Texas Embarrasses Itself Again. About Reproductive Rights. Again. Part 2 of ∞

Via chan4chan.com

Via chan4chan.com

Yes, I titled this post “Part 2 of ∞,” because I don’t expect that the elected leaders of this state will ever stop saying stupid crap about female reproductive parts until the mind-controlling properties of fluoride finally take effect. In my earlier post, I forgot to mention the national shame that is Representative Michael Burgess, an OB-GYN-turned-idiot who represents Texas’ 26th District. His district is northwest of Dallas and north of Forth Worth, which might explain a lot.

Rep. Burgess’ contribution to our quick descent into self-imposed idiocy came on Monday, June 17, during a debate on the bill that would ban abortion after 20 weeks based on a complete and utter disregard for science. Rep. Burgess, speaking from the principle that having the title “doctor” means you can say whatever the hell you want, cited male fetal masturbation as the supposed reason that fetuses can obviously feel pain before the 20-week mark:

“This is a subject that I do know something about,” Burgess said, citing his experience as an OB/GYN. “There is no question in my mind that a baby at 20-weeks after conception can feel pain. The fact of the matter is, I argue with the chairman because I thought the date was far too late. We should be setting this at 15-weeks, 16-weeks.”

“Watch a sonogram of a 15-week baby, and they have movements that are purposeful,” he continued. “They stroke their face. If they’re a male baby, they may have their hand between their legs. If they feel pleasure, why is it so hard to think that they could feel pain?”

Yup. He thinks male fetuses masturbate in the womb. There are not enough facepalms in the world.

Anyone attempting to claim the Congressman’s words were “taken out of context” must provide a context in which his words are not a major step backwards in our nation’s intellectual history.

Photo credit: Via chan4chan.com.

Share

Texas Embarrasses Itself Again. About Reproductive Rights. Again.

Via picardfacepalm.com

Via picardfacepalm.com

The Texas Senate passed three new abortion regulations today, during a special session that was supposed to be about things like jobs or the economy. Apparently, Texas legislators can’t focus on jobs so long as they are distracted by thoughts of unregulated ladybits. These regulations serve no purpose other than to make operating a clinic that provides abortion services either impractical or impossible, and driving them out of business. (The fact that this is a direct regulation on business that is likely to eliminate jobs probably isn’t lost on state Republicans. They just don’t care.) Here’s as good a summary as I can manage off the top of my head (copied from a series of Facebook comments), so some of this may not be 100% accurate.

The first regulation requires abortions to take place in ambulatory surgical centers, which are facilities that provide outpatient surgical care and must conform to a set of health and safety standards geared towards procedures involving anesthesia and incisions. Abortions generally don’t involve either of those things, so requiring them to take place in an ambulatory surgical center means that either (1) existing ASCs must take in existing abortion providers, or (2) facilities that currently provide abortions must meet state requirements for ASCs, even though they will never perform a surgery. Existing ASCs have no reason to start providing abortions, and nearly every incentive not to be targeted by protesters, and upgrades to ASC certification would cost current providers thousands upon thousands of dollars and give ideologues on the bodies that handle licensing endless opportunities to find ways to deny them. There is no reason for this regulation except to drive abortion provers out of business.

The second regulation requires doctors providing abortions to have admitting privileges to a hospital within 30 miles. I’m not sure what goes into getting admitting privileges, but I think it generally involve doctors who routinely work at or with that hospital. Again, this requirement serves no purpose but to make life harder for abortion providers. More and more doctors who provide abortions travel to clinics around the state, so this regulation would force them either to undertake an unreasonable and unsustainable level of admitting privileges, or stay within a 30-mile radius of wherever they are. The one plausible justification I’ve heard for this is that doctors who perform abortions need admitting privileges to local hospitals in case complications occur that require an immediate trip to the emergency room, but that’s not true, from what I’ve read.

The third regulation requires doctors to administer RU-486 in person. I’m not sure how that particular drug is administered. I know it’s more than just a pill or an injection, but so is chemotherapy, and nothing requires doctors to do that personally. Same goes for pain medication infusers. In fact, we entrust most routine procedures to nurses and medical techs, not to mention physician’s assistants and nurse practitioners. Unless administering RU-486 requires monitoring and reactions to complications on par with open heart surgery (I’m sure it doesn’t), this is just another way to make it difficult for doctors.

This is about controlling women’s sexuality. Period. I have yet to see an argument against abortion, along with the trumped-up arguments against birth control and reproductive care, that didn’t eventually boil down to “she shouldn’t have had sex.” The argument flagrantly fails to take into account the myriad ways people can become pregnant, the non-birth-control benefits of the pill, or the fact that people are redefining the very definitions of “birth control” and “abortion” as we go along. At this point, given all the information out there, I have to conclude that people who still oppose abortion on the grounds I’ve heard cited are either lying or are too dumb to have an opinion worth taking seriously.

Photo credit: Via picardfacepalm.com.

Share

The BAMF in Baytown

Do. Not. F***. With Dorothy Baker (© Good Morning America)

Do. Not. F***. With Dorothy Baker (© Good Morning America)

A mother in Baytown, Texas deserves a hearty BAMF designation, not only for selflessly protecting her kids, but also for thinking quite quickly when faced with something that’s supposed to be an urban legend. Via Good Morning America:

While Dorothy Baker and her 2-year-old and 5-year-old sons were shopping Friday at a CVS in Baytown, Texas, a man identified as Ismael Martinez allegedly hid out in her unlocked van, police said.

When the family got back into the car, Baker said Martinez “popped up out of the backseat and said that if I didn’t want my kids to get hurt, that I would do exactly what he said.”

Martinez, 54, allegedly pulled a knife on Baker while she was driving and demanded she stop at an ATM for money, she said.

When she refused, Martinez allegedly became violent, she said.

Baker said she fought back, refusing to compromise the safety of her children.

“She’s got a cut that goes across her chest, and she grabbed the knife and he bit her hand,” Baker’s husband, Charles Flugence said.

“I took my fist and I hit him in the face, and I told him to get out of my car,” Baker said.

Baker intentionally drove her van into a telephone pole in hopes of sending Martinez through the front windshield, according to the Baytown Police Department crime report.

Police said she managed to dial 911 while she grappled with the suspect in hopes that a dispatcher might hear what was going on in the car and find a way to help, ABC station KTRK-TV in Houston reported.

“I thought, ‘If you swerve and hit the pole, he’s not wearing a seatbelt, he’ll go through the windshield or at least hit his head, and you can stop him. You can do something to make sure that he doesn’t hurt your kids,'” Baker told KTRK-TV. “That’s all I was thinking of really, was just to get him away from my kids.”

Police said Martinez eventually jumped out of the van and tried to flee. But before Baker knew it, she had run her car into him.

“I didn’t mean to run him over,” she said. “I was just trying to stop him so he didn’t hurt anybody else.”

Her goal was to keep her kids safe, but she may also go down in BAMF history:

“You don’t come after people with kids,” she said. “I told him he messed with the wrong witch.”

I wouldn’t fault her at all if, in the moment, she didn’t use the word “witch.”

Photo credit: © Good Morning America

Share

Texas is #26!!!

Today’s random Texas statistic: this is the 26th-largest subnational governing body, as measured by area, in the world.

Alaska clocks in at #7, and I doubt anyone is ever going to overtake the winner, Russia’s Sakha Republic, which takes up a large percentage (about 24%) of Siberia. You could fit roughly 4½ Texases in the Sakha Republic. On the other hand, the greater Austin area has more people than the Sakha Republic, so we might be evenly matched in a game of pick-up basketball.

Yeah, that's, uh, big.

Yeah, that’s, uh, big.

In terms of population, Texas’ 25 million people rank 5th in the world among subnational units, behind China’s Sichuan and Heilongjiang Provinces, the state of California, and Gansu Province in China. Canada’s Nunavut, which ranks fifth in land area, ranks last in population with just over 33,000 people.

Photo credit: By TUBS [CC BY-SA 3.0], via Wikimedia Commons.

Share

Monday Morning Cute: Monkeys!!!

They’re like tiny adorable people!

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

1404573_93626000

Photo credits: Monkeys on the move (1 and 2) by e-Eva-a, Monkey family 2 by goejsen, on stock.xchng.

Share

LEGO My House!

Hypothetical LEGO structures are much more fun for me now, as a grownup, than actual LEGOs. I learned this at LEGOLAND in San Diego a few years ago, as I stood impassively, or at least unimaginatively, in front of a quantity of LEGOs that, had I been 8-9 years old, might have inspired the early onset of puberty. (Don’t get me wrong: LEGOLAND was all kinds of awesome, but it just didn’t inspire youthful creativity in me the way it might have in the ’80s.)

LEGO technology has advanced considerably since the pinnacle of my LEGO constructions, which was around 1985-86. Back then, if you wanted a horse, you built a damn horse out of bricks. If you wanted a cave troll, you sure as shit didn’t have this:

© LEGO, via amazon.com

© LEGO, via amazon.com

Anyway, in the realm of hypothetical LEGO models, I can’t think of anything cooler than my own house, built entirely out of LEGO bricks.

Okay, that’s not true. A full-scale LEGO model of the Star Destroyer Executor would be much, much cooler than my house.

Kraken optional (Ochre Jelly [CC BY-NC-ND 2.0], on Flickr)

Kraken optional (Ochre Jelly [CC BY-NC-ND 2.0], on Flickr)

As it currently stands, though, I’m stuck with the hypothetical model of my house.


Lego My House by Movoto

I don’t have access to 11,647,240 LEGO pieces, nor to the roughly $1,164,724 I’d need to procure that many pieces. I’m definitely never getting that Star Destroyer, alas.

Photo credit: Cave troll © LEGO, via amazon.com; Release the KR-KN! by Ochre Jelly [CC BY-NC-ND 2.0], on Flickr.

Share

This Week in WTF, June 14, 2013

Zero Nerf Tolerance: A school in Edmonds, Washington suspended a group of students who brought Nerf guns to school, which is not all that surprising given schools’ “zero tolerance” policy for anything resembling childhood. What makes it interesting is that the Nerf guns were supposedly part of a school project, and that the kids claim they had their teacher’s permission to have them. Their parents are less than thrilled. In an unrelated incident, school officials in Maryland caught a kindergarten student with a cap gun. Again, zero tolerance blah blah blah, but they allegedly held him for questioning for two hours without calling anybody, and frightened the child to the point that he wet himself. That’ll teach him to trust school administrators! (Maybe that wasn’t the lesson they intended…)

I could conceivably see some trademark issues here... (© @KUboobs/Twitter)

I could conceivably see some trademark issues here… (© @KUboobs/Twitter)

Branded in Kansas: If you want to highlight the cleavage of a major Midwestern university’s coeds, be sure not to use the school’s logo or name in a commercial way. That seems to be the trouble with @KUboobs, a Twitter page that posts “boob selfies” featuring cleavage under University of Kansas t-shirts:

The trend began after University of Kansas student Tiffany Kent tweeted a photo of her breasts in a Jayhawks shirt with the hashtag #kuboobs in the hope of boosting support for her struggling college basketball team during a game in February last year.

The move proved to be a successful one, inspiring a sensational turnaround for the Jayhawks, from a 19-point deficit to a one-point-lead over the Missouri Tigers by the end of the game.

The trend has since gone nationwide too, with over 30 spin-off ‘boobs’ Twitter accounts dedicated to cleavage-led support for other colleges, such as @UF_Boobs@bamaboobs@arboobs and @vandyboobs.

The page has over 62,000 followers, but the university sent a cease and desist letter objecting to the sale of unauthorized merchandise bearing KU and Jayhawk brands. This led to a campaign to save the page, which uses the hashtag #saveKUboobs. The school’s athletic director emphasized that they were not trying to shut down the Twitter page, but rather to stop the sale of trademark-infringing merchandise.

Lest you think that @KUboobs is just about boobs, they engage in charitable activities involving boobs as well:

The Pirates of Cornwall: Senegalese authorities arrested two Cornish men who converted a yacht into a warship, sort of, and then took it from a Spanish impound in the Canary Islands. Because this story would be very boring without the words “marine commandos,” Continue reading

Share

Why You Should Never Ask a Non-Practicing Lawyer for Legal Advice at a Party

192px-Stop_sign_plus_silhouette.svgI quit the active practice of law in 2011. While I still have a few cases I’m wrapping up, I last took on a client more than two years ago. This means that, although I still have an active law license, I do not want to help you with your legal matter.

I’m not trying to be rude. In fact, this is my hail Mary attempt at saying this as politely as possible: your lengthy recounting of your “simple” legal issue makes me want to break things on your head. That’s not really your fault. It probably has a lot to do with the way several years of family law broke my brain. The specific reasons why I left the active practice of law are mine alone, but suffice it to say that I do not want to give out legal advice in exchange for money, so I really don’t want to do it for free in a social setting.

Of course, I’m too polite to say any of this to your face, especially when you are pouring out the sordid details of your recent arrest/divorce/custody battle/business merger/naturalization petition. About the only caveat I’ve ever been able to make before the onslaught of personal details involves the fact that I have never practiced criminal defense, yet this never stops people from asking questions about how to handle their upcoming court appearance. Here’s a hint for anyone considering asking a lawyer they know for advice: the advice can always be summarized as “Hire a lawyer, then go to court when ordered to do so.”

It is possible that I will return to legal practice some day. Even then, of course, I will not want to answer your questions for free. So please leave your legal queries for actual law offices or hotlines. If you want to talk to me, the following non-exclusive list of topics will almost never fail to engage me in conversation:

  • Game of Thrones (the books or the TV show);
  • What the plots of the new Star Wars movies should be;
  • Why “ancient alien” theories are idiotic;
  • Obscure aspects of World War II;
  • Why most M. Night Shyamalan movies don’t actually have plot twists;
  • The world’s best key lime pie;
  • Improv;
  • Why Tom Waits’ music was better before Swordfishtrombones;
  • How to be an advocate for animal welfare while still eating bacon; or
  • What might have happened in the 10th season of Firefly, had it not been cancelled.

Thank you for your attention, and please piss off with your legal questions.

Photo credit: By Liftarn [Public domain, GFDL, CC-BY-SA-3.0 or CC-BY-SA-1.0], via Wikimedia Commons.

Share

Texas Made Its Bed, and Now It Has to Lie in It

West_Explosion_AerialAfter FEMA denied the state’s request for aid for the West fertilizer plant explosion, Texas Governor Rick Perry had the gall to say the following:

The day of the West memorial service, President Obama stood in front of a grieving community and told them they would not be forgotten. He said his administration would stand with them, ready to help. We anticipate the president will hold true to his word and help us work with FEMA to ensure much-needed assistance reaches the community of West.

Rick Perry is not a man to mince words about his disdain for the federal government when it suits his momentary needs. He has no right to act surprised all of a sudden when that same government refuses to help the man who has said time and again that his state doesn’t need them (except, of course, when he does need them).

This is really about a Texas business avoiding regulatory obligations, killing a bunch of people through neglect, and then asking the feds to help clean up. They should be begging OSHA for forgiveness, not asking FEMA for money. If “freedom” from regulation is a Texas value, the rebuilding of West’s infrastructure is the cost Texas hoped to pass on to the rest of the country.

I’m reminded of the talk after the Oklahoma tornado about whether we, as a people, should support relief efforts there even though Oklahomans keep electing people who have nothing but contempt for the very notion of government aid until the moment they need some. My position was, and still is, that we owe them assistance and relief, but that we should not let them forget that their own elected representatives would probably deny it to them had they but lived a few hundred miles in any direction.

Now that the federal government is denying aid to a state that elected a guy who gives lip service to secession, a big part of me wants to say I told you so. Well, I guess I just said it. If so many Texans are so unenamored of the federal government, let us all lie in the bed they made.

Shorter version of what I just said: if you voted for Rick Perry and dare to say anything other than “we don’t need FEMA anyway,” you deserve to get punched in the throat.

One final thought: sooner or later, the lawsuits will start rolling in against West Fertilizer Company and whomever else might be civilly liable, asserting injury claims, wrongful death, and property damage. The odds are very good that Rick Perry will call these suits “frivolous,” or seek to undermine them in some other way. It’s fine to expect the nation’s taxpayers to foot the bill in Perryland, but I’m not so sure the private sector should ever have to pony up.

Photo credit: By Shane.torgerson [GFDL or CC-BY-SA-3.0], via Wikimedia Commons.

Share

Game of Thrones and “Justice”: Nope

From the "Lady Sansa ღ" page on Facebook

From the “Lady Sansa ღ” page on Facebook

In life, the monsters win.
A Game of Thrones, Chapter VI

There is no creature on earth half so terrifying as a truly just man.
Chapter XIV

If we have learned anything from Game of Thrones (the books or the TV series), it is this: the seemingly noble qualities of justice and mercy can have dire, even deadly consequences. (Spoilers ahead.)

I knew the Red Wedding scene was coming from the moment the show started its run in 2011, but I can still say I was surprised that the show presented it in such a brutal manner. The addition of Talisa, a character who does not appear in the books, as well as the news of her pregnancy, added an element of brutality absent even from the books. Much of the reaction I have seen (from people who did not know that the Red Wedding was coming) has focused on bemusement, or even rage, that the show would kill off its main character, Robb Stark.

I have two thoughts in response to that sentiment: (1) Have you learned nothing from the death of Ned Stark? That was not a narrative outlier. (2) Why assume Robb Stark is the central character, or hero? Continue reading

Share