One Amendment down, nine to go!

Does the timing of the Paris Hilton jailhouse Hokey Pokey seem a little odd to you? I mean, she's in, she's out, she's in again and then BOOM she's out. It was almost as though it was manipulated behind the scenes. It all became clear to me when the U.S. Supreme Court released its decision in Morse v Frederick on Monday, the same day that Paris was finally released back to her well-earned life of luxury. Coincidence? Just think about it - if Paris wasn't dominating the media, maybe more attention would have been paid to a decision that further chips away at your right to free speech. Allow me to explain.

On January 24, 2002, students at Juneau-Douglas High School were told they could leave class to go to the front of the high school to watch the Olympic torch make its way through the town. The torch was on its way to the Olympic Games in Salt Lake City. Joseph Frederick, a student at Juneau-Douglas High School, unfurled a banner that read "BONG HiTS 4 JESUS." Not, perhaps, the statement that one would choose to make the focal point of a Constitutional battle, but it is what it is. One of the major cases in student free speech rights is Tinker v Des Moines Independent Community School Dist, 39 U.S. 503 (1969). In the Tinker case, students wore black armbands to school to protest the Vietnam War. The next day, wearing armbands was banned at the school. The wore the armbands anyway and were suspended. The Supreme Court held that student expression may not be suppressed unless school officials reasonably conclude that it will "materially and substantially disrupt the work and discipline of the school." Frederick's high school argued that its actions were legal because Frederick's banner advocated drug use. Frederick says



The Ninth Circuit held that the school's actions violated Frederick's rights because there was no "risk of substantial disruption." The Supremes reversed, holding that the banner advocated drug use and that Frederick was present at a school-sponsored activity, and therefore the school had the authority to confiscate the banner and suspend Frederick. That the banner could "reasonably regarded as encouraging illegal drug use," is ludicrous. There's an element to the majority's decision that smacks of "we'll show those pot smoking hippies."


The standard for free speech in a school is justifiably different than free speech in a public street. Fair enough. But as the dissent points out that one need not find otherwise to still conclude Frederick's First Amendment rights were violated. Does this banner advocate drug use? That seems like a stretch. In the dissent, Justice Stevens explains why that's important:

Frederick's credible and uncontradicted explanation for the message--he just
wanted to get on television--is also relevant because a speaker who does not
intend to persuade his audience can hardly be said to be advocating
anything.7 But most importantly, it takes real imagination to read
a "cryptic" message (the Court's characterization, not mine, see ibid., at 6)
with a slanting drug reference as an incitement to drug use. Admittedly, some
high school students (including those who use drugs) are dumb. Most students,
however, do not shed their brains at the schoolhouse gate, and most students
know dumb advocacy when they see it. The notion that the message on this banner
would actually persuade either the average student or even the dumbest one to
change his or her behavior is most implausible. That the Court believes such a
silly message can be proscribed as advocacy underscores the novelty of its
position, and suggests that the principle it articulates has no stopping
point.

And later, in my favorite section of the dissent:

If Frederick's stupid reference to marijuana can in the Court's view
justify censorship, then high school students everywhere could be forgiven for
zipping their mouths about drugs at school lest some "reasonable" observer
censor and then punish them for promoting drugs.

Another thing that confuses me about this is when standing on a public street became a "School sponsored activity." Frederick was late to school that day - he hadn't attended any classes, but went straight to the event. He was standing on a public street. A public street. Standing on a public street with a stupid banner during a school day is now restricted speech? Scary.

By the way, the attorney who argued for the high school was none other than Kenneth Starr, who's been merrily chipping away at the Bill of Rights from his Luthor Lair, Pepperdine University Law School. Did I mention that Kenneth Starr is Paris Hilton's godfather? Ok, I made that list bit up, but seriously, folks, isn't that "vast right wing conspiracy" starting to make just a teeny-weeny little bit of sense now...? Are the pieces starting to fall into place...?

The full text of the opinion is here.

Misunderstood.

I was describing to JFJ how what the Pride festival is like and how packed the Civic Center gets.

JFJ: I wonder what it's like for street people this weekend?

Me: Well, I guess if you're a scavenger you can probably pick up a lot of bottles and stuff for recycling. But if you're mentally ill it must just seem like all your paranoid fantasies come to life. It could be nightmarish.

JFJ: Hm.

a few moment pass...

Me: But I guess being homeless and mentally ill is always rough. Maybe pride weekend is no worse.

JFJ: Oh! I said straight people, not street people.

JFJ pointed this out.

As you ponder your selection for the "Which Ya Ya?" contest below, you may want to spend some time perusing my new favorite column, "The Unethicist." Gawker describes:

"The Ethicist" is Randy Cohen's long-running advice column in the New York Times. Each week, Gabriel Delahaye's "The Unethicist" will answer the same questions as "The Ethicist," with obvious differences."

Top Ten Things That Happened to Ya Yas While I Haven't Been Blogging

10. A Ya Ya packed for her impending move to Germany.

9. A Ya Ya got a dog.

8. A Ya Ya went to Gay Porn Star Karaoke at the Hi-Dive.

7. A Ya Ya got a new job.

6. A Ya Ya went to a bat mitzvah (not her own).

5. A Ya Ya did a triathlon and beat her PR by 10 minutes.

4. A Ya Ya went to Russia.

3. A Ya Ya has a girlfriend.

2. A Ya Ya booked her trip to Peru.

1. A Ya Ya got married.

Of these 10 things, the Ya Ya that was involved in 3 of them was me. Guess which 3 and win a prize.

It's an evolution-themed week here at On The Rocks...

Ok, folks, cancel those flights to Orlando because I've got some summer vacation plans for you that are going to blow Disneyworld right into the hereafter (um, I'm afraid that's true. Stop worshipping idols of oversize rodents, you heathens).

That's right, ladies and gentiles, it's the Creation Museum, a 65,000 square foot "walk through history" that "brings the pages of the Bible to life." The Creation Museum appears to be the Bible Belt's answer to natural history and science museums across the country, only it's not pretending to teach you anything, so it's probably a lot more fun. The Creation Museum promises "murals and realistic scenery, computer-generated visual effects, over fifty exotic animals, life-sized people and dinosaur animatronics, and a special-effects theater complete with misty sea breezes and rumbling seats." Take that, American Museum of Natural History! The Creation Museum can be as fun as it wants, because it's got The Lord on it's side! I bet there's no preachy environmental exhibits at the Creation Museum. And the website specifies that firearms are not permitted in the museum.

Thanks to the efforts of an intrepid student at Eastern Kentucky University, you can see photos of the museum as the finishing touches are added. I have to tell you, I simply cannot wait to get myself to Petersburg, Kentucky, so I can check my .45 at the door and get me some interactive learnin' to offset all those years at university!

No, seriously. It actually looks really fun. I'm concerned that I'm funding Operation Rescue with the price of my admission fee, but surely I can offset that with a substantial donation to Planned Parenthood or the Act Up...? This is a good example of why the Christian right will eventually win over this country. They make stuff fun and cool. Science involves lots of hard work and studying. And nerds. And when it comes to being a fundamentalist, all you really need is The Bible and zeal.

The thing that kills me about Christian fundamentalists is that they're really, really good at what they do. Even though I mock them, I bet the folks at the Creation Museum would be pretty nice if this pro-choice, Hillary-loving, Catholic California girl showed up. They believe they are saving the country. They have a clear vision of what they hope to achieve. They're cohesive, they're organized, and they have extremely slick marketing. This is something the Christian left could never hope to achieve. We've got, like, Al Franken and the Prius. That's the best we've got, America! Good luck!

Scotts Valley 5-0

A recent selection from the blotter of the Scotts Valley Police Department, showcasing many fine criminal minds at work.

May 22
At 4:39pm a man on the 4600 block of Scotts Valley Drive whistled at a woman driving by, assuming, perhaps, that she was alone in the car. This prompted a man in the passenger’s seat to sit up and instruct the woman to stop the car. The man reportedly jumped out of the car and punched the whistler in the face, leaving him with a broken nose (I think we can all agree what's interesting about this story is how it's unclear what the guy was doing in the passenger seat that he couldn't be seen... hmmm...)

May 26
Two men went into a store on the corner of Granite Creek Road and Santa’s Village Road and reportedly began loading up two baskets with alcohol and food. When they got what they wanted, the men ran out through the emergency exit to an awaiting vehicle. The vehicle was later found and its four occupants were arrested.

May 24
A 42 year-old man successfully lifted a bottle of Cook’s Champagne (they must mean "sparkling wine" - what is wrong with journalists today?) from a store on the 200 block of Mt. Hermon Road. Feeling confident, the man returned to steal two more bottles of bubbly, but he was caught, arrested for burglary and booked into Santa Cruz County jail.

Pun of the week

My colleague was describing a long-lost boyfriend to me in terms that made him sound very exotic and sexy. I tried to join in by telling her what kind of accent I thought he had but she told me I was wrong, he didn't have an accent. "Don't tell me the truth about him," I told her, "You'll ruin the fantasy I've cocked up for myself!"

I meant to say "cooked." My boss was there, too, and we laughed so hard we all had tears running down our faces.

From Ape to Woman, by the Grace of God

Today's New York Times published an Op-Ed article, by Sam Brownback, a Republican Senator from Kansas who is running for President. Now. There are a lot of things that I tend to disagree with when it comes to the average views of Republican Senators from Kansas. Choice comes to mind immediately. Wars in Iraq is another one. Most questions of foreign policy. Affirmative action in higher education -- I bet we don't see eye-to-eye on that, either. But the first thing I think of when I think of Republicans (Senators or not) from Kansas, is probably evolution.

As a small child, I was indoctrinated with repeat showings of the film version of the play Inherit the Wind. For those of you who did not spend your childhood tucked in with classic courtroom drama cinema, the movie is an adaptation of a play, which is in turn a dramatization of the 1925 Scopes “monkey” trial. John Scopes was a high school science teach prosecuted for teaching from a textbook that referred to evolution, in violation of the Butler Act of 1925, a Tennessee law expressly forbidding curriculum that references that scientific theory:

"... that it shall be unlawful for any teacher in any of the Universities, Normals and all other public schools of the State which are supported in whole or in part by the public school funds of the State, to teach any theory that denies the story of the Divine Creation of man as taught in the Bible, and to teach instead that man has descended from a lower order of animals."

As far as I can tell, not much has changed. The teaching of evolution, eve as theory, continues to be assaulted. In the meantime, the U.S. continues to slip behind in the teaching of science in schools. And people wonder why jobs are moving overseas.

Everything I learn about science strengthens my faith, and it offends me that the teaching of science could ever be perceived as a threat to Christianity. Seeing the size of a blue whale, looking at the crusted shadows on the moon, seeing the tiniest living creatures through a microscope. My reaction to that is sheer amazement and the incredible world God made for us.. made for us to learn about and explore, and discuss.

Having said that, I was impressed by Sen. Brownback's articulation of his position on evolution. I was jolted to find our own views are not that different. Who's to say what causes genetic mutations that give rise to the development of new species? I have no problem crediting God with the spark that first caused a bunch of molecules to turn into "life" on this planet.

While our views on the subject still don't quite match up, I have to say he's caught me off guard with the whole "not all people who believe the world was created by God believe it happened in six 24-hour days" thing. And I have to admit, I really did think of creationists as people who interpret the Bible literally. Apparently I was doing some narrow-minded stereotyping of my own, and his perspective really showed me that.

"What I Believe About Evolution" by Sen. Sam Brownback

In our sound-bite political culture, it is unrealistic to expect that every complicated issue will be addressed with the nuance or subtlety it deserves. So I suppose I should not have been surprised earlier this month when, during the first Republican presidential debate, the candidates on stage were asked to raise their hands if they did not “believe” in evolution. As one of those who raised his hand, I think it would be helpful to discuss the issue in a bit more detail and with the seriousness it demands.

The premise behind the question seems to be that if one does not unhesitatingly assert belief in evolution, then one must necessarily believe that God created the world and everything in it in six 24-hour days. But limiting this question to a stark choice between evolution and creationism does a disservice to the complexity of the interaction between science, faith and reason.

The heart of the issue is that we cannot drive a wedge between faith and reason. I believe wholeheartedly that there cannot be any contradiction between the two. The scientific method, based on reason, seeks to discover truths about the nature of the created order and how it operates, whereas faith deals with spiritual truths. The truths of science and faith are complementary: they deal with very different questions, but they do not contradict each other because the spiritual order and the material order were created by the same God.
People of faith should be rational, using the gift of reason that God has given us. At the same time, reason itself cannot answer every question. Faith seeks to purify reason so that we might be able to see more clearly, not less. Faith supplements the scientific method by providing an understanding of values, meaning and purpose. More than that, faith — not science — can help us understand the breadth of human suffering or the depth of human love. Faith and science should go together, not be driven apart.

The question of evolution goes to the heart of this issue. If belief in evolution means simply assenting to microevolution, small changes over time within a species, I am happy to say, as I have in the past, that I believe it to be true. If, on the other hand, it means assenting to an exclusively materialistic, deterministic vision of the world that holds no place for a guiding intelligence, then I reject it.

There is no one single theory of evolution, as proponents of punctuated equilibrium and classical Darwinism continue to feud today. Many questions raised by evolutionary theory — like whether man has a unique place in the world or is merely the chance product of random mutations — go beyond empirical science and are better addressed in the realm of philosophy or theology.

The most passionate advocates of evolutionary theory offer a vision of man as a kind of historical accident. That being the case, many believers — myself included — reject arguments for evolution that dismiss the possibility of divine causality. Ultimately, on the question of the origins of the universe, I am happy to let the facts speak for themselves. There are aspects of evolutionary biology that reveal a great deal about the nature of the world, like the small changes that take place within a species. Yet I believe, as do many biologists and people of faith, that the process of creation — and indeed life today — is sustained by the hand of God in a manner known fully only to him. It does not strike me as anti-science or anti-reason to question the philosophical presuppositions behind theories offered by scientists who, in excluding the possibility of design or purpose, venture far beyond their realm of empirical science.

Biologists will have their debates about man’s origins, but people of faith can also bring a great deal to the table. For this reason, I oppose the exclusion of either faith or reason from the discussion. An attempt by either to seek a monopoly on these questions would be wrong-headed. As science continues to explore the details of man’s origin, faith can do its part as well. The fundamental question for me is how these theories affect our understanding of the human person.

The unique and special place of each and every person in creation is a fundamental truth that must be safeguarded. I am wary of any theory that seeks to undermine man’s essential dignity and unique and intended place in the cosmos. I firmly believe that each human person, regardless of circumstance, was willed into being and made for a purpose. While no stone should be left unturned in seeking to discover the nature of man’s origins, we can say with conviction that we know with certainty at least part of the outcome. Man was not an accident and reflects an image and likeness unique in the created order. Those aspects of evolutionary theory compatible with this truth are a welcome addition to human knowledge. Aspects of these theories that undermine this truth, however, should be firmly rejected as an atheistic theology posing as science. Without hesitation, I am happy to raise my hand to that.

New York Times, May 31, 2007

Aquariums are fantastic places, and the Seattle Aquarium is no exception.

























It was pretty quiet when we were there, and sometimes when you're standing in a room surrounded by tanks, you can hear the soft whirr of the machinery of the tanks and a gentle swish of the water, it feels a lot like being in an empty church.

Heavenly Bed

Vancouver/Seattle trip was great. Slow half-marathon time but I'm learning to deal with that. This was my first time to Canada. It's probably not fair to judge an entire country by one city, but then again, I was judging it before I left, too. As far as I can tell, it's like the Lite version of America.

But the main reason we were there was for JFJ's 26.2 mile triumph! He set a PR at Vancouver with a fabulous 3:54 finish. The nice thing about the two of us running different events is that there is clearly one person who is hurting and one person who is helping. So after my race I was able to go back to the hotel, shower, pack a bag of post-race essentials, get the rental car, drive to the finish area, park, and still be there to cheer him on at the last half-mile. He was really a broken man after the race and after we got back to the hotel we put him in the shower and then I ordered room service while he got cleaned up. I wrapped him in one of the fluffy robes and then the food arrived. We ate it just like you see here, lying in bed and eating off the tray. He looked like this for about 20 seconds and then he fell into a dead sleep. We were both really happy that we had all the food and the fluffy towels, and we appreciated it because we came very close to having to share the bathroom with strangers.

You can see from this photo how important it is to stay somewhere nice when you are in town for an endurance event. JFJ had originally suggested we stay at "the Y." Now, don't be confused and think that I mean "the W," the swank urban hipster hotel chain. No, the letter stands for "YWCA" which I actually thought was a halfway house, but apparently is (also?) a budget hotel. With shared bathrooms. Uh huh. Needless to say, I balked and booked us a room at the Westin, home of the Heavenly Bed, double-head showers, room service, and of course fluffy robes. So I guess that's what I like about this photo. It shows me being right, and I'm not even in it.

Bay to Breakers Highlights

Before the race, we saw a group of faux "anti-running" protesters advocating walking:

Unfortunately, JFJ gave the camera to a woman with Parkinsons so the photo of all of us isn't great:
I think I'd just call this photo God Bless America: "The Mane Attraction" boy band, complete with boom box belting out cheesy pop tunes:

The lovely "ladies" of Hooters, along with Paris Hilton in her jail outfit:

Needless to say, I couldn't get through the weekend without shaming myself at least once. The night before the Bay to Breakers we stayed at a hotel near SFO, so we could take the free airport shuttle and then BART into the city. We had a Ya Ya dinner in the Mission and I drank several gallons of sangria before we took BART back to SFO. We were waiting for the hotel shuttle to pick us up (I don't know what time it was, but we must have been on one of the last BART trains) and we were near International Arrivals. Remember at the beginning and the end of the movie Love Actually where there are real scenes of joyous reunions at London Heathrow? Well, a plane had just landed from Somewhere Far Away and there were some joyuos reunions involving very old people, small children, and much embracing. And people, I lost my shit at San Francisco Airport. I just started bawling. I don't know if it was the alcohol or the stress of trying to get everything organized for the race and getting around but I was absolutely sobbing. And drunk, which is always really classy. Drunk chick crying at TOTAL STRANGERS in airport. As Paris Hilton would say, "That's hot." But I got up the next morning at 6am and we completed the Bay to Breakers in hula skirts and feather boas so who are you to judge me?

I know I haven't posted in a while...

... but I've been very busy. And here's why:

In the waiting line.

You're not going to believe this, but the federal government has done something smart and efficient. There's an extremely useful function on the TSA site that allows you to check the average wait time for the security line at U.S. airports. It also tells you the maximum wait time so if you're a worry wart like me you won't worry about cutting it too close. It even specifies which line, so if there's one that's generally faster you'll know before you get there.

Speaking of airports, I'll be leaving bright and early tomorrow for Seattle where I get to spend a few days getting the tour of JFJ's Seattle, seeing law school gal pal Mel and kickin' it old skool style with The Notorious D.R.J.U. All that in 48 hours, after which we'll be heading up to Vancouver for the Vancouver Marathon. The doc says I'm only up for 13.1 so no full marathon for me. I hate being one of the crowd that peels out halfway but with my knee still hurting, I think I'll be glad to be done.

“I don’t know why we are here, but I’m pretty sure that it is not in order to enjoy ourselves.”
—Ludwig Wittgenstein

"You happen to pull this shit while I'm in a transitional period."

Your favorite movies. In 30 seconds. Reenacted by bunnies.

Check out Jaws - they just nail Richard Dreyfuss. Aliens and Star Wars are also nicely done. Princess Leia bunny ears! My favorites are the ones where the bunnies sing - the first few seconds of Highlander theme will make you mess your pants.

If you like that, check out the outtakes from recording the James Bond themes in bunny sound.

Which Grey's Anatomy character are you?

Now here’s a quiz I can get into.

Wanted to be:

Quiz thinks I am:

Ok, if you've seen the show you know this is highly inaccurate. I am not an insensitive career-driven commitment phobe. And don't you dare say I am or I will take you DOWN!

Ok, now you take it, and email your results to me so I can tell The Internet.

Our parents never had these problems.

Despite the fact that I haven't had an active profile on Match.com for several months, I continue to get almost daily email solicitations from them. They also send me the weekly report of "My Matches," people they think I'm likely to take my pants of for, or eventually procreate with. It kind of concerns me because JFJ is presumably getting these emails, too, since I originally met him on Match (albeit as a running buddy, but the point is that my boyfriend gets delivered to his email, on a regular basis, profiles of single women who live nearby and are looking for a man!). As I pondered this, it occurred to me that the Match former-member email marketing might work a little better if they actually geared the emails more towards our demographic. Emails with subject lines like, "Has she stopped putting out already? Upgrade to one of these!"

Today, a Match email invited me to take a test that started by identifying the relative lengths of my fingers:


The email promised that, "Using engaging questions like this, we determine your personality type and then provide you your most compatible matches." Wow, I'm really impressed that Match takes such a studied approach to pairing people up. Am I more or less likely to take my pants off for someone whose index finger is roughly the same length as their ring finger?

When I joined Match, my hand actually looked like this:

What do you think that says about my personality?

A little more than a vacation snapshot.

I'm on the last audio CD of The Places In Between, Rory Stewart's account of his 2002 walk across Afghanistan. Towards the end of his journey he meets a French photographer named Didier Lefevre, and his work is so intriguing I thought I should share it.

Monday Helpful Chick Tips Day

JNCis a f*cking rockstar when is comes to useful information (and switching jobs - SNAP!).

Useful tidbit numero uno: Clean out your closet and get rid of clothes you don't wear -- turn all your hangers in the opposite direction. In a year, or six months [depending on seasonality] if the hanger is still the same, throw out the garment b/c you haven't worn the item and it's time to get rid of it.*

Useful tip numero dos: The no-period pill. According to the New York Times, this is highly controversial. Really? For most women I know, your period is just a monthly "heads up" that no little swimmers have slipped past the goalie. The article states that "Doctors say they know of no medical reason women taking birth control pills need to have a period." Besides just a handy reminder that you're not knocked up, is there some non-health related reason to have a period? I don't know many women who "celebrate the period as a spiritual or natural process." It seems like most modern women are content to let periods be a thing of the past, so we can get back to slowly but surely taking over most sports, professions and real estate.

You can learn all about this at the site fewerperiods.com, which loses points for pretending to be a neutral provider of information when it is, in fact, the manufacturer's own site.

Curious to get your thoughts, gal pals. Is having a period part of the mystery and essence of womanhood? Or is that hippie bullsh*t?

*This was actually on Oprah but JNC vets Oprah and passes the good tips on to me.