As more spillways are opened along the Mississippi, I am reminded of what I consider a basic fact: nature always wins.  Certainly we can control and harness it, but only to an extent.  In most years, the levees and sea walls work fine, for example.  But when the water gets high enough, nature wins.

We are left with the choice or working with it,  submitting to it, or stubbornly continuing to fight.  Opening the spillways is an example of working with nature, of making compromises so both sides are at least somewhat satisfied.  Some of the people affected by spillway openings understand.  Many don't,...

Read more: Nature Always Wins @ About.com
(Sorry, I'm not allowed to publish About.com blog posts in full on other sites)

China Arnold has, yet again, been found guilty of microwaving her baby to death.  (One trial ended in mistrial, and a second was overturned on appeal.)  She's gone through a whole list of improbable explanations, pointing fingers at various other people but admitting she was so drunk that night she doesn't remember anything.

Of course that disturbs me.  Everyone should be disturbed about a microwaved baby.

But what really stands out to me is her lawyer, who insisted "No mother is going to do this, in this way," while also pointing out the baby's father as a potential alternative suspect.


Fathers care for their children as much as mothers.  Why is it so heinous to think of a mother doing such a thing, but less heinous to think of a father doing the same?  I'm not even sure who it insults more: women by essentially defining their nature as centered around mothering, or men by depicting them incapable of bonding with a child like women do.


An associate of mine has a terrific picture of him him cuddling his baby.  It's adorable, and loving, and amazing.  You don't see dads in those pictures very often.  Moms, sure.  Lot's of sentimental moments between mother and baby, but dad and baby pics are much more often either silly or the dad is presenting the baby to the camera like a trophy or a prize fish.


Men care.  Men should care.  And society should recognize it and encourage it. 

The Aflac duck has lost it's voice: the company fired voice actor Gilbert Gottfried after tweeting such "humorous" lines as "I just split up with my girlfriend. But like the Japanese say, 'They'll be another one floating by any minute now.'"

What the hell is wrong with him?  How does he think that's even funny?  Or did I miss  the newest fad where drowned women were considered humorous?

He's certainly not the only one, however, who thinks such humor is appropriate.  I was very tempted to post Friday on Facebook "You might be a douche if...you think "Look out for Godzilla!" was an appropriate first comment on the Japan disaster, due to the number of times I saw it.  Really, that's the best you can come up with as thousands die and hundreds of thousands lose their homes?  Hilarious.

I've also encountered the odd duck on the internet who objects to us sending aid to Japan, suggesting that we have somehow forgotten "a little thing called Pearl Harbor."  Really, we're keeping score?  Even when the great majority of victims were not even alive, much less involved, when Pearl Harbor happened? 

But, OK, let's keep score:  I'm pretty sure a little thing called Hiroshima paid their debt in full.  Not to mention Nagasaki.  Are you sure keeping score sounds like a good idea?

I gave up thinking of my country, the United States as particularly progressive some years ago.  Today I found one more reason to discount that claim:  South Africa has a Wiccan member of Parliament.

Just for the record, the number of Wiccan members of the US Congress is zero. No member of the US House of Representatives nor the US Senate identifies himself as any form of neopagan. Wikipedia gives a neat breakdown of the current religious demographics.


Read more:  South Africa Parliament Has Neopagan Member @ About.com
(Sorry, I'm not allowed to publish About.com blog posts in full on other sites)

Oil City, Pennsylvania has allowed Halloween trick-or-treating only in the afternoon since a child murder that occurred in 1992. This year, urged by a 5th grader, the city council unanimously voted to allow trick-or-treating to return to evenings.

The 16-year precaution is an example of the unreasonable fear people attach to Halloween. The victim wasn't even killed on Halloween. Rather, she was abducted on the evening of Oct. 27 and found dead on Oct. 30. The death had nothing to do with Halloween, but still the city council insisted children shouldn't be out after dark on Oct. 31. Seriously, if they were going to single out a single night, wouldn't Oct. 27 make slightly more sense? (I emphasize "slightly".)

We all want to protect our children, and parents should, of course, always take reasonable precautions. But we're developing a culture in which we think unreasonable precautions will somehow guarantee our children's safety. Singling out one night is not going to protect children. Teaching children to fear the dark rather than respecting it and taking proper precautions is not going to protect them either.

Full story: http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/10/29/scared.town.halloween.ap/index.html?iref=mpstoryview