A woman's body is at its fertility peak between the ages of 17 and 23. So when young women advertise or flaunt their sexuality they are being driven by a force far stronger than the Judeo-Christian ethic. They are driven by the power of peak fertility and a million years of evolutionary biology. Nature has programmed them for pregnancy, genetic diversity and keeping the species going. A big job.

I have no argument with this premise. However, he seems to completely miss the mark as he heads towards his conclusion.

A healthier society would allow women to have children earlier than they do now. At 32, no matter what people want to believe, the reproductive system is far less robust than it was 10 years earlier. Our aim should be to have children born into a culture where there is plenty of support for child care in addition to the mother, thus liberating mothers to more fully exploit the possibilities that advanced society can offer them.

Guess what culture gives a lot of support to young mothers and children and has worked for thousands of years? The culture of marriage. Indeed, the best predictor for poverty isn’t the age at which one has children, but whether or not one is married when the children are born.

And this isn’t just some tired old Judeo-Christian ethics thing. Not only are women biologically programmed for desiring children at the age of their peak fertility, but they are also biologically programmed for wanting to keep the father around. Men are the ones who are typically seen as wanting to sow their seed far and wide, while making sure that their partners don’t. Marriage is and has been an almost universal method across nearly all cultures for dealing with the competing biological urges of the sexes.

But, instead of promoting marriage, the tried and true method of making sure children have the support they need, Mr. Sheehan lauds the recent expansion of parental leave rights in Australia.

Such requests can be refused. However, the commission has placed a higher burden on employers, who are required to show reasonable grounds for refusal, rather than simply deny the request outright. This is a shift in the balance towards nurture.

If you ask me, this solution is like putting a band-aid on an arterial gusher. The parental leave decision will likely have no effect on future poverty rates. (Indeed it seems that the author came up with a conclusion (that the parental leave decision is good) and thought of a sexy way to support it by stating that “There is nothing wrong with pelvic display, push-up bras, Gosford miniskirts, spray-on jeans, low-cut tops, bare legs, bare arms, bare ankles, G-strings or even buttock cleavage, providing the displayer is young enough to get away with it.”)

Changing parental leave policies is completely useless for fixing the problems of teen pregnancies and their effects on future poverty. Pregnant teenagers usually aren’t worried about if their job at McDonalds will provide them two years of unpaid parental leave or let them work part time. If they are to the point where they are working in an industry that actually pays more than minimum wage and doesn’t have a huge turnover rate, which is when parental leave actually matters, then they are much less likely to face poverty in the future anyway. However, teenagers usually aren’t because our society is structured such that they have rarely even begun considering their permanent career path, let alone solidifying it. The reason that things have worked better in the past isn’t so much the rise of materialism as it is the necessity of more education to be considered a mature adult in our society.

Our current educational system is very inflexible in terms of how long it takes to produce mature adults (that is, if it does at all). If we want to enable people to have children younger, we need to increase the flexibility of our educational system. A (non-exhaustative) list of better solutions might be:

1. Stressing the importance of marriage before children (even if they do choose not to wait until marriage to have sex.)
2. Improving intellectual and emotional development (so that teenagers can make an informed decision of when to have kids) instead of just focusing on pure knowledge.
3. Bring back the apprentice system so that kids who want to can start on their careers sooner. (Not everyone needs to go to college to have a successful career.)

Basically society needs to mature the minds of teenagers so that they are either mature enough to not decide to have children until they are ready, or mature enough to have children when their bodies tell them to. Traditionally, society has attempted to implement the first solution. Mr. Sheehan might inadvertently be correct in his overly provocative and simplistic suggestion that the second might be worth a look.

One of the objections I am getting to my previous post about Ian Stoakes, author of “A New Dawn” and his past as a scam artist, is that I haven’t read his books and so I don’t really know the information. Well, given my last post, I am certainly not going to spend $25 on them to find out, but I have been reading some other stuff about PCOS and inflammation that is of some interest to the issue.

From the other information provided on Mr. Stoakes’ website, it appears that he is making 3 premises:

1. PCOS is caused by inflammation.
2. That inflammation is caused by food.
3. Mr. Stoakes test can accurately test which foods cause the inflammation in each person.

The previous post certainly casts an awful lot of doubt on premise #3, but while we’re at it, let’s take a look at premise #1 – that PCOS is caused by inflammation.

Inflammation and PCOS is something that has been in a lot of research papers lately. In fact, these studies have found increased levels of inflammatory markers in women with PCOS.

Gonzalez F, Thusu K, Abdel-Rahman E, Prabhala A, Tomani M, Dandona P. Elevated serum levels of tumor necrosis factor alpha in normal-weight women with polycystic ovary syndrome. Metabolism 1999;48:437-41.
Kelly CC, Lyall H, Petrie JR, Gould GW, Connell JM, Sattar N. Low grade chronic inflammation in women with polycystic ovarian syndrome. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2001;86:2453-5.
Kelly CJ, Lyall H, Petrie JR, Gould GW, Connell JM, Rumley A, et al. A specific elevation in tissue plasminogen activator antigen in women with polycystic ovarian syndrome. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2002;87:3287-90.
Atiomo WU, Bates SA, Condon JE, Shaw S, West JH, Prentice AG. The plasminogen activator system in women with polycystic ovary syndrome. Fertil Steril 1998;69:236-41.
Atiomo WU, Fox R, Condon JE, Shaw S, Friend J, Prentice AG, et al. Raised plasminogen activator inhibitor-1 (PAI-1) is not an independent risk factor in the polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS). Clin Endocrinol (Oxf) 2000;52:487-92.

However, unlike what many seem to think, just because two things are related, doesn’t mean we can immediately assume that one causes another. While Mr. Stoakes and others who think inflammation is the cause of every disease on the planet might think that these studies prove that inflammation causes PCOS, there are in fact three possibilities:

1. Inflammation causes PCOS.
2. PCOS causes inflammation.
3. Some third problem (such as insulin resistance, for example) causes both inflammation and PCOS.

Insulin resistance, insulin sensitization and inflammation in polycystic ovarian syndrome
Year : 2004 | Volume : 50 | Issue : 2 | Page : 140-144

Dhindsa G, Bhatia R, Dhindsa M, Bhatia Vishal
Department of Internal Medicine, State University of New York, Buffalo, NY, USA

Thiazolidinediones have been shown to decrease inflammation in obese and diabetic subjects.[74],[75],[76] TZDs have also been shown to reduce carotid intimal medial thickness, normalize vascular endothelial function and improve fibrinolytic and coagulation parameters.[77] Rosiglitazone therapy for 26 weeks reduced MMP-9 (a matrix metalloproteinase, implicated in atherosclerotic plaque rupture) and C-RP levels in type 2 diabetics.[78] In studies in PCOS women, Troglitazone reduced PAI-1 levels[53] and improved endothelial-dependent vasodilation.[79] It is possible that the beneficial effect of TZDs in PCOS may be partly due to the decrease in inflammation. Metformin has also been shown to decrease PAI-1 and C-RP levels in PCOS women.[80],[81]

So, to summarize in non-medical jargon, patients with PCOS (as well as obese patients and patients with diabetes) were treated with insulin sensetizers such as metformin and subsequently had their inflammatory markers decrease. This seems to imply that insulin resistance causes inflammation. If instead, as Mr. Stoakes implies, inflammation caused insulin resistance, treating the insulin resistance would not improve inflammation.

In fact, research is beginning to suggest that this inflammation is what contributes to the greater incidence of cardiovascular disease in patients with insulin resistance.

So Mr. Stoakes first and third premises really have no legs to stand on, unless of course there’s some secret research papers about PCOS and inflammation he will only give to people who pay him. I’m not feeling particularly confident about his second as he certainly hasn’t proven himself capable of logical scientific interpretation.

He has perpetrated scams in the past. They ban anyone from their forum who mentions Mr. Stoakes' past or asks too many insistant questions. He avoids giving direct answers to technical questions. People have told me privately in email about high-pressure sales techniques. I’ve also heard that he offers to perform tests for free to those who are able to convince others to buy the test. One of his associates even made a half-hearted attempt to threaten me with legal action.

What possible reason would I have to waste my time and money on his book? What reason would anyone have?

This process can be carried out by an elimination diet (which Ian does not recommend) or a $1500 blood test. (Of course no one was told about the test until after they already spent $25 on the book.)

I have looked around his website. He references no research papers that either discuss the issue of whether or not PCOS is caused by inflammation, or the issue of whether this inflammation is caused by allergies to certain foods. (In fact, nearly half of the articles referenced in his PCOS article are from dental journals that discuss a disease that causes inflammation of the gums.) He also provides no information about his credentials, his research, the test name, or the technical process whereby food allergies are found.

After spending a few hours searching the web, I happened upon some interesting information. In an article in the July 1998 issue of Positive Health Magazine, this information about Ian Stoakes appeared. (All the many misspelled words were left as they were.)

Ian Stoakes trained as a teaccher, concentrating on behaviourally disturbed children. After running a unit for mentally handicapped children he was employed by the Home Office as principal of a secure unit. He has worked for a number of charities, primarily involved with children and nutrition. He was Chief Executive of the Dietary Research Foundation, which conducted research into the relationship between nutrition and intelligence. He is now Chief Executive of NuTron Analytical Limited.

A teacher, not a doctor. Now that’s certainly sounds like someone I’d trust to give me expensive medial advice without a single iota of pertinent backup research.

The article itself, of which only an abstract is available, discusses a blood test that detects which foods cause an inflammatory response.

The food particulates in the blood are marked for immune response and the first cell to react is the neutrophil. This cell is recognised as producing more than fifty different inflammatory chemicals and is able to produce a wide range of subtle responses. The neutrophil's responses can be so fast and so subtle and the cell itself is so small that responses are very difficult to measure.

The NuTron Test uses a haematology analyser to assess the degree and nature of neutrophil response in blood incubated with reconstituted food samples. It is thus possible to detect foods that produce a neutrophil response and to construct a diet that avoids them.

Ian's current explanation for the test sounds pretty much exactly the same.

The automated hematology analyzer is employed to interogate a blood sample that has been incubated with food and to compare it to a control sample i.e. a sample from the same person that has not been exposed to a food extract.

The state of the cells are carefully checked for sign of activation, the platelets are checked for activation, too. In this way, it possible to build up a picture of the response that will occur if the food is eaten.

Let’s just forget, for the moment, the questions of whether or not food particles (as opposed to more basic nutritional building blocks) really pass through the gut wall and float around in the blood stream. Let’s also forget about the question of whether or not a hematology analyzer can really detect the “fifty different inflammatory chemicals.”

Instead, let’s just do a search on the internet for “NuTron.”

Several articles from the Health Watch newsletter, as well as a blog article show up. Let’s look at this one.

"Don't be tempted by the Nutron diet - it’s a con," says Which? magazine (11/94). The £135 diet is provided by the Individual Diet Company, which tests your blood and devises a personal food sheet for you. The sheet excludes foods to which it says you have an intolerance.

Which? investigated the company's claims by sending in two blood samples from the same person under different names. The company sent back two diet sheets. One listed 20 foods to avoid, the other listed 12 to avoid - there were only five foods in common to both lists.

More dangerously, the company failed to notice that the investigator was intolerant to gluten and similar proteins because of coeliac disease.

In fact, Nutron listed gluten as safe to eat. It told Which? when challenged that the test could not be expected to pick up a gluten allergy.

The company also did not tell the sufferer to avoid rye, wheat and oats, all of which must be avoided in this condition.

Nutron claims that its diet will help solve problems from irritable bowel syndrome to obesity.

Experts told Which? that the diet may lead to loss of weight simply because it bans a lot of calorie-high foods.

The other articles say the same thing. This isn’t something I’d advise anyone to spend $25 on, let alone $1500 on. (Besides, other scam artists, apparently old associates of Ian Stoakes, will provide the same useless thing for half the price elsewhere.)

Of course supporters say "oh, there's naysayers everywhere." Yeah. Uh-hu. That sounds like a great excuse for sending back two very different reports on two blood samples for the same person. Hey - who needs repeatability? Certainly not valid scientific health care procedures or anything.

I must admit the only thing that really surprised me about this was how old the scam really was. I certainly wasn’t surprised that it really was a scam – it had all the hallmarks including, but not limited to, a refusal to discuss the credentials of the writer, a refusal to provide research supporting his claims, paranoid accusations of the money driven pharmaceutical industry and doctors hiding the information, claims that the only reason that hadn’t published research was a lack of money, calls to “take control of your own health” by trying this expensive and unproven technique, escalating costs as people are drawn in, personal attacks on people voicing skepticism, and a supposition that it’s up to skeptics to prove them wrong rather than up to them to prove themselves right.

Instead we were expected to believe this miraculous cure merely on the basis of a few testimonials. Testimonials are all well and good, but they don’t prove anything: only carefully controlled double blind placebo research does and I have a hard time beliving that after over 10 years they haven't managed to scrounge together enough money for a study. The people testifying to the success of the program could be lying, or they could not. But either way their weight loss and other successes are mostly likely due to the placebo effect or the result of going on a very restrictive diet, rather than a result of avoiding an allergy to lettuce.

I don't care if one person or one million people swear by this method, that doesn't provide a lick of proof to its efficacy. The number of positive newspaper articles containing glowing testimonials also mean nothing. Reporters are no more or less guilible than anyone else. (Thousands of people have also believed in the healing power of everything from arsenic to distilled water.) Indeed the proponents don't provide ANY proof and instead expect you to just take them on their word.

Check out the next post for what the research REALLY says about PCOS and inflammation, as well as more reasons why you shouldn't trust Ian Stoakes.

Days before the event, [David] Lash, a construction worker, suffered a job-related injury in which he lost a quarter of his right index finger, the suit says.

About 3 a.m. on Jan. 11, he suffered an allergic reaction to medication at his stepdaughter's house, the suit says, and his son, David Lash Jr., came to the house to restrain him, said Lash's attorney, Stephen Wyse.

Since when does an allergic reaction to medication make it necessary to restrain someone? What, were they trying to stop him from scratching himself? (After all, as Mom always says, “scratching it just makes it itch more.”)

In all seriousness, I suspect it was most likely some other sort of bad reaction (I hate it when the word allergic is tossed around like that) to a medication, probably one of the psychiatric sort, or else that’s just some sort of weird excuse.

Lash Jr. had his father pinned to the floor when Moberly police arrived, Wyse said. When Lash Sr. moved his shoulder, two officers, whose names are not given, shot both the father and the son with a Taser, the suit claims.

Then, after Lash Jr. was taken to another room, the officers continued administering the shocks to Lash Sr., kicked him in the groin and neck, reinjured his finger and caused him to lose two front teeth, the suit says.

"Reinjured his finger?" So did he lose the previously reattached portion of his finger, or did a new quarter fall off?

"I'm an ex-cop, and I'm familiar with the use of force and when it's necessary and when it's not, and they had no reason to use force here," [Stephen] Wyse [Lash's attorney], said. "They had no reason to start Tasering his son and him."

I’d be interested to see what the officers’ version of events is. However, if the guy was going so crazy that his son had to drive over, restrain him, and call the cops, it seems likely that they did indeed have a reason to start tasering him. I wonder what injuries Lash Jr. and the police officers sustained at the hands of Lash Sr.

After the officers put a stranglehold on Lash Sr., he began to vomit, and an ambulance was called to take him to the hospital, Wyse said.

At the hospital, he was unconscious for most of 10 days, Wyse said. He suffered kidney failure, and he received dialysis treatments for two months, Wyse said.

Hmm. I searched all over and couldn’t find any connection between Taser guns and kidney failure. People who claim Taser guns are dangerous seem to think they can cause damage to the heart, lungs, or skin, not the kidneys.

Again, I wonder what drug he had an “allergic reaction” to and what other side effects it has. What other medical problems does he have? Could something else have caused his kidney failure and/or hospitilization?

Not only does the lawsuit seek unspecified damages from the police department, it also seeks to cash in on $5 million from Taser International Inc. because “Taser, the police department and other defendants failed to train the officers properly.”

I didn’t know that Taser was responsible for ensuring the training of every single officer who uses their product. Does anyone more familiar with this subject know if similar tactics have been used against gun manufacturers?

It could turn out differently, but it certainly seems like a frivolous lawsuit so far.

Henrico County [Virginia] has 24 full-time bus drivers, plus 20 supervisors and others pulled in to cover routes, transportation supervisor Harold Grimes said. The average driver turnover is between 10 percent and 13 percent a year; there are now 23 driver vacancies.

Grimes said that besides balking at the starting salary of $13,920, or $10.69 an hour ($14,153 annually and $10.87 hourly for the upcoming school year), potential bus drivers also consider the responsibility involved, especially after recent bus accidents and violent incidents on buses.

"They're in charge with those children," Grimes said. "Plus it's hard to watch for the traffic. When it's added together, people say, 'Whoa, why am I trying to do this?"'

Virginia has had two fatal accidents this year -- a teenager was killed in February and last month two children died after their bus collided with a truck. And in Tennessee, a 14-year-old was charged with fatally shooting bus driver Joyce Gregory in March because he "hated her," according to a recorded statement played in court.

Earlier this month, a security camera on a school bus in Punta Gorda, Florida, captured a fight between a substitute driver and two teens. The driver was charged with misdemeanor battery and the teens with assault.

Behavior problems that affect teachers also affect everyone else who comes into contact with the kids.

At the end of the article, someone puts the blame where it belongs.

Megan Williams, a mother of four, thinks potential bus drivers don't want to put up with disrespectful children, for which she blames parents.

"I am part of the problem. I have four boys. They are the kind that don't sit still and say, 'Yes, ma'am, no, ma'am,"' Williams said. "I drive my van with my four kids in it and that's enough. I can't imagine a bus full of them."

Er, ok... At least she's not in denial.

More than half of those responding to a new poll said they would be at least somewhat likely to vote for Sen. Hillary Clinton if she runs for president in 2008.

But those saying they are virtually certain to vote against her topped those virtually certain to support her by 10 percentage points in the CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll.

The poll found 29 percent were very likely to cast a vote for Hillary Clinton for president and 24 percent said they were somewhat likely.
Seven percent were not very likely and 39 percent said they were not at all likely. The margin of error was plus or minus 5 percentage points

Some note that

Clinton commands as much strong support as George W. Bush did in a Newsweek poll in November 1998, two years before the 2000 election, though also more strong opposition.

The amount of strong opposition is going to be a big obstacle for a presidential run. I think the Democrats would be foolish to immediately nominate her without considering that factor.

CNN also notes that there is “overwhelming support” (67%) among her New York constituents. However…

Among Democrats [] 65 percent surveyed want her to pledge to serve out a full term if she runs, negating a 2008 White House bid.

Given that, this next piece of news is interesting.

Senator Clinton is believed to be ready to drop a pledge to serve a full six-year term when she seeks re-election as senator for New York next year.

This will be the clearest sign of her intention to run for the White House, since she pointedly told New York voters in 2000 that she would not curtail her term in order to try for the presidency.

The official line from her advisers is Senator Clinton is keeping options open. But The Washington Post reported: "In 2000, she repeatedly pledged that she would finish her term without seeking the presidency. Aides say she will not issue such a pledge this time."

So it isn’t confirmed yet, but then again if she were going to issue the pledge you’d think they’d just say that she was.

It still amazes me that so many of our politicians, on all sides, are spending the majority of their time campaigning for other offices rather than doing their jobs. If anyone else spent 4 hours at work every day working on hig resume and reading the classifieds, he'd get fired for sure. But I suppose that’s just the way it is.

While New York Democrats want her to pledge to serve a full term, I doubt that her not doing so will prevent her from winning the 2006 senate run. I often read stories about so-and-so considering running against her, but no good candidates are coming to the forefront. I am sure she will win re-election. The White House is not at all a certainty though.

Back at the CNN article, I enjoyed this quote from her

"My view is that life unfolds in its own rhythm. I've never lived a life that I thought I could plan out."

Yeah, that’s believable. Hillary Clinton reads like she has a detailed 500 page manuscript of her future, including sketches of the clothes she plans to wear to each inauguration, as well as her carefully considered last words.

In other news, Newsday manages to print the stupidest opening line to a story that I’ve ever heard.

Conservatives may strive to portray New York Democratic Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton as a polarizing figure, but she unified Hollywood Democratic political donors at a series of fundraisers that netted an estimated $1 million in a single evening, hosts estimated Thursday.

Imagine that! A politician unifying political donors at her fundraiser? That'll show those conservatives.

(Check out the Hillary Watch catagory for more stuff Hillary Clinton has been up to.)

SSRIs are a class of antidepressant drugs that include paxil, prozac, effexor, cymbalta, celexa, zoloft, and many others. The abbreviation stands for “selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor.” Serotonin is one of the neurotransmitters that help to regulate mood. It is released by neurons and activates receptors on other neurons, then is reabsorbed, (a process which is called reuptake.) SSRIs work by preventing serotonin from being taken back up from the synapse, which increases serotonin levels in the brain and makes serotonin signals stronger. This helps people with depression because they generally have lower serotonin levels. (Some of the drugs also work on other neurotransmitters, such as Norepinephrine.) A similar thing happens when you take cocaine.

Over time, the brain chemistry adjusts as the body tries to go back to what it sees as “normal.” The neurons actually produce less serotonin than they did originally. This means that the body develops a tolerance to the drug: the same amount no longer works as well and more of the drug must be taken to have the original effect.

This also helps explain the effects of withdrawal. If the user all of a sudden stops taking the drug, reuptake will no longer be prevented but the brain will still be making less serotonin, meaning that the serotonin levels will actually be lower than they were before the user started taking the drugs. In some people this causes severe side effects, ranging from flu like symptoms to more “mental” problems such as nightmares, suicidal thoughts, anxiety, hallucinations, and just a general sense of being “f’d up.” This can often be worse than the depression was in the first place.

I can’t even begin to describe how scary it is to go through this. The first time it happened to me, it was because I had missed a few doses. I was having dreams about raining blood and I felt disconnected from reality. I had no idea that missing a few doses of your antidepressant could cause this, so I thought it was all me. I seriously thought I was going crazy.

The second time it happened, I had run out of my medication on a weekend and had no way to get any more. I knew what was happening and I thought I would be able to handle it, but after a few days I just couldn’t hold out anymore and had to go to the ER and pay them exorbitantly amounts of money just to get a few pills. This time I felt like a drug-seeking junkie.

The part of all this that really upsets me is the instance of the drug companies that SSRIs are not addictive. The addiction may be different than an addiction to cocaine, alcohol, or barbiturates; but it’s still an addiction and I think it’s very misleading for doctors to tell their patients that there is absolutely no risk of addiction or dependence. If some people have such a hard time stopping the drug, I don’t know what else it should be called!

After my two terrible experiences, I was determined to quit the drug. I did some research and decided to do it by tapering, which means taking successively smaller portions of the pill for at least several weeks. By reducing my dose by an 1/8th of a pill every 4 days or so, I was able to get off the medication with few problems.

My husband also had a bad reaction to one of these drugs last year, and so asked his psychiatrist to put him on a non-SSRI. She said “oh, ok” and gave him another drug. Turns out the drug isn’t an SSRI, it’s a SSNRI – which is like a SSRI times two. Now he’s quitting this drug because of all the other side effects and going through the withdrawal for it, all because we listened to his stupid psychiatrist.

Drug companies and doctors do wonderful things. They make it possible for us to live longer, healthier lives. But they are also human and are as prone to human foibles as the rest of us. Drug companies often downplay side effects and risks. Doctors often throw out prescriptions like candy without exploring milder but more time consuming options.

The best medical advice I can give is to know your body and research everything your doctor tells you before you choose a path of action. Weigh your options and seriously consider things like lifestyle changes before popping a pill. If your doctor won’t address your concerns, find another doctor. It’s hard work in the short term, but you could save yourself a lot of pain and suffering.

(Note: I’m not suggesting that no one should ever use SSRIs, just that fewer people should and those who do should be aware of potential problems.)

Linked at Outside the Beltway.

Regulators Thursday ordered Internet telephone carriers to provide full 911 emergency calling services to customers later this year, after hearing from people who were unable to get through during life-threatening crises.

The Federal Communications Commission voted unanimously to require carriers to ensure that 911 calls from Internet phones will reach live emergency dispatchers instead of being connected to administrative lines. In addition, the carriers will have to provide callers' numbers and addresses.

The FCC approved the order at an open meeting attended by families who had trouble reaching 911 operators when they dialed for help with Internet phones.

This is good news. Of course I'm sure this will mean one more random charge on my cell phone bill that helps to practically double the contract price...

A pregnant student who was banned from graduation at her Roman Catholic high school announced her own name and walked across the stage anyway at the close of the program.

Alysha Cosby's decision prompted cheers and applause Tuesday from many of her fellow seniors at St. Jude Educational Institute.

But her mother and aunt were escorted out of the church by police after Cosby headed back to her seat.

"I can't believe something like this is happening in 2005," said her mother, Sheila Cosby. "My daughter has been through a lot and I am proud of her. She deserved to walk, and she did."

...

"I worked hard throughout high school and I wanted to walk with my class," she said.

If I were making the decision for the school, I probably would have gone the other way with this one, depending on other circumstances. I certainly have respect for their decision though. It is a private religious school, and preventing public flouting of their morals is not something all that outlandish, discriminatory, or unexpected. I mean come on, it's a Catholic school! If I were the student or the student's family I surely would have respected the decision.

On the other hand...

Cosby was told in March that she could no longer attend school because of safety concerns, and her name was not listed in the graduation program.

The father of Cosby's child, also a senior at the school, was allowed to participate in graduation.

I have a lot less respect for the school for not coming out and saying their reasons and instead coming up with some crap about "safety concerns." What, were they afraid she'd trip and fall down the stairs on the way up to the stage?

And I damn well have a lot less respect for the school for allowing the other culpable party to walk when his partner was not. He may not have a big pregnant belly, but he's just as responsible and should recieve the same punishment.

Number 2 Pencil has more.

Customer Service Representative: All right then, I've put that into the computer and the line should be deactivated sometime today. Now I just need to...

Phone: *click*

Me: Ha ha! That sure was quick.

(And yes, the phone had just been shut off, it was not a disconnect or anything.)

Griffin’s approach is interesting and effective, but I’m afraid it’s logically flawed for two reasons.

First of all, people calling in to a conservative leaning talk radio show who are already resistant to gay marriage are probably not going to be the ones who would feel the effects of society’s redefinition of marriage. They most likely already have a clearly defined definition of marriage in their heads that is not so dependant on society’s whims as others’ may be. Obviously they are willing to defend that definition, both against Griffin and against things that happen around them.

Secondly, the question assumes a rather simplistic view of peoples’ objections to gay marriage. No opponent to gay marriage who is saying it would affect marriage as an institution is seriously suggesting that once two gay people get married, other marriages across the country will immediately drop dead for that reason and that reason only.

That would be like a doctor reading a study that says rheumatoid arthritis suffers are 10% more likely to have consumed lots of red meat, and then telling each patient that comes in that they got the disease because they ate lots of red meat. Diseases of the body are a little more complicated than that, and so are diseases of marriage.

Can you imagine someone objecting to the doctor telling people to eat less red meat because the doctor can’t come up with an example of someone who ate a steak and then woke up with rheumatoid arthritis the next day? There may be other reasons to not agree with that plan of attack, but the one given here ain’t one of them.

Any societal occurrence that affects traditional marriage, for good or for bad, takes years to show its effects in any statistically significant way and even then it’s going to be pretty hard to measure because of all the other factors that also have influence. Does this mean that we, as a society, should stop asking ourselves what possible effects, subtle or not, any change might have? I think not.

Marriage as a societal institution isn’t a right, it’s something society has around to benefit itself. If gay marriage supporters actually want to change peoples’ minds, they need to stop insisting that marriage is a right and refusing it to them is outright discrimination, and instead try to convince the public that gay marriage helps society. And “well, it doesn’t really hurt anyone” just isn’t going to cut it. It’s absurd to say that gay marriage will have absolutely no effect on marriage itself. Indeed, the only question that should be up for debate here is “how.”

This all reminds me of the flurry of commentary from supporters of gay marriage after Britney Spears’ 55 hour marriage.

It would be far easier to take these claims seriously if gay-marriage critics spent as much energy denouncing irresponsible heterosexuals whose behavior undermines traditional marriage. Among prominent Americans, such misdeeds are increasingly ubiquitous.

Exhibit A is musical product Britney Spears's micromarriage to hometown pal Jason Allen Alexander. The 22-year-olds were wed on January 3 in Las Vegas. Clad in sneakers, a baseball cap, ripped jeans, and a navel-revealing T-shirt, the vocalist was escorted down the Little White Wedding Chapel's aisle by a hotel chauffeur. Spears and Alexander, who wore baggy pants and a zippered sweater, soon were wife and husband.

Almost as soon, their marriage was annulled. Clark County Judge Lisa Brown accepted Spears's request and ruled that "There was no meeting of the minds in entering into this marriage contract, and in a court of equity there is cause for declaring the contract void."

The revolving-door couple's 55 hours of marital bliss were based neither on love nor shared commitment, but because "they took a joke too far," explained Spears's label, Jive Records.

I hardly think that any social conservative was happy or even ambivalent about this, or the hundreds of other daily examples of the denigration of marriage in this society. But to suggest that gay marriage is a-ok because at least it’s not as bad as a 3 day Vegas marriage is ridiculous. Should the parent of a child with brain cancer stop making him wear his seatbelt?

It's also a logical fallacy to suggest that because someone is not as vocal about subjects similar to their pet causes, that their arguments can just be dismissed out of hand. In fact, there is actually legimate reason for conservatives to object more to gay marriage than Spears' marriage. Spears is actually admitting to the public that her marriage was a mistake.

I note that this commentator and his peers didn’t go around asking people if Spears’ marriage affected their own marriage before assuming that it would affect traditional marriage. Some things are just obvious.

I did some research on it, and was amazed to find that the estimate for the number of people who jumped to their deaths from the World Trade Center on 9-11 runs from 50 to 200 people. I knew that there were some jumpers, but I didn’t realize that there were so many. I certainly didn’t know that the media under-reported that story. (Obviously they did a good job.)

I have a hard time understanding the objections of those who didn’t want the pictures to be published. From what I’ve found, none of them were ever positively identified, although (somewhat insensitive) attempts were made, so it’s not as though the death of any specific person is being capitalized on.

Apparently another reason given was that pictures would lead to violence against Muslims.

Some seem to think it was merely sick voyeurism for the papers to print them.

I would think, though, that the reason people really objected was that they are just too disturbing to deal with, especially with the wound so fresh. The image of the towers collapsing combined with the words that thousands of people died is nothing compared to the image of even one of those people falling to their deaths. The first is academic, the second forces me to wonder what it must have been like to have to choose between two deaths, one long and agonizing; one immediate but requiring a step over the edge.

Likewise, the pictures of starved and abused holocaust victims stacked like so much refuse bring home the realities of the horror in a way that the words “millions dead” never can.

I suddenly find myself thinking more about the people who died and were injured this week.

that reserve the first 10 slots in an 18-student class for minority students, while requiring others who want to get into the class to arrive on the morning of the first day of class and meet with an adviser before being allowed to register for the remaining eight slots. The OMAS pays for and controls three lower-division math and three lower-division English classes that allow fewer enrolled students and provide more individualized instructor attention. While other sections of Math 242 and Math 243 this term have an average of 115 students for lectures, 29 students for discussions and 35 students for integrated classes, the OMAS classes had a maximum of 18 students. The general Writing 121 and Writing 122 sections had an average of 25 students per class, and the OMAS sections were again restricted to 18 students.

Linda Liu, advising coordinator and academic adviser for OMAS, said the classes are meant to offer a safe haven for minority students and give struggling students a chance to work more closely with professors.

This issue was brought to the forefront when a white student attempted to enroll in one of these classes because it was the only one available. This certainly seems like blatant racism to me. What’s the reason given for these classes?

University Senior Instructor Michel Kovcholovsky, who teaches the OMAS's math classes, said the classes were created to foster a comfortable environment for minorities. "That was the basic idea, so that they don't feel afraid to raise their hand and ask something."

Ahhh, the same condescending claptrap you always hear from these sorts of people. Minorities might feel afraid to raise their hands to ask a question if there are too many white people in the class. (This makes me wonder what they are going to do if they get a job in the real world where less than half of the workforce is non-white.) Let me just say, as a female engineering student I attended many a class where I was one of 2-3, if not the only, female in the class. It never caused me a moment of trouble.

I might also point out that, seeing as how American engineering programs attract a lot of students from different countries, there were also times when white students were in the minority in my classes. And yet no one ever made any concessions for us. Indeed, see my article from last month about unintelligible foreign instructors. On that subject many were saying that this problem was the fault of the white American students who just weren’t willing to suck it up and learn “worldly listening skills.” So what if it took them half the semester to learn how to understand the instructor and they were unable to catch up?

He said students enjoy interacting with him one-on-one.

Gee, you think other struggling students would enjoy interacting with you one-on-one?

The course material he teaches is exactly the same. "To lower the standards for people of color would be racism," Kovcholovsky said.

That last sentence there is pretty darn funny.

So the class material isn’t the same.

She said the enrollment policy is fair because coming from a smaller high school, she liked the opportunity to study in a smaller class and that the remaining slots still give everybody a chance to enroll.

Apparently the white students who come from small high schools or struggle with large classes just have to suck it up.

The comments on the article are filled with the sort of stuff you always hear from supporters of affirmative action. It’s ok because it’s just making up for past racism, white people have it better so it’s ok to discriminate against them, you’re a racist if you object to this, etc.

This is my favorite comment.

What does it mean to be white? Please think about that. Why do I have to go to a class and be the only person of color in my class? Do you know what that feels like? So what students of color have 5 classes designated for them, you have all the rest of the 1,000 or whatever amount of classes where you are the majority. You are right, this campus is racist, the fact that we are even contesting the validity of the classes is a joke.

Yes, because the school has more whites than blacks enrolled, even though there are more whites than blacks in the population, the school is racist. Obviously, America should ship over 100 million black people from other countries so that everything will be “fair.”

You know, I do sympathize with these people who have a hard time coming into an unfamiliar culture. I’m very shy, and I have trouble in many situations where there are lots of people who are substantially different from me in any one of many ways. I think anyone of any race would have trouble being in a school where the majority of the population is a different race with a different culture. But that’s just life, and dealing with those situations is how you learn tolerance and respect for people who are different from you and how you learn to function in the real world. These courses may be just as academically rigorous as the other classes, but they aren’t as socially rigorous and “people of color” don’t need to be protected from that anymore than a person from a rural area needs classes with only FFA members in them, or a Jew needs a class with no Christians allowed.

Linked at Outside the Beltway and Mudville Gazette's open post.

On a happier note, I see that I hit 10,000 hits while I was gone. Not all that special compared to some blogs, but I'll take it.