I almost forgot, happy IEAPD!!

Interesting.

Molten Thought has a satirical re-write of the ten commandments, which “parodies the notion of updating an exalted text through the lens of modern language fads.”

Funny stuff.

1. I am the cool mack daddy of the dope hype flow. Give me props and mad respect.
2. Don’t be kneeling for some bling bling.
3. Don’t be throwing my name around, be it J. Hovah or Yah Diddy.
4. Yo, Sunday is “funday”, ya dig?
5. Respect your moms, your pops, or whoever it was raised you, unless they whack.
6. Thou shalt not bust a cap in someone’s ass.
7. Don’t be running around on people like they don’t know.
8. No five-finger discounts.
9. Don’t front.
10. If your neighbor’s got a fly crib or a pimped-out set of wheels, that’s they bidness, not yours.

If you don’t know what this is all about, there’s a re-write of the Bible in progress to impose a political agenda. This appears to be beyond just a reasonable re-translating of things such as “all men” to “all people” so today’s government-educated youth can understand it.

More:

Michelle Malkin
Civil Commotion
Lots of others, but it’s a busy day… track back here and I’ll link to you if you’re blogging about this.

This is a great discussion of the value of experienced coders. Check it out if you write code for a living, or are considering doing so.

he was making a distinction between being a coder and a developer, a distinction made very well by Mike Gunderloy in his excellent book, Coder to Developer. Mr. Gunderloy differentiates a coder — someone who understands the syntax and semantics of one or even a number of computer programming languages – from a developer — someone who can turn out a full application with all the required supporting details.

If I was a COBOL-coding drone who just translated detailed specs into executable code, I recognize that I could easily be replaced by someone willing to work for a whole lot less. But, reading the column, it was obvious that Mr. Adamsky was talking about both coders and developers. I quote:

There’s little future for someone who only programs. Code is a commodity that can be created by other people for less money – much less. Think of coding as the beginning of a career – a great place to start, but not what you want to do for your entire professional existence.

…

I firmly believe that much of bad software comes from a lack of imagination over how software might be used in ways different than those we anticipate. While our industry should not underestimate the value of a newly minted computer science graduate’s enthusiasm, it should also not underestimate the value of a somewhat less enthusiastic, but seasoned, interested and experienced coder.

The editorial in yesterday’s SF Chronicle wonders about girls wearing pajama pants to school.

It doesn’t pay to go too far with this analyzing. Ponder too much and you’ll miss the plain anarchy of wearing rumpled sleepwear outside the house.

One fashion-world survey found that 3 of 4 teenage girls wore some form of “innerware'’ such as PJs outside the house. Take that, America.

Maybe it’s just all about safety first. After all, sleepwear is fire retardant.

In a whimsical google search about fire retardant pajamas, I learned that there are people who seek non-treated sleepwear in order to be chemical-free and ecologically sensitive.

For example:

The healthiest safe choice with the lowest embodied energy and lowest ecological impact would be snug-fitting, organic cotton long johns or union suit-style pajamas with the “Wear snug-fitting. Not flame resistant” label

I can now go on about my day knowing that I have learned something new today - and that my children can sleep in low embodied energy and low eco-impact PJ’s.

This post is provided as a public service from Myopic Zeal.

There is an interesting article in the Toledo Blade today by Homer Brickey, their senior business writer.

But, while we’re at it, why stop at just privatizing Social Security? Why not privatize government spending? Why not give each taxpayer a checklist and let him or her choose the spending priorities?

He goes through a checklist of what taxpayers might do if they were able to choose the priorities and manage government spending. He mentions the environment, veterans, the needy, the military, potholes, and other things, but there is one major omission.

I read the article twice to be sure, because the omission seems too obvious.

Some tax payers might even decide to scrap certain programs entirely and want to keep their money for themselves and NOT spend it.

For a good time, add this item to your eBay watch list.

(via Beth)

Strange:

A few weeks ago, Mr Hurley was rotary hoeing the garden when he struck metal.

“He started uncovering it, thinking he could pull whatever it was out, but he had no luck,” said Mrs Hurley.

In Indiana, any person having sex under the age of 14 is considered to be the victim of molestation, and it is required by law that this be reported to both law enforcement and child services.

Turns out that Planned Parenthood may not have followed the law.

According to the Courier Press, Indiana Attorney General Steve Carter’s office confiscated (actually, asked and were given) medical records of eight minors who visited Planned Parenthood.

There are 73 more patients whose medical files Planned Parenthood is suing to block access to.

The big question here is this: is Planned Parenthood knowling concealing the crime of molestation of 12 and 13 year old girls?

Steve Carter appears to want to find out, and he also appears to have a battle on his hands.

This AP story says:

In each case, the minors were receiving services other than abortions, Cockrum said.

Neither Cockrum nor Ken Falk of the Indiana Civil Liberties Union, which is representing Planned Parenthood in the case filed in Marion Superior Court, would reveal the ages or the genders of the three minors involved or any other information about them.

However, they released copies of a form letter from the Indiana Medicaid Fraud Control Unit that said the agency “is investigating an incident report or complaint alleging possible patient abuse or neglect.”

Indiana law defines sexual activity with a child 13 or under as child abuse, even if the partner also is a minor, Falk said. State law also requires anyone suspecting child abuse to report it to child welfare authorities, and Planned Parenthood said it complies with that law.

Dawn Eden points out that Margaret Sanger’s organization has the ICLU on it’s side.

Related stories here.

UPDATE: Joining OTB’s BTJ.

More judicial legislation? (I know I didn’t pay attention much in my high school gov’ment class, but…)

Anyway, here’s the story from the SF Chronicle.

Gay and lesbian couples in California have a constitutional right to marry, a San Francisco Superior Court judge ruled Monday.

The ruling by Judge Richard Kramer is just the first step in a case that is headed for the state Supreme Court, probably sometime next year. But it marks the first time that a California judge has declared unconstitutional the state law that defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman.

The Jawa Report headlines it with “Judge rules constitution unconstitutional”

Ace of spades says that letting “the states” decide about marriage does not usually mean “the judges in those states.”

Wizbang’s Kevin: Gay marriage will be imposed not by the peoples representatives, but via the bench.

RightPundit compares it to the old marching band joke.

Vote for Judges thinks this emphasizes the need for term limits, with a discussion of the SCOCA make up and why it is the way it is.

Stones Cry Out asks: “aren’t they supposed to default to case law even if they disagree with it? I thought the Supreme Court of California was the appropriate place to review the constitutionality of historical interpretation of case law or legislation passed by the legislature or initiative”

James Joyner reluctantly thinks it’s time for a constitutional ammendment: “Given that judges are overstepping their bounds and imposing their policy preferences, though, it appears the only recourse that the public has.”

Prestopundit says the robed ones are saying “I make the laws in this state, your job is to shut up and follow the laws as I pull them randomly out of my…” well, you can read the rest yourself.

Gay Orbit says this whole Judicial activism thing is just a bunch of buzzwords to get conservative readers in a frenzy.

The Faerie Wizard says: “Does that mean segregation and Brown V the Board of Education are also on the list of acts of judicial activism waiting to be corrected? Same goes for the rulings allowing inter-racial marriage.”

Len also picks up the segregation theme when pouncing on the judicial activism mantra: “If we had waited for this so-called democratic process, what do you think would be the status of school integration in the southern states today? Would white people still be drinking from fountains marked “Whites Only?” Would interracial marriage still be illegal?”

And lots more from around the blogosphere.

UPDATE: Scalia weighs in, sort of.

In a 35-minute speech Monday, Scalia said unelected judges have no place deciding issues such as abortion and the death penalty. The court’s 5-4 ruling March 1 to outlaw the juvenile death penalty based on “evolving notions of decency” was simply a mask for the personal policy preferences of the five-member majority, he said.

“If you think aficionados of a living Constitution want to bring you flexibility, think again,” Scalia told an audience at the Woodrow Wilson Center, a Washington think tank. “You think the death penalty is a good idea? Persuade your fellow citizens to adopt it. You want a right to abortion? Persuade your fellow citizens and enact it. That’s flexibility.”

“Why in the world would you have it interpreted by nine lawyers?” he said.

UPDATE 2: Eugene Volokh has a look back at some of the screeching when the ERA was initially being discussed.

Yet it now looks like the “hysterical” “emotional scare tactic” “canards” may well have been quite reasonable predictions: It looks like courts are indeed treating opposite-sex-only marriage rules as involving sex classifications, and as thus being presumptively unconstitutional. Had the ERA been enacted at the federal level, it would have further raised the bar against sex classifications, and thus made decisions like the California and Massachusetts one more likely.

It appears that our host has had technical problems overnight. We apologize for the inconvenience, since we know how much you rely on this blog.

You are not alone if you frequently wake up in the middle of the night with that desire to go check Myopic Zeal to see what the latest posting reveals about the world around us. :-D