Odessa

A generation plus ago, my mother gave birth to a full-term stillbirth. My father saw the baby - my mother never did. There was absolutely no thought given to naming a baby that never took a breath. There was no thought to marking her grave. No one even blinked an eye that my parents might be in mourning. A few years ago, a friend of mine lost a full term baby. Her and her husband named the baby, had her cremated and buried her ashes under a tree in the yard. The hospital staff were very sympathetic. Both were horrible losses handled in very different ways.

This past summer a Texas couple lost their baby. The woman was in her 2nd trimester, that is between 3 and 6 months gestation. A horrible loss, but it was not nearly a full term baby. The couple went so far as to name the fetus. The couple is now suing the hospital for sending their stillborn son to the cleaners with the soiled linens rather than the morgue - citing "severe emotional distress and mental anguish". While I do find it disturbing and rather disgusting that the hospital would be so careless with biological material, I can understand the mistake. A fetus during this stage of development is about the size of a peach, about 3 to 4 inches long and about 1.5 lbs.

I find it rather evolved that now the medical establishment consider a full-term fetus a baby. Asking the medical establishment, or anyone else, to consider a fetus that is not viable outside the womb and is smaller than many things surgeons send to the incinerator a baby might be expecting a bit much. I encourage the grieving "parents" to grieve in their own way, but leave the courts out of it. The hospital didn't cause the miscarriage, they just perhaps handled the after effects inappropriately.

Maybe I sound a bit heartless, but where do we draw the line? Will we start naming and holding vigils for zygotes when a woman miscarries? And what about the handling of an aborted fetus?

In the U.K., a goth couple were denied transportation on a public bus. Dani Graves was holding a leash connected to a choke collar around Tasha Maltby's neck. The bus driver evidently told them "We don't let freaks and dogs like you on".

Walking around with a leash around my neck would not be my cup of tea, but if Miss Maltby likes being a "pet" what business is it of mine. She claims being a "pet" is pretty good, and if she is treated half as well as my two cats lazing on the chairs near me, I can certainly understand.

And as for the bus driver - Did he get a crumpet stuffed up his arse? That might account for his foul disposition.

I am back to on-line dating sites. I am minding my own business when this guy IM's me asking me if I will be his sub. I tell him no. I had thought I had dealt with all that I ever would on these sites - Then this guy asks if I am into bestiality. I say "eww".

No kidding, this is what the guy has on his profile:

I'm looking for...
I am looking for a kind, caring sensitive woman and some of those old fashioned morals wouldn't go a miss. So if you are somewhat into health and fitness, who loves the outdoors and a woman who is looking for her soul mate, her best friend, her lover, her everything then I am looking forward to hearing from you...

Yeah, bestiality is such an "old fashioned moral". Where are the rocks these turds crawl out from under? And, Doug_ny, go crawl back under it, where ever it is.

First Romney did it, then Hillary - They misted up in front of prospective voters. Does this make them look more human? Does this make them look weak?

Frankly does it matter? For me - no. And I told the opinion taker that called me about this issue that it makes no difference to me. And who exactly calls to ask and opinion about something like that?

I'm not talking about horsepower. I've seen them. Maybe you've seen them - the rubber testicles that some people think are amusing to attach to the back underside of their vehicle, typically to a trailer hitch. Funny? Maybe. Tasteless? Sure, but then again there is a bunch of other stuff that is tasteless wandering around the world (Paris, as in Hilton; any number of sports superstars, etc.). I deal with it the way I deal with most other tasteless stuff - laugh if its funny, shrug my shoulders if it ain't. Personally, I think that anyone (insert "man") that finds the need to attach rubber testicles to their vehicle, frequently a big ass truck or SUV, is having a variant of the same identity issues that middle aged men have when they buy a Corvette.

Now a Virginia legislator wants to ban the display of these vehicle balls. Why? Because one of his constituent's young daughters asked her Daddy what they were. Again and again some parent gets asked the same types of questions that their own parents squirmed answering when they themselves asked as wee lads and lassies. Instead of using it as a learning tool (like a good Mommy or Daddy) - the bonehead calls their favorite local politician and whines 'cause we gotta protect the children!

It could have just as easily been a huge male dog with all his parts that would have likely prompted the same "What are those silly things hanging down there Daddy??!!!" While I would love the removal of testicles from any number of things - most dogs and cats (shelters are full enough), the Neanderthal with the lame ass pick-up line - legislation of their removal are patently uncalled for. Likewise is this piece of legislation for the neutering of motor vehicles.

Virginia has also agonized over whether to ban the droopy draws with which we have all become familiar. Seeing some dude's boxers is annoying to me too, but come on. I'm sure Virginia needs some real problems solved.

From the AP

NEW YORK - From the waist up, they looked like perfectly normal commuters. That wasn’t good enough for police.

Eight pranksters who dropped their pants and showed their underwear on the subway on Sunday were taken into custody and issued summonses for disorderly conduct. All were ultimately released, said Improv Everywhere, the group that organized the stunt.

The group said more than 160 riders participated in the fifth annual No Pants Subway Ride before police halted their No. 6 train about 5 p.m.

Disorderly conduct? Is that the best they could do? Boy, that was dredging the bottom of the barrel digging for a charge. Nothing was showing, so "New York's Finest" needed to give it a rest and let the folks have their fun.

When I was driving home from work tonight, Nickelback's "Rockstar" came on the radio. Its song with which I am familiar, familiar with the "explicit" version that is. I can understand "ass" being cut. What really made me go "what the . . .?" was the removal of the word "drug". The word "drug" is not one of the seven that used to get Howard Stern periodic vacations. I get removing "nigger" out of the Kayne West's "Gold Digger" - the n-word may not classically be profanity, but it is an ugly, degrading word and removing it off the radio is probably a good idea. But "drug"? - this takes "Just say no to drugs" to a new level.

I had previously remarked about a woman being charged with disorderly conduct for cursing in her own house:
http://www.worldofsuck.net/index.php/Odessa/2007/10/23/say_what

Its conclusion:

Good week for: The foulmouthed, after a Pennsylvania judge acquitted a woman of disorderly conduct for swearing at her malfunctioning toilet. Her neighbor, a policeman, charged Dawn Herb, 33, with a crime after he heard her repeatedly using the F-word through her bathroom window. The language Herb used “may be considered by some to be offensive, vulgar, and imprudent,” the judge ruled, but she was entitled to use it under the First Amendment.

Male monkeys "pay" for sex:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,319746,00.html

Way I look at it, foreplay is foreplay. "Groom" me baby, and lets see what happens . . .

How many of us have wanted to say this on public transportations or in a store or else where. One Texas bus driver did just that and its being labeled a religious incident by many. Seems Christine Lutz was reading the Bible to her children on the way to church. She was asked to keep it down and she said she was teaching her children and she was going to continue. She was subsequently ejected from the bus and provided a ride to church.

If she was loud, it shouldn't matter what she was reading, she was being disruptive to her fellow passengers. The self-righteousness of some people astounds me. I guess they believe that just because the topic of their hyperbole happens to be religious in nature it is OK.

Ms Lutz and Liberty Legal Institute are going to lock horns with the mass transit system, calling it religious prosecution. I call it a bus driver standing up for the rights of the other passengers. Also, Ms Lutz and her children were not physically harmed - they were provided safe transportation to their destination. She is just upset that she got called out and God didn't strike the heathen down. Well, Ms Lutz, ever consider that God doesn't like you talking loud on the bus either?