PC run amok (some more)

Post conception fertility control? Follow the links here.

Movie violence

Eugene Kane blames at least part of violence in America on the movies,

I wonder why so many people seem surprised at the random violence in America that regularly bubbles up and explodes in all kinds of horrible ways, everything from school yard shootings to car jackings to serial killers to murder-suicide domestic incidents.

Violence is all around us and apparently we like it. Just check out the movies.

So do movies, as Hollywood contends, merely reflect culture? Or do they influence culture?

And what difference does it make. It’s Free Speech and we can’t do anything about it anyway.

Well, at least MPS is limiting benefits to domestic partners

Via The Week magazine (subscription required),

Palm Beach Community College in Florida has angered gay-rights groups by extending health benefits to cover employees’ pets but not their “domestic partners.” College employees can now get a discount on health insurance for their dog, cat, hedgehog, frog, guinea pig, or gecko. Yet a plan to extend health coverage to employees’ live-in partners was rejected in August. “Many pet owners consider their dogs and cats part of their families,” said Deirdre Newton of the Palm Beach Human Rights Council, “but there is a basic disconnect when an employer will insure an employee’s pet but not an employee’s partner.” [Emphasis mine]

OK, I may not agree with extending benefits to gay partners (or heterosexual ones either, for that matter), but is the PBCC board filled with PETA members?

Waukesha County to ease prosecutions for pot?

From the Journal Sentinel,

Joining a movement to decriminalize certain marijuana cases, Waukesha County officials are considering handling minor instances of possession like traffic tickets.

First time offenders would pay a fine and would not get a criminal record.

Many other municipalities and counties in Wisconsin already have taken steps toward decriminalization, but an advocate for relaxed marijuana laws expressed surprise that move would be under consideration in traditionally conservative Waukesha County. [emphases mine]

Although, traditionally, conservatives have been against decriminalization, many have been in favor, most notably William F. Buckley, who, in fact, doubts the effectiveness of the entire war on drugs,

Back in 1965 I sought to pay conventional deference to libertarian presumptions against outlawing any activity potentially harmful only to the person who engages in that activity. I cited John Stuart Mill and, while at it, opined that there was no warrant for requiring motorcyclists to wear a helmet. I was seeking, and I thought I had found, a reason to override the presumption against intercession by the state.

About ten years later, I deferred to a different allegiance, this one not the presumptive opposition to state intervention, but a different order of priorities. A conservative should evaluate the practicality of a legal constriction, as for instance in those states whose statute books continue to outlaw sodomy, which interdiction is unenforceable, making the law nothing more than print-on-paper. I came to the conclusion that the so-called war against drugs was not working, that it would not work absent a change in the structure of the civil rights to which we are accustomed and to which we cling as a valuable part of our patrimony. And that therefore if that war against drugs is not working, we should look into what effects the war has, a canvass of the casualties consequent on its failure to work. That consideration encouraged me to weigh utilitarian principles: the Benthamite calculus of pain and pleasure introduced by the illegalization of drugs. [emphases again mine]

Ok, I think he stopped speaking English there at the end, but you get the point. Milton Friedman was another, although some may consider him libertarian,

I don’t mean to say we could not enforce our laws. In principle, there is no doubt that we could completely eliminate drugs if we were willing to use the methods that Saudi Arabia is willing to use: If we were willing to cut off the hands of a drug offender; if we were willing to impose capital punishment on drug dealers. We are not, and all of us without exception are proud of the fact that we are not willing to use those methods. Those are cures that are clearly worse than the disease. Given that we cannot enforce our own laws, I believe that there is no way to justify behavior by the United States that leads to the destruction of other countries. [emphasis mine]

Dan Quayle,

Congress should definitely consider decriminalizing possession of marijuana… We should concentrate on prosecuting the rapists and burglars who are a menace to society.

George Melloan, asked early last year in the Wall Street Journal,

A large percentage of Americans will probably say no, mainly because they are law-abiding people who maintain high moral and ethical standards and don’t want to surrender to a small minority that flouts the laws, whether in the ghettos of Washington D.C. or Beverly Hills salons. The concern about damaging society’s fabric is legitimate. But another question needs to be asked: Is that fabric being damaged now?

A couple of years back Rich Lowry wrote at The National Review,

Marijuana is not harmless, and its use should be discouraged, but in the same way, say, smoking a pack of cigarettes a day should be discouraged. The criminal-justice system should stay out of it. Twelve states have decriminalized marijuana to varying degrees, fining instead of arresting people for possessing small amounts. They recognize that — as the authors of a new study for the conservative American Enterprise Institute argue — “the case for imposing criminal sanctions for possession of small amounts of marijuana is weak.” [emphasis mine]

Marijuana probably has no more health dangers than tobacco, and may be beneficial in some cases. And it has no more danger than alcohol, both legal drugs.

Maine Middle School to Offer the Pill

This pains me

Pupils at a city middle school will be able to get birth control pills and patches at their student health center after the local school board approved the proposal Wednesday evening.

The plan, offered by city health officials, makes King Middle School the first middle school in Maine to make a full range of contraception available to students in grades 6 through 8, according to the state Department of Health and Human Services.

In my ideal world, which I’m learning from Ann Coulter’s appearance on Donny Deutsch’s program I should not mention my ideals, ideals which are unrealistic because the world would be dull (Well, DUH, it’s an ideal), middle school students would not even be thinking about sex yet, much less indulging in it (Can we all say, “Immaturity”?). They would not get pregnant, would not have to abort the baby or have to drop out of school because of their pregnancy, and would not, most likely, be condemned to a life of poverty because of being pregnant.

Unfortunately, the world is not ideal. I’m not sure if passing out condoms increases the likelihood of sex, or if it even prevents teen pregnancy (i.e., do they use them?) . And yes it’s a parental responsibility, if the parents are responsible parents. Sadly many aren’t.

But could the school system at least require some counseling with some responsible adults before passing them out? Maybe that takes place in the Health Centers.