and wear Islamic clothes? I think it's a cool idea. It teaches religious tolerance. We ought to learn Arabic while we're at it, and have an elective on "why the Jews are filthy swine" for high school credit. That teaches religious tolerance, too, because we're actively engaged in a differing mindset... viewing the world through the eyes of another culture, broadening our horizons and whatnot. I'm thinking that's a great thing.

(kidding! hopefully I didn't have to clarify that part, though...)

But you know, in fairness to the English school, why is everyone so upset? You KNOW they teach religion in public school here in America. You KNOW they do. It's called "being tolerant..." No, just YOU being tolerant. No one else has to be tolerant of your view that certain activities and thoughts are morally reprehensible. YOU need to learn that it is wrong for you to think that way, and bring your religious conviction in line with that of the state. Unless you're Muslim or one of those "interesting and ethnic" religions. Then we have to respect you because of multicultural diversity and our fear of being labelled racists.

Well, I'm trying to teach my children TRUE tolerance and respect for all people. Even the ones that are wrong. Respecting that these other folks are PEOPLE does not have to mean parroting their viewpoint. I was kinda hoping that all the "convert or die" days were over, but some religions are a little more backward than others. Just sayin'. Maybe I'm just sayin' it because I CAN say it and I'm afraid those days may be over soon.

What About Aunt Bea?

In the old days, single brothers and sisters could live together without being looked at askance. In fact, they often did. So it wasn't an unusual situation to have old Aunt Bea come and live with Andy and Opie on the "Andy Griffith Show." She made sure that Andy had a clean house and laundry, and his child Opie was looked after during the day while he was at work.

Nowadays, Andy would just send Opie off to "latchkey" care and Aunt Bea had better get a career and live somewhere else or suffer terribly if she were to ever get sick. Health insurance doesn't provide for "spinster sister living with me," you know. God forbid she were to have an attack of appendicitis or need some dental work done. People like her today had better either get a job or learn to employ their cooking and cleaning skills as a low-paid maid. (Learn to speak Spanish before accepting this job at a hotel, though, or you probably won't be able to speak with much of the help. Just being practical.)

I daresay that "Aunt Bea" would not be a valued and respected member of the community today. In fact, I could very easily see people sneer at her lack of "job skills" and how she has allowed herself to be overly dependent on others. Then again, I don't know that characters like "Aunt Bea" could develop in our society today in the first place given these parameters.

Hmm. As long as we're redefining "family" to include homosexual partners, can we allow corporations to include folks like Aunt Bea on their insurance policies? Who gets to decide what constitutes the "immediate family?"

OK, So Which One's Cuter?

I suppose it depends on what you're trying to sell. Supposedly using the blonde one in advertisements will get you more cash in certain areas of the globe. This sort of argument works just as well as the idea that all main characters in books and movies ought to be male because girls can read about boys on an adventure, but boys won't live vicariously through girls. I think this may be true for cosmetics in terms of race: when I see a black model for a cosmetic, I immediately think it's a cosmetic or hair product for dark people that wouldn't work for me. But otherwise, I don't *think* I care much. This NBC article rants like my old college professors about tokenism. A quote from the article: "Until these post-colonial attitudes evolve and 'ethnic' consumers demand more balanced representation, the occasional non-white face in a Hermes ad or collector's edition issue of Italian Vogue will remain novelty acts, ways for the fashion establishment to appease critics and appear progressive, without posing a real threat to the dominant paradigm—more proof that, in fashion, everything changes, yet still remains the same."http://www.newsweek.com/id/144549

Report: Celebrities Suffer Passport "Snooping"

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25519798

The government wants to be sure that celebrities and presidential candidates' information is safe. So they launched an investigation, which no doubt cost the taxpayer tons of money, to snoop through the records of people... so they can see if their records are being snooped through.

Well soo-prise, soo-prise, would you believe that sometimes people snoop through records? Those poor celebrities. I'm sure that they deserve a higher level of protection than "the rest of us lowly slobs," who of course deserve no such study and follow-up:

"The report calls for 22 specific actions to improve safeguards. All but three have been accepted, including random audits of all passport files, boosting the number of full-time passport record monitors from two to eight, cutting by half the number of people authorized to view the records and improving privacy training for employees.

"The department has also made substantial additions to its list of "flagged files," or files of people that get extra protection because of their notoriety. That list had in the past included as many as 500 names, but at the time of the March breaches contained only 38. It now has more than 1,000 names, officials said."

So, since I'm no one of particular importance, my file can be accessed 9,999,993 times without much notice. No one is going to care whether my data is stolen because no one is ever going to be held accountable. But if I were a celebrity or high-level official... you know, the people with lawyers and money anyway to fight this kind of thing?... I'd get lotsa protection.

Niiiice.

How to Eat a Hot Dog.

We need to follow proper etiquette, folks! I'm just trying to bring you **all** the relevant news here. Happy Fourth of July!

Glad I Wasn't on the Jury.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25508572

I can't imagine what "shocking photographs" the news article is referring to when the judge sentences someone to more than 4,000 years in prison. You know if a simple rape and murder just gets ya "life" that the pictures and testimony would affect these jurors for the rest of their lives. Jurors have a very hard job because they don't get to be like the posse and hang them that needs a hangin'.

They have to sit and listen to defense attorneys give lame excuses for their client, and they have to do it without rolling their eyes and doing the "talk to the hand" move. They have a limited number of options to decide from in terms of deciding someone's guilt. Truly they give up a lot to serve, mostly I would imagine in terms of their psychological peace of mind. How'd you like to see that evidence, hear the testimony, and then hear the defense attorney say, well, if being raped were that trumatic, everyone would be able to give dates and times for every occurrence...?

"If it was as traumatic as they indicate, they would be able to give you (specific dates and times of the incidents). Simply because it's shocking doesn't make it true," Alley said.

I have trouble remembering my anniversary and I've been married 15 years. I can remember it, but the date isn't seared into my mind like the event is. Gimme a break.

I'd love to be on a jury if I got to pick from one of the few cases I know personally about. One child cleaned up so nicely with the haircut and nice clothes before court that it made me sick. If only a judge or jury could see that!

I also think some of these "juvenile" offenders need to have their faces in the paper so that every person living near them knows what scum they are when their daughter wants to date them. I think trials should be much more speedy than they are, both for the guilty criminal and the innocent-but-accused. There ARE innocent-but-accused, and I'd be proud to let someone like that get out of jail free. :]

Not a Nice Thing to Say?

http://www.autismvox.com/not-a-nice-thing-to-say/#comments

Kristina Chew writes on her Autism Vox blog:

Can you imagine having this said to you?

“One family I met took their child to the doctor and the doctor said: ‘If he was a dog you would put him down.’”

As quoted in the February 7 Campbelltown-McArthur Advertiser (Australia).

I can imagine it, but most of the time people are more tactful than that and simply label my autistic children as "manipulative" or as having emotional or disciplinary problems. Lots of eugenic code words out there for unacceptable people.

By the way, usually I don't quote other people's posts in their entirety, but this one is worth the read and is so short I couldn't figure a way to do just a snippet and have it still make sense. My apologies.