Apparently, there is a science to choosing the fastest checkout lane at the grocery store. I’m going to be trying this one.

Each person in a grocery store checkout lane approximates 48 seconds in addition to whatever is in his/her cart (this average time includes exchanged greetings and the payment process). Each item in a cart is only 2.8 seconds. Therefore, 17 items in someone’s cart is the same as an extra person. So, it is usually better to hop in line behind the one woman with 30 items (132 seconds) instead of the three-person Express Lane (which will be between 153 and 270 seconds).

This assumes clerks are similarly fast (not a rule where I shop). Also, it doesn’t say anything about those U-Scan self-checkout machines. I’d love to know how to spot the clueless before I stupidly park my cart behind them.

You know me: I’m not religious. Atheists and non-believers don’t bother me, and neither do most believers (I have some issues with those who can’t stop themselves from trying to convert me after I’ve asked them to desist, but fortunately these people are reasonably rare). But what I absolutely cannot stand are people who claim to be religious who turn around and behave as though they weren’t. Case in point, the new president of the Episcopal Divinity School (EDS) in Cambridge, the Rev. Dr. Katherine Ragsdale, who had this to say about abortion:

When a woman wants a child but can’t afford one because she hasn’t the education necessary for a sustainable job, or access to health care, or day care, or adequate food, it is the abysmal priorities of our nation, the lack of social supports, the absence of justice that are the tragedies; the abortion is a blessing.

“And when a woman becomes pregnant within a loving, supportive, respectful relationship; has every option open to her; decides she does not wish to bear a child; and has access to a safe, affordable abortion – there is not a tragedy in sight — only blessing. The ability to enjoy God’s good gift of sexuality without compromising one’s education, life’s work, or ability to put to use God’s gifts and call is simply blessing.

“These are the two things I want you, please, to remember – abortion is a blessing and our work is not done. Let me hear you say it: abortion is a blessing and our work is not done. Abortion is a blessing and our work is not done. Abortion is a blessing and our work is not done.”

Apparently, her appointment to the EDS has pro-life Episcopalians upset. I want to know why more people aren’t upset. “The ability to enjoy God’s good gift of sexuality without compromising one’s education”? What Bible is that from?

________________________

Tanya has a sharp pain right between her eyes: “Abortion is a blessing and our work is not done.” All she’s missing is a pocketwatch swinging like a pendulum. Or eyeballs that light up like these (1 minute in):

[youtube:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zEp7QopOZ30]

Wow, I’m amazed! A PETA ad featuring Pamela Anderson was deemed too racy to air! (You can read about it and see the video here: it’s not that bad, but your probably don’t want to watch it with the little ones around. It’d be hard to explain this much silly nonsense.)

Anyway. I’m almost certain that no one has ever been banned for wearing one of those. Do you have yours yet?

A long piece on sex-ed and this newish “philosophy of inclusive, non-threatening, pleasure-focused sex education” that’s apparently now making its way into high schools.

Where to begin?

I’m glad the kids are interested to know more about what makes for good sex and happy, healthy relationships. I’m sure they’ve had it up to there with the “how to put on a condom properly” tutorial (sort of like having to watch An Inconvenient Truth over and over again, I suppose – it gets tedious pretty fast). But there is a big giant BUT. Two, actually. One, no matter how fun you think it is to fool around with a “plush pink vulva puppet” in a high-school class, the secret to good sex isn’t technical. It’s something that comes with the kind of commitment very few teenagers are ready to make, and you’re not doing them any favours trying to make them believe otherwise. Plus they’ll find out the truth on their own eventually (I did) and realize then that they’d been lied to all this time (ditto). And two, please people, do not leave this crucial topic for sex-shop owners to deal with for you. Talking to your kids about healthy relationships (yes, including the sex part) is your job. If you don’t do it, somebody else will, whether you like it or not. So get to it.

Finally, a long weekend Canadians and Americans can share! (If only we could learn to spell things the same way, too, eh?)

Personally, I’ll be busy puttering and trying to finish various small-scale building projects around the place, and that’s just the way I like my long weekends. Busy with fun, non-policy-related, real-life stuff. Here’s hoping you all have a fun and safe Labo(u)r Day weekend.

I find much comfort in this piece. You?

Abortion advocates have got to be scratching their heads.

For the first time in decades, they have staunch allies in the top echelons of government and the left-wing majorities needed to advance their agenda. No legislative roadblocks impede their way — not a president’s veto pen, not hostile committee chairs, not unfriendly leadership in the House and Senate.

They also have a president who promised to make the Freedom of Choice Act, a bill that would overturn all state-level abortion restrictions, his first priority as the nation’s chief executive. More importantly, with Obama the pro-abortion movement has the luxury of claiming the implicit support of the American people, 70 million of whom voted for him last year.

Yet during the first eight months of his administration, abortion has been far down the president’s list of priorities. Even worse for abortion advocates, the issue is trending away from them even as they’ve gained more power.

Government health-care guidelines have no other purposes than looking after our best interests, right? Or maybe not.

In a letter to The Daily Telegraph, a group of experts who care for the terminally ill claim that some patients are being wrongly judged as close to death.

Under NHS guidance introduced across England to help doctors and medical staff deal with dying patients, they can then have fluid and drugs withdrawn and many are put on continuous sedation until they pass away.

But this approach can also mask the signs that their condition is improving, the experts warn.

[…]

The warning comes just a week after a report by the Patients Association estimated that up to one million patients had received poor or cruel care on the NHS.

The scheme, called the Liverpool Care Pathway (LCP), was designed to reduce patient suffering in their final hours.

Not to be overly flip about this, but yes, indeed, death has a way of reducing patient suffering. But honestly, if you don’t see the slippery slope here, it’s probably because you’re already at the bottom of it.

And he’ll probably be out in no time:

OTTAWA — A 21-year-old man who beat his pregnant girlfriend to make her unattractive to other men was sentenced to a year in jail Wednesday.

Marcel Mario Vien struck his pregnant girlfriend three times in the stomach and scratched her chest five or six times, causing bruising over a two-month period in August and September 2008, according to an agreed statement of facts.

Vien also grabbed the neck area and strangled the woman, dug his fingers into her mouth and inflicted bloody scratches that were so deep they left permanent scars on her back and side.

The story doesn’t say what, if anything, happened to the baby she was carrying. Maybe they forgot that detail?

Interesting. The same crowd (yes, I’m generalizing) that tells people like me not to impose my beliefs on others (“If you’re opposed to abortion, don’t have one”, they say) are up in arms about Michelle Duggar’s 19th pregnancy. Look at the comments here. A few samples with a warning, some are very crude:

@ xifeng882: They claim that it’s “up to God” to determine how many children they’ll have. I can’t even imagine what kind of toll this has taken on Michelle’s body.

—

Does this family recieve any type of social financial assistance, food stamps, child care, health care via our tax dollar ? If so, why ?! There is a local couple here who are “religious” who also have a bunch of kids and they get welfare assistance-why should my tax dollar pay for their choice ? Let their church ‘help’ them if God is leading them to have so many kids !

—

Why hasn’t someone sewed her vagina shut yet?

—

I still don’t understand why people who love children so much don’t adopt or foster.  Why produce so many kids of your own when there are so, so, many children out there who need loving homes?  Have one or two of your own, then adopt.  It seems so egotistical to have a huge family that is *all* your biological kids . . .

—

I dont think these people have to have sex anymore, he just has to jack off in her general direction, her hole should be big enough now.

There’s more – some worse, some better. I don’t know much about the Duggers but as far as I can tell they are happy, debt-free, not on welfare. The kids looks well-cared for.

Their kind of life is not for me. But why should I care? They’re having a load of kids the old-fashioned way, they’re not using all kinds of weird fertility treatments, and they’re certainly not killing unborn babies. Who, exactly, are they hurting – other than, potentially, Mrs. Duggar’s reproductive system? (Although so far it seems remarkably healthy.) What gives other people the right to make crude comments about this woman’s sex life, especially after having spent decades insisting that nobody had any business criticizing other women who’ve had abortions?

Just wondering.

_________________

Véronique adds: I think this large family is good news. I also think it’s none of my business but since they do have a TV show, I guess they de facto made their business everybody else’s business. Why would you judge and heap vitriol on a woman who, even if you don’t share her morals or her views on contraception, deserves to be admired more than condemned?

Two things really get me from that post and its comments. First, isn’t it interesting how “reproductive freedom” is a one way street? As in: you should be free not to reproduce, but if you do, you’re fair game. And these people call us judgmental and close-minded! Secondly, why do pro-whatevers always need to resort to vulgarity and name calling to make their point? Seriously. If you think that global warming has no bigger problem than Michelle Duggar, make an argument. I just don’t get people who think that being rude is being cool, funny or intelligent.

________________________

Rebecca notes: So, we’re not supposed to care about what people do in the privacy of their bedroom … unless they’re a religious married couple. And we’re not supposed to judge other people’s reproductive choices … unless they’re choosing to bear children. And we must never make derogatory remarks about a woman’s sexuality … unless she’s a happily married mother. Got it.