H1N1, the type A swine influenza that is currently causing problems around the world, starting from Mexico, is of interest to many people because it's a mixture of viral genomes. Pigs, as some of you may know, are influenza mixing bowls, because they can get both avian and human influenza infections as well as their own. This allows the viruses to have a swap party, and then leave with entirely new genes in their repertoire. This makes an old virus look brand-new, and consequently your body has little to no defense against it.
For the mapping of H1N1, see the Google Maps page.
For general prep in case of any flu (or really any pandemic situation -- and pandemic is not a synonym for "panic"), see Making Light Archives, the archived LJ of misia, or the CDC Emergency Preparedness Site. For more specific information on this outbreak, go to the Pandemic Flu site.
For anyone interested in worldwide infectious diseases, the ISID database PRO-MED covers all suspected and confirmed infectious disease outbreaks.
We now return you to your Sunday Night Movie, Outbreak.
Sunday, April 26, 2009
Saturday, April 11, 2009
Saturday, April 4, 2009
Iowa Stands Up
As seen in the news:
Iowa Court Decision
"It is true the marriage statute does not expressly prohibit gay and lesbian persons from marrying; it does, however, require that if they marry, it must be to someone of the opposite sex. Viewed in the complete context of marriage, including intimacy, civil marriage with a person of the opposite sex is as unappealing to a gay or lesbian person as civil marriage with a person of the same sex is to a heterosexual. Thus, the right of a gay or lesbian person under the marriage statute to enter into a civil marriage only with a person of the opposite sex is no right at all.
As someone else said, "I love the smell of a judicial smackdown in the morning."
"Classifications based on factors like race, alienage, national origin, sex, or illegitimacy are “so seldom relevant to achievement of any legitimate state interest that laws grounded in such considerations are deemed to reflect prejudice and antipathy.” Cleburne Living Ctr., 473 U.S. at 440, 105 S. Ct. at 3254, 87 L. Ed. 2d at 320. Rather than bearing some relationship to the burdened class’s ability to contribute to society, such classifications often reflect irrelevant stereotypes. Id. at 440–41, 105 S. Ct. at 3254–55, 87 L. Ed. 2d at 320–21. “For these reasons and because such discrimination is unlikely to be soon rectified by legislative means,” laws based on these types of classifications must withstand more intense judicial scrutiny than other types of classifications. Id."
"The Supreme Court has considered: (1) the history of invidious discrimination against the class burdened by the legislation;12 (2) whether the characteristics that distinguish the class indicate a typical class member’s ability to contribute to society;13 (3) whether the distinguishing characteristic is “immutable” or beyond the class members’ control;14 and (4) the political power of the subject class.15 In considering whether sexual orientation is a suspect class, a number of our sister jurisdictions have referenced similar factors. See In re Marriage Cases, 183 P.3d at 442–43; Kerrigan, 957 A.2d at 426; Conaway, 932 A.2d at 606–07; Andersen v. King County, 138 P.3d 963, 974 (Wash. 2006)."
"see also In re Marriage Cases, 183 P.3d at 442 (“Because a person’s sexual orientation is so integral an aspect of one’s identity, it is not appropriate to require a person to repudiate or change his or her sexual orientation in order to avoid discriminatory treatment.”)."
"When a certain tradition is used as both the governmental objective and the classification to further that objective, the equal protection analysis is transformed into the circular question of whether the classification accomplishes the governmental objective, which objective is to maintain the classification."
"We begin with the County’s argument that the goal of the same-sex marriage ban is to ensure children will be raised only in the optimal milieu. In pursuit of this objective, the statutory exclusion of gay and lesbian people is both under-inclusive and over-inclusive. The civil marriage statute is under-inclusive because it does not exclude from marriage other groups of parents—such as child abusers, sexual predators, parents neglecting to provide child support, and violent felons—that are undeniably less than optimal parents. Such under-inclusion tends to demonstrate that the sexual-orientation-based classification is grounded in prejudice or “overbroad generalizations about the different talents, capacities, or preferences” of gay and lesbian people, rather than having a substantial relationship to some important objective. See Virginia, 518 U.S. at 533, 116 S. Ct. at 2275, 135 L. Ed. 2d at 751 (rejecting use of overbroad generalizations to classify). If the marriage statute was truly focused on optimal parenting, many classifications of people would be excluded, not merely gay and lesbian people."
"The ban on same-sex marriage is substantially over-inclusive because not all same-sex couples choose to raise children. Yet, the marriage statute denies civil marriage to all gay and lesbian people in order to discourage the limited number of same-sex couples who desire to raise children."
"At the same time, the exclusion of gay and lesbian people from marriage is under-inclusive, even in relation to the narrower goal of improving child rearing by limiting same-sex parenting. Quite obviously, the statute does not prohibit same-sex couples from raising children. Same-sex couples currently raise children in Iowa, even while being excluded from civil marriage, and such couples will undoubtedly continue to do so. Recognition of this under-inclusion puts in perspective just how minimally the same-sex marriage ban actually advances the purported legislative goal. A law so simultaneously over-inclusive and under-inclusive is not substantially related to the government’s objective. In the end, a careful analysis of the over-and under-inclusiveness of the statute reveals it is less about using marriage to achieve an optimal environment for children and more about merely precluding gay and lesbian people from civil marriage."
"The conservation of state resources is another objective arguably furthered by excluding gay and lesbian persons from civil marriage. The argument is based on a simple premise: couples who are married enjoy numerous governmental benefits, so the state’s fiscal burden associated with civil marriage is reduced if less people are allowed to marry. In the common sense of the word, then, it is “rational” for the legislature to seek to conserve state resources by limiting the number of couples allowed to form civil marriages. By way of example, the County hypothesizes that, due to our laws granting tax benefits to married couples, the State of Iowa would reap less tax revenue if individual taxpaying gay and lesbian people were allowed to obtain a civil marriage. Certainly, Iowa’s marriage statute causes numerous government benefits, including tax benefits, to be withheld from plaintiffs.28 Thus, the ban on same-sex marriages may conserve some state resources. Excluding any group from civil marriage -— African-Americans, illegitimates, aliens, even red-haired individuals -— would conserve state resources in an equally “rational” way. Yet, such classifications so obviously offend our society’s collective sense of equality that courts have not hesitated to provide added protections against such inequalities."
"Consequently, the language in Iowa Code section 595.2 limiting civil marriage to a man and a woman must be stricken from the statute, and the remaining statutory language must be interpreted and applied in a manner allowing gay and lesbian people full access to the institution of civil marriage."
Iowa Court Decision
"It is true the marriage statute does not expressly prohibit gay and lesbian persons from marrying; it does, however, require that if they marry, it must be to someone of the opposite sex. Viewed in the complete context of marriage, including intimacy, civil marriage with a person of the opposite sex is as unappealing to a gay or lesbian person as civil marriage with a person of the same sex is to a heterosexual. Thus, the right of a gay or lesbian person under the marriage statute to enter into a civil marriage only with a person of the opposite sex is no right at all.
As someone else said, "I love the smell of a judicial smackdown in the morning."
"Classifications based on factors like race, alienage, national origin, sex, or illegitimacy are “so seldom relevant to achievement of any legitimate state interest that laws grounded in such considerations are deemed to reflect prejudice and antipathy.” Cleburne Living Ctr., 473 U.S. at 440, 105 S. Ct. at 3254, 87 L. Ed. 2d at 320. Rather than bearing some relationship to the burdened class’s ability to contribute to society, such classifications often reflect irrelevant stereotypes. Id. at 440–41, 105 S. Ct. at 3254–55, 87 L. Ed. 2d at 320–21. “For these reasons and because such discrimination is unlikely to be soon rectified by legislative means,” laws based on these types of classifications must withstand more intense judicial scrutiny than other types of classifications. Id."
"The Supreme Court has considered: (1) the history of invidious discrimination against the class burdened by the legislation;12 (2) whether the characteristics that distinguish the class indicate a typical class member’s ability to contribute to society;13 (3) whether the distinguishing characteristic is “immutable” or beyond the class members’ control;14 and (4) the political power of the subject class.15 In considering whether sexual orientation is a suspect class, a number of our sister jurisdictions have referenced similar factors. See In re Marriage Cases, 183 P.3d at 442–43; Kerrigan, 957 A.2d at 426; Conaway, 932 A.2d at 606–07; Andersen v. King County, 138 P.3d 963, 974 (Wash. 2006)."
"see also In re Marriage Cases, 183 P.3d at 442 (“Because a person’s sexual orientation is so integral an aspect of one’s identity, it is not appropriate to require a person to repudiate or change his or her sexual orientation in order to avoid discriminatory treatment.”)."
"When a certain tradition is used as both the governmental objective and the classification to further that objective, the equal protection analysis is transformed into the circular question of whether the classification accomplishes the governmental objective, which objective is to maintain the classification."
"We begin with the County’s argument that the goal of the same-sex marriage ban is to ensure children will be raised only in the optimal milieu. In pursuit of this objective, the statutory exclusion of gay and lesbian people is both under-inclusive and over-inclusive. The civil marriage statute is under-inclusive because it does not exclude from marriage other groups of parents—such as child abusers, sexual predators, parents neglecting to provide child support, and violent felons—that are undeniably less than optimal parents. Such under-inclusion tends to demonstrate that the sexual-orientation-based classification is grounded in prejudice or “overbroad generalizations about the different talents, capacities, or preferences” of gay and lesbian people, rather than having a substantial relationship to some important objective. See Virginia, 518 U.S. at 533, 116 S. Ct. at 2275, 135 L. Ed. 2d at 751 (rejecting use of overbroad generalizations to classify). If the marriage statute was truly focused on optimal parenting, many classifications of people would be excluded, not merely gay and lesbian people."
"The ban on same-sex marriage is substantially over-inclusive because not all same-sex couples choose to raise children. Yet, the marriage statute denies civil marriage to all gay and lesbian people in order to discourage the limited number of same-sex couples who desire to raise children."
"At the same time, the exclusion of gay and lesbian people from marriage is under-inclusive, even in relation to the narrower goal of improving child rearing by limiting same-sex parenting. Quite obviously, the statute does not prohibit same-sex couples from raising children. Same-sex couples currently raise children in Iowa, even while being excluded from civil marriage, and such couples will undoubtedly continue to do so. Recognition of this under-inclusion puts in perspective just how minimally the same-sex marriage ban actually advances the purported legislative goal. A law so simultaneously over-inclusive and under-inclusive is not substantially related to the government’s objective. In the end, a careful analysis of the over-and under-inclusiveness of the statute reveals it is less about using marriage to achieve an optimal environment for children and more about merely precluding gay and lesbian people from civil marriage."
"The conservation of state resources is another objective arguably furthered by excluding gay and lesbian persons from civil marriage. The argument is based on a simple premise: couples who are married enjoy numerous governmental benefits, so the state’s fiscal burden associated with civil marriage is reduced if less people are allowed to marry. In the common sense of the word, then, it is “rational” for the legislature to seek to conserve state resources by limiting the number of couples allowed to form civil marriages. By way of example, the County hypothesizes that, due to our laws granting tax benefits to married couples, the State of Iowa would reap less tax revenue if individual taxpaying gay and lesbian people were allowed to obtain a civil marriage. Certainly, Iowa’s marriage statute causes numerous government benefits, including tax benefits, to be withheld from plaintiffs.28 Thus, the ban on same-sex marriages may conserve some state resources. Excluding any group from civil marriage -— African-Americans, illegitimates, aliens, even red-haired individuals -— would conserve state resources in an equally “rational” way. Yet, such classifications so obviously offend our society’s collective sense of equality that courts have not hesitated to provide added protections against such inequalities."
"Consequently, the language in Iowa Code section 595.2 limiting civil marriage to a man and a woman must be stricken from the statute, and the remaining statutory language must be interpreted and applied in a manner allowing gay and lesbian people full access to the institution of civil marriage."
Friday, March 20, 2009
Spaceballs
We're watching the classic Mel Brooks parody of Star Wars. It never gets old, although the classic Mel Brooks penchant for jokes involving crotches, bodily fluids, and slapstick humor does. Still, it's Mel.
Dark Helmet is playing with dolls. Mary is asleep on the couch, as per usual. It's traditional for her to fall asleep while "watching" a movie at home. The dogs are lying around in a post-prandial doze; they had a good run around the playground before dinner.
Today was a day off, so I took the boy to school while Mary did some work at home before her doctor's appointment; she headed to her office after that. I had a late breakfast (didn't want to make her suffer as she was getting a fasting blood draw), napped on the couch (same one -- it's very comfy), then went shopping. We needed a refill on ink for our new printer (an HP photosmart printer/scanner/copier with wireless printing), some ant bait, bread, kitty litter, and various frozen items from TJs. This necessitated a trip to the mall where I could visit Staples, Target, and PetSmart before driving over to TJs. The only thing I forgot was the ant bait, and luckily we still had some. The ants still find their way into the old part of the house (not the renovated side), and the baits keep them from coming in.
Once the movie's done, it'll be time to check Facebook and then shut down for the night.
Dark Helmet is playing with dolls. Mary is asleep on the couch, as per usual. It's traditional for her to fall asleep while "watching" a movie at home. The dogs are lying around in a post-prandial doze; they had a good run around the playground before dinner.
Today was a day off, so I took the boy to school while Mary did some work at home before her doctor's appointment; she headed to her office after that. I had a late breakfast (didn't want to make her suffer as she was getting a fasting blood draw), napped on the couch (same one -- it's very comfy), then went shopping. We needed a refill on ink for our new printer (an HP photosmart printer/scanner/copier with wireless printing), some ant bait, bread, kitty litter, and various frozen items from TJs. This necessitated a trip to the mall where I could visit Staples, Target, and PetSmart before driving over to TJs. The only thing I forgot was the ant bait, and luckily we still had some. The ants still find their way into the old part of the house (not the renovated side), and the baits keep them from coming in.
Once the movie's done, it'll be time to check Facebook and then shut down for the night.
Saturday, February 7, 2009
Book Review
Over on LJ, there's been some discussion about books by people of color (PoC), and there's lists of suggested books for reading. I like mysteries, so when I noticed a series by Barbara Neely about the amateur sleuth Blanche White, I tracked down a source and got some of them. They're not in print now, so you have to hit the used bookstores, and I've got the second or third in the series (not the first, I never start with the first book except by accident). This one is Blanche Cleans Up, published in 1998.
Blanche White is a black woman with confidence, a business (housekeeper/cook/etc.), and two kids (courtesy of her dead sister). In this book, she is asked to fill in for someone at the home of a rich white couple; in the course of two weeks, she stumbles across a mysterious videotape, several dead bodies, and figures out the murderer as well as solving a few other mysteries along the way.
Barbara Neely is an excellent writer; from the very first page she grabs hold of you and pulls you along. There's all kinds of people in here, from elderly preachers to teens with attitudes. Definitely worth reading, and I hope to find more by this author.
Blanche White is a black woman with confidence, a business (housekeeper/cook/etc.), and two kids (courtesy of her dead sister). In this book, she is asked to fill in for someone at the home of a rich white couple; in the course of two weeks, she stumbles across a mysterious videotape, several dead bodies, and figures out the murderer as well as solving a few other mysteries along the way.
Barbara Neely is an excellent writer; from the very first page she grabs hold of you and pulls you along. There's all kinds of people in here, from elderly preachers to teens with attitudes. Definitely worth reading, and I hope to find more by this author.
Friday, January 23, 2009
Post-Inaugural Update
So, Inauguration involved lots and lots of people in the Metro area. Mary's sister-in-law got three tickets from her Congressman, and ended up bringing one daughter with her to the shindig (the other ticket she returned for some other lucky soul). They came down Monday evening, and we got up early on Tuesday to take them over to the New Carrollton Metro stop. They needed to take the Blue or Orange Line in, so they could get to the proper side of the Mall for their single approved entrance.
We knew it was going to be a crowd when all the Metro garages were filling or already at capacity by 6:30 AM. The traffic started backing up onto Rt 50 Westbound, because of the Metro crowds. We zoomed back home to begin the watch, and to finalize our menu.
Breakfast was an all-American buffet of oatmeal with dried fruit, apple crumb cake, scrambled eggs with cheese, toast, and the choice of coffee or tea.
The news anchors were all reporting live from the Mall, and you could see crowds of people walking briskly by, to get to the security screenings and make it in before they closed (as was threatened). The morning went by in a blur, and the crowds built until there was a sea of people visible from the Capitol Dome camera.
We were spell-bound, and didn't budge, so our lunch was held post-Inauguration.
What did we end up selecting?
We stayed with the all-American menu, and made pepperoni pizza with the choice of beer, soda, or milk. Trail mix, pretzels, and fresh fruit were also offered, along with refills on the coffee/tea.
The afternoon went on, with live feeds of the lunching Inaugural legislators, and news updates. We were somewhat disappointed that the ex-presidential helicopter did not pass over us on its way to Andrews, as we'd hoped to offer one last salute.
The sister-in-law and daughter called to let us know they were finally cold enough to hit the Metro home, and would meet us in downtown (they took the Red Line home). Dinner was ordered from the local Chinese shop and delivered shortly, and we fed ourselves like a hungry horde. They headed out for home, while we watched some of the news and the live reports from the Inaugural Balls before conking out completely.
Waking the next morning and thinking "President Obama" was a lovely feeling.
We knew it was going to be a crowd when all the Metro garages were filling or already at capacity by 6:30 AM. The traffic started backing up onto Rt 50 Westbound, because of the Metro crowds. We zoomed back home to begin the watch, and to finalize our menu.
Breakfast was an all-American buffet of oatmeal with dried fruit, apple crumb cake, scrambled eggs with cheese, toast, and the choice of coffee or tea.
The news anchors were all reporting live from the Mall, and you could see crowds of people walking briskly by, to get to the security screenings and make it in before they closed (as was threatened). The morning went by in a blur, and the crowds built until there was a sea of people visible from the Capitol Dome camera.
We were spell-bound, and didn't budge, so our lunch was held post-Inauguration.
What did we end up selecting?
We stayed with the all-American menu, and made pepperoni pizza with the choice of beer, soda, or milk. Trail mix, pretzels, and fresh fruit were also offered, along with refills on the coffee/tea.
The afternoon went on, with live feeds of the lunching Inaugural legislators, and news updates. We were somewhat disappointed that the ex-presidential helicopter did not pass over us on its way to Andrews, as we'd hoped to offer one last salute.
The sister-in-law and daughter called to let us know they were finally cold enough to hit the Metro home, and would meet us in downtown (they took the Red Line home). Dinner was ordered from the local Chinese shop and delivered shortly, and we fed ourselves like a hungry horde. They headed out for home, while we watched some of the news and the live reports from the Inaugural Balls before conking out completely.
Waking the next morning and thinking "President Obama" was a lovely feeling.
Saturday, January 17, 2009
Inauguration
We'll be "attending" Inauguration from the comforts of our house, since it's very likely to be extremely crowded on the Metro, extremely cold (although perhaps not as cold as yesterday), and we'll be able to eat our lunch while applauding.
The lunch menu is the tricky part. What should we dine on in honor of this historic occasion? Should we aim for a multi-cultural buffet of dishes that represent all the influences upon our country? Or should we go with the patriotic "red, white, and blue" theme? How about basic comfort food? Perhaps the traditional meal of Jews at Christmas (and other non-Jewish holidays), i.e., take-out Chinese? The All-American pizza and beer? Something new, that we've never tried before? Easy food in the slow cooker, so we can focus on the events unfolding before us?
Maybe we should just fast. Y'know, eat afterwards.
I want to hear President Obama's speech. I hope it will be like Abraham Lincoln's second inaugural address, in which he ended with these famous words:
" With malice toward none, with charity for all, with firmness in the right as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in, to bind up the nation's wounds, to care for him who shall have borne the battle and for his widow and his orphan, to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves and with all nations."
For more information on the best places to station yourself, see the Washington Post's insert in the Sunday Section.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
