My Family

Whilst browsing my cousin's baby blog, I ran into this cute family sticker widget. Allow me to introduce the stick people version of my family to you =)

Puppy Love

In Langenhagen, Mika and Anna-Lena are in love. Following the overwhelming emotion pouring out of their hearts, they decided to elope. What better way to celebrate your love is there than to get away from the record low temps in Germany and tie the knot in Africa? Along with Anna-Lena’s sister (the planned witness to their wedding) they packed their bags for time under the sun and started to make their way to the airport.

Oh, and the betrothed are five and six years old. The witness is seven years old.

Aw. If this is not puppy love, I do not know what is.

As always, there are those grumpy sourpusses who claim that the parents of these children are irresponsible. After all, how could they let their children get out so easily during the night?

I think those sourpusses have not been loved enough. In this instance, I think it is safe to say that the children live in a very loving household; unlike this four year old that shot his babysitter for stepping on his foot. Children often reflect their parents’ attitudes and habits. Having said that, hubby and I should probably spend more time explaining that we hug and kiss a lot because we love each other, and that we do not do that with random strangers. Here is my little Romeo in action:


I cannot speak for those sourpusses, however I would much rather have my children piece together a somewhat cohesive plan to elope than violently attack their babysitter.

Happy New Year!!!

HAPPY NEW YEAR EVERYONE!

I hope you all forgive me for my extreme tardiness. As you may gather from my previous post, our then-current circumstance promised a chaotic Christmas. And chaotic it was.

It all started on the 23rd. Shortly before lunch, hubby’s cell phone rang. He was needed in the UK and had only an hour and a half to make it to the airport. It was not certain if he would be able to fly home in time for Christmas.


I have prepared for birthdays and Christmases without hubby before. I thought I could handle it. I did not expect that our littlest one would slow me down so much. By mid-afternoon, I had no other choice. With a heavy heart, I called my mother-in-law for help. After a little bit of phone-tag, it was decided that we would celebrate Christmas at hubby’s aunt’s home. All I had to do was show up with our Santa Claus costume. That evening, I snuggled on our couch with a bag of pfeffernüsse and a steaming pot of Christmas tea and watched Love Actually. It was my calmest December 23rd in years.

On the morning of the 24th, I still had not found our Santa outfit. (Our attic remains an enigma to me. I may have packed the boxes, but hubby is the one who arranges the attic. I do not consider myself claustrophobic, but I cannot stand the small, dark, damp and dusty space.)

Around lunchtime, things started to look up. Hubby called to say that he was already waiting on the airplane. His flight would be 80 minutes delayed, but he would make it in time for Christmas and that was what mattered. Hubby’s aunt solved my Santa dilemma – she had an oversized red bathrobe. I just needed to stop by the drugstore to buy some cotton wool for Santa’s beard.

Then arose the battle of the sisters. About 30 minutes after my conversation with hubby’s aunt, my mother-in-law called saying that she was also just called by her sister and their conversation developed into a shouting match. Hence, she was now asking me to cancel Christmas Eve at her sister’s and hosting them myself. This was followed by a lot of he-said-she-said (or, rather, she-said-she-said). Eventually, all communication was done through me, as the sisters no longer wanted to speak with each other.

What Santa left outside our front door.

End result? I hosted Christmas Eve anyway. Hubby made it home on time. My mother-in-law contributed to dinner, as I had done no preparations. Santa did not make his traditional personal appearance, but rather knocked on the door and left the big sack of presents outside our front door. Our four- and five-year-old kids were confused by Santa’s quick getaway, but were satisfied with the explanation that Santa was especially busy this year and couldn’t stop by for long.

Dinner at my mother-in-law's on First Christmas Day.

Because my mother-in-law came, hubby’s aunt refused to come. She also skipped on First Christmas Day hosted by my mother-in-law who, in turn, skipped on Second Christmas Day at hubby’s aunt’s home. Oy vey.

Dinner at hubby's aunt's home on Second Christmas Day.

Thank goodness that our visits with my father-in-law’s side of the family on the 27th and 28th went smoothly. Spending time with our adorable niece makes me miss having a large family, and wish that she did not live so far from us.

Another victim to hubby’s sudden departure on the 23rd was our night at the opera on the 27th. We cancelled because we were not sure if he would make it back on time. Instead of The Magic Flute, at the end of this month we are going to see The Bat (I realise that it is not an opera but an operetta, but I’ll still count it as my first opera.) Hubby has warned me that it is a modern interpretation which he generally does not find enjoyable (apparently modern interpretations do not have the same general appeal that classical staging does), but for a night away from our army of children, we are open to anything.

We spent New Year’s Eve at our friends’ house, who themselves have a son who is four years old and a daughter who is two. It was an evening of firsts for me. This was the first time we truly celebrated New Year’s Eve in four years. They live outside of the city, so it was also the first (somewhat-) quiet New Year’s Eve in four years. I had my first raclette dinner ever, which I learnt is a popular New Year’s Eve dinner choice in Germany.

My first raclette dinner - yum!

The next morning I woke up to a blanket of snow! It was very thin, but a blanket nonetheless. The kids kept fighting over the shovel and broom.


What a wonderful start to the new year. I cannot wait to see what 2009 brings. My kids are already begging for our traditional January trip to the aquarium with Oma.

Now that I am all caught up, how about you? How were your holidays?

Last-minute Christmas jitters

Just one last post until I disappear until after Christmas...

I may be procrastinating, but our elusive Santa Claus costume, hidden somewhere amongst our boxes of Christmas wares, is driving me bonkers!

The fact that hubby might not make it home on time for Christmas is driving me bonkers!

My kids insisting that we get dressed and leave for hubby's aunt's house (seven hours early!) is driving me bonkers!

The fact that I am facing my FIFTH green/snowless Christmas in a row is driving me bonkers!

I hope you all have a wonderful, stress-free Christmas!

Parallel-parking 101

We have all seen it before; the driver with absolutely no sense of how big their car is. It can be especially annoying when you are stuck on a narrow road because someone is having a hard time parallel-parking their huge car.

I usually give the driver the benefit of the doubt. Perhaps they are driving a rental, or they have newly purchased the car, and have yet to adjust themselves to the dimensions of it.

Drivers such as the one in the clip below, however, just make you want to scream how much room there is – never mind the fact that they are driving a Smart, the car that practically fits into your pocket!

Bush's secret service detail

I am certain that everyone knows about the Iraqi reporter who threw his shoes at Bush. Jon Friedman posted these insightful questions for the secret service on 236.com:

1. Shouldn't you have jumped in front of that shoe?
2. Shouldn't you have jumped in front of that second shoe?
3. Second shoe = the one thrown after being removed from foot after first shoe was thrown.
4. Let's say people had three feet. Would you have allowed a third shoe to fly unimpeded?
5. While the shoe was in the air, were you like, "Oh, its just a shoe."
6. Same question about the second shoe.
7. Do you think this is funny, "Throw a shoe at me once, shame on--you. Throw a shoe--you throw a shoe, you can't throw a shoe again."
8. Is there not "protection training" for lunatics launching objects?
9. Let's say there isn't training for that--but do they tell you that if someone does throw (or shoot) something to be on the alert in case they want to repeat this behavior?
10. Where were you?

BONUS QUESTION: Do you think the Iraqis want us there? (Hint: their journalists are throwing their shoes at Bush)

My guess is that the secret service detail found the sight of shoes being hurled at Bush so funny that they forgot they were on duty. Then they had kind of an "Oh f*ck! I was supposed to stop that!" moment, and figured that an ambush overkill would compensate for their momentary absence.

If I had the time, patience and skill...

...I would definitely prepare Bento like this for my kids. It would sure circumvent the all-too-familiar battle my rugrats over finishing their food. These wonderful Bentos are created by Anna the Red, who made her first “kyaraben-ish” bento for her boyfriend not too long ago. On her blog, she gives wonderful step-by-step instructions and how-to photos. I think I will give it a shot when hubby has time off work next month.

Adultery = Criminal in South Korea

Upon first reading this article, I had to double check which Korea it was about. It may be an over-simplification, but when one thinks of how the two Koreas are different, it can be said the North is backwards and the South is more forward, like the US.

But wait – in parts of the US, adultery is still punishable by law, which leads me to ask: Should an extramarital affair be deemed criminal?

Of course not. The only time adultery should ever be considered in a legal proceeding is whilst negotiating a divorce settlement, as the adulterer did break his/her oath. Anything past that is ridiculously outdated in the western world.

Can the same be said about South Korea? I am not in a position to confidently say that revoking the Anti-Adultery Law would be ‘damaging to social order’. Taking the circumstances in which the law was originally enacted into consideration (namely that it happened in 1953 and only applied to married women), I think the main question becomes: Does South Korea consider itself a forward-oriented country?

Image source: blinkbing.blogspot.com

I feel sorry for Adolf Hitler…

...and that is surely not an easy thing for me to say. I am actually referring to Adolf Hitler Campbell. He is a three-year-old boy who was denied his name on a birthday cake at ShopRite. (I would have refused to inscribe the cake as well.)

I feel sorry for him and his two sisters, JoyceLynn Aryan Nation and Honszlynn Hinler Jeannie. As long as they keep these names, these children will be branded by their parents’ small and hateful minds. Whether or not they believe in Nazi ideology in their adult lives, they will be equated with one of the world’s worst hate crimes.

You can be sure that these children will never have a chance for a decent job. Just imagine: A newspaper headline “Adolf Hitler new Director of Communications at XYZ Inc”. How about your child running home from school saying that their new history teacher is Adolf Hitler?

I sincerely hope that these children will have the chance to grow past their parents’ limited mental capacity. For Pete’s sake, they could not even get Himmler’s name right (for Adolf’s sister)!

Photo source: AP

Playboy apologises

Are you offended by this magazine cover?
I am not. All I see is the typical Playboy cover; a suggestively clad woman with enough exposed skin to be scandalous, yet enough covered skin to be permissibly printed on the cover.

I do not see the need for Playboy Enterprises Inc. to apologise. Is not every single Playboy cover offensive to a group of people? Why single out Mexican Catholics as worthy of an apology?

Realitätsfremd

“It could have been worse.”

That is how John Thain, CEO of Merrill Lynch, defends his request for a $10 million bonus for 2008. Under his watch, the company’s stock performance burnt through billions of investors’ money. Under his watch the company needed to sell itself to Bank of America to ward off a Lehmann Brothers-like scenario. Goldman Sachs, not nearly faring as poorly as Merrill Lynch, will not pay out bonuses to senior management. And yet Thain feels he deserves the moolah because it could have been worse.

I was dumbstruck.

English has, by far, the largest vocabulary amongst the European languages. Despite that, you occasionally are at a loss of words when confronted with an outrageous situation, such as this.

I scoured my mind (and thesaurus) for a single word that encompasses the delusion that Thain must be experiencing. Initially, I thought that it was my being sick, and not a lack of words, that stopped me. Then hubby saved the day…

Realitätsfremd – German. Out of touch with reality, in the sense of being estranged from reality. Marie Antoinette-esque delusion.

I could have simply used the word delusion, but there is a marginal, yet significant, difference in meaning. Thain seems to find his success in how much more of a failure he could have been.

Sad. Very sad.

A musical you don't want to miss!

Love it!

See more Jack Black videos at Funny or Die

Rick's Rant

One of the lovely things about living with kids is the certainty that once once person gets sick, it is only a matter of time until everyone else at home is sick as well. Having said that, I have been busy taking care of my sick hubby and kids, awaiting my turn to share in the "fun".

Of course, all this happens during a very interesting week for Canadian politics. Oh yes, those Canadian politicians have worked themselves in such a frenzy that CNNI actually dedicated some air time during their hourly world news report to the mess, and when CNNI reports on it, you know it's got to be interesting.

I am a little too preoccupied at the moment with my sick family to dedicate any significant depth to this post, so invite you to watch this clip, where Rick Mercer sums up what I think many Canadians are thinking...

Word of the day

irony

• noun (pl. ironies) A state of affairs that appears perversely contrary to what one expects, as in 'Bush receives International Medal of Peace'.

'Nuff said.

Democracy: US vs. Canada vs. Germany

But our perfect democracy, which neither needs nor particularly wants voters, is a rarity. It is important to remember there still exist many other forms of government in the world today, and that dozens of foreign governments still long for a democracy such as ours to be imposed on them. – Jon Stewart

With Obama’s overwhelming success in America’s recent election, Jon Stewart echoes an inspiring point. But is the American “democracy” really that enviable? How about other democratically elected governments in the western world, such as Canada’s directly representative House of Commons and Germany’s proportionally representative Bundestag?

The American Electoral College system has a few drawbacks. Primarily, criticism centres on the possibility of electing a minority president, one without the absolute majority of the popular vote. This system also has an inherent tendency to suppress voter turnout due to its indirect nature. You do not vote for the presidential candidate you want to be in power; you vote to show a third person, the elector, how you want them to vote for you. This, in turn, leads to another potential problem: the faithless elector. There is no guarantee that the elector will follow the democratic majority of his electoral district whilst casting his/her vote in the Electoral College. Sounds confusing? I certainly think so.

Furthermore, the American system gives way to a bipolarisation of the political landscape. The winner of any state will take all electoral votes of that state. This prevents any significant showing of a third or independent party candidate. On the other hand, the system gives way to a strong, limited term presidency, wherein a democratically elected president is free to implement politics as he/she sees fit, provided congress plays along. That strength allows for major political shifts with the election of a new President.

The Canadian direct representation offers a bit more accountability. Each member in the House of Commons is elected by a plurality of popular votes in separate constituencies (ridings). The party that gains most seats in the House (parliament) fills the position of prime minister. The advantage of this system is that members of parliament (MPs) needing to vote on any bill can be subjected to direct scrutiny and influence by voters in each riding. If voters pressure their MP to take a specific stance there is a good chance that this MP may vote faithless to party lines – there is a long standing history of voter influence in ridings in Canada.

The disadvantage is, however, the possibility of a minority government such as the current conservative government. This article details very nicely some of the perils of a minority government. Also, similar to the American system, there is a good chance of over- or under-representation in the Canadian parliament. As an extreme example: if in every riding a member of the Conservative Party won a marginal majority, they would fill 100% of the seats in parliament (one of my worst nightmares), thus starkly skewing the make-up of popular political preferences.

Finally, looking at the German version of proportional representation in parliament, the plurality of political representation in the Bundestag makes a seductive first argument in favour of such a system. Similar to Canada, the party gaining an absolute majority or majority coalition may fill the Chancellor’s seat. Any party gaining five percent of the popular vote (barring minor electoral adjustments) will gain the same proportion of seats in parliament. This system, installed by the allies post WWII, has proven immensely stable and truthfully reflective of the popular political fabric.

There can, however, be made an argument that a voter will quickly feel disenfranchised as the impact of his or her vote is not immediately apparent. The plurality of political platforms and virtual impossibility of a majority government by a single party forces the government to negotiate for virtually every aspect of daily business, leading to perpetual compromises. This prevents the occurrence of bold moves and frequently bogs governmental business down in trench wars.

Which system is best? The short answer is very political: it depends. It depends on your set of priorities and political affinities. For me personally, the Canadian one suits best. It allows bold moves within reason. It limits US-like bipolarisation without the paralyzing effects the Bundestag frequently endures. Either way I look at it, any of these systems, no matter how skewed or imperfect they are, supply the best answer to our current political challenges. It is the plurality of ideas – allowing for more than just one idea to be right - that will win the struggle against tyranny and totalitarianism that some people unfortunately have to endure.

As Winston Churchill put it, “Democracy is the worst form of government except for all those others that have been tried”.

Comebacks to use this Thanksgiving

For those of you not looking forward to conversing with the "Righteous Right" during Thanksgiving, 236.com has taken it upon themselves to make sure you enter Thanksgiving equipped with a list of comebacks sure to put Obama haters back in their place. For example:

• The "socialist" takeover of America's banks happened on Bush's watch.
• The "Democratic" Senate has been working with a one vote majority, and that vote is Joe Lieberman. If they get to the "Magic 60," that sixtieth vote is still Joe Lieberman.
• The majority of rich Americans voted to have their wealth spread.

Click here for the complete list. Happy Thanksgiving America!

A cause for concern?

What do you see happening in this video?



Do you see child abuse? Perhaps snake abuse? Many people commenting here and here certainly think so.

I would exercise caution before coming to those conclusions. I believe this all to be a matter of clashing cultures. In this video clip, I see a curious baby toying around with what seems to be a family pet. It is just a little difficult for those in western countries to watch, due to the wild difference in culture. I would even go as far as to compare this to my eldest daughter’s former habit of trying to pull our cat’s tail when she was still a toddler.

Let’s get it on… Let them eat cake!

Let’s get it on…
I know this is another article about pastors and sex, but I could not resist commenting on Reverend Ed Young’s advice. Simply put, Rev. Young believes it is time to “put God back in the bed” by means of a week of “congregational copulation”.

Before you call up your fellow parishoners and set up a holy orgy, I should clarify that the reverend’s advice is intended to help promote and improve monogamous marriage (sorry Utah). He delivered this message in front of and on a large bed. To really bring the point home, his wife was with him in jeans and **GASP** knee high black boots.

In all earnestness, the message is not completely silly. I do believe that a healthy sex life is vital in any relationship. The key in it, however, is that the sex should be fun and spontaneous, not forced. If you need orders from a reverend to have a reason to want to have sex with your partner, then you have issues that a week of pastor-prescribed fornication most likely will not solve.

Let them eat cake!
Unsurprisingly, this advice is aimed solely at married members of the congregation. I think it is a safe bet that one could extend that description to heterosexual, married members. The reverend went all Marie Antoinette on everyone else. His exact words:

I don’t know, try eating chocolate cake.

Er, excusez-moi? He did not just compare sex to chocolate cake, did he? Oh, yes he did. You hear that Lindsay Lohan? When you get an urge to do the mattress mambo, head to the kitchen for some chocolate cake instead.

Tackling young and novice drivers, con't.

In light of the young and novice driver rules the Liberals in Ontario are pushing forward, here is a thought: instead of limiting the freedom of responsible drivers, take a page out of Germany’s book.

Raise the minimum age from 16 to 18.
Two years may not seem like a big difference to some, but the adult mind is much more capable of fully realising the responsibility that comes along with operating a vehicle. At 18, with the end of high school and beginning of university/work life, comes a sense of social responsibility. And the hormones are not quite on the rampage any longer.

Penalties for speeding and drunk driving.
From my understanding, there are already harsh fines and penalties in place for speeding and impaired driving in Ontario. More should be invested into the enforcement of these rules. As I mentioned here, I am in complete agreement with the alcohol ban for young and novice drivers – although two years is the requirement here. This rule should not be seen as an intrusion to one’s freedoms, but rather as a practical way to combat impaired driving habits.

Make the attendance of driving school mandatory.
In order to pass driving school and qualify for a driver’s exam in Germany, one must fulfill certain requirements such as x number of hours of successful nighttime driving, driving in rural areas (for those who live in the city), city driving (for those who live in rural areas), and driving on the speed-limit-free sections of the autobahn. All in all, there are around 14 theory classes and at least 12 driving sessions. Theory is taught alone at first and then parallel with the practical lessons, so that students learn the rules and how to apply them. This ensures drivers with a well-rounded experience.

What if the whole process of getting a license costs an arm and a leg (anywhere from 1000-2000 EUR)? Driving is a privilege, and there is no reason against making people work for the opportunity to do so. Paying that kind of money will result in people taking care to drive within the confines of the law. (And think of the jobs that will be created with the implementation of mandatory driving schools!)

In short, teach the population to treat their driver’s licenses like gold, and harshly punish those who do not. This is how, despite being the country of beer, Germany sees relatively small amounts of drunk driving.

Read more on the controversy here and here.

Weekend Summary

• I am almost finished Christmas shopping, which means I am on schedule. I always start Christmas shopping in September and try to have it all finished before the first Sunday of Advent. That way I can relaxedly bargain-hunt at the Christmas markets in December. All I have left to shop for this year are the two most difficult: my dad (who never asks for anything) and step-fathter-in-law (who has very specific tastes).

• Other than Christmas gift-shopping, I normally ban anything Christmas from our home until the first Sunday of Advent. Miraculously, the kids remembered where I hid the Christmas DVDs, and begged me to help them retrieve the films. The kids won in the end, mainly due to our second daughter's ability to bend Papa to her will by putting on her sad face. Works every time.

• Does anybody know a good recipe for edible playdough that you bake into cookies once they are shaped and does NOT include peanut butter? Last week I bought a wonderful premix from the grocery store. The kids had so much fun watching their creations bake in the oven and eating them afterward that I would like to make it a weekly activity, but I find the premix a little overpriced and I am sure it costs less than half to make it yourself. Unfortunately, all I can find are recipes that either include peanut butter, chocolate, or are not to be baked into cookies.

• Nick Jr. held a 24-hour Spongebob marathon. I do not think I need to explain the squabbling that ensued between parents and children when we tried to get them away from the television for lunch, our trip to the park, shopping, bath time and dinner.

• I have a gift certificate from last Christmas that I was not yet able to redeem and is only valid until the 31st of next month. We were finally able to find a show that agrees with both hubby's and my step-mother-in-law's work schedules, thank goodness. Barring any unforseen obstacles, we are going to the opera to see Die Zauberflöte (The Magic Flute) on December 27th! Yay!
  

Open to anything but sex

The Catholic Church is not always behind the times. In fact, it has a history of reversing aspects of its doctrine to keep up with the zeitgeist. It renounced usury in the 16th century, slavery in the 19th century and capital punishment in 1995.

When it comes to matters concerning sex, however, the Church shows no indication of budging. Be it marriage of members of the clergy (after having been ordained), homosexual marriage and intercourse or artificial contraception, the Church says NO.

Mandatory celibacy was not always a must for those wishing to dedicate their lives to the Church – it was made universal Church law only by the Second Consilium of Lateran in 1139. Despite that, there are exceptions. Men who are married before entering priesthood can do so and maintain their marriage. Is the devotion of an unmarried, celibate priest worth more than that of a married one? With fewer men entering into priesthood whilst the global Catholic population grows, will allowing young priests to marry not help to stop this shortfall? The Church says NO.

I am sure that there are those who will quote scripture forbidding homosexual marriage and intercourse. To them I say – I am sure many scripture-quoting individuals have coveted a neighbour’s wife. Amongst all the adultery, murder, lying and stealing, why pick the homosexuality guideline to stick to so closely? Is it not more Christian to grant everybody a legal relationship of mutual love, care and affection? The Church says NO.

Even more pressing is the rejection of artificial contraception. The Church cannot ignore the physical suffering from the AIDS epidemic in Africa, or the uncontrolled population increase in the Philippines, where it still has an overwhelming influence on daily politics. The means to limit the effects of either dilemma giving rise to a more hopeful generation are so simple. And yet, the Church says NO.

Flip-flopping on Bush

Bush was apparently snubbed at the G20 summit. Or was he?

Nobody shook his hand.

BUT, he already greeted them personally at the White House. He made such a big show of it that it unsurprisingly became fodder to Jon Stewart and his brilliant comical wrath. Technically, nobody needed to shake Bush’s hand again.

BUT, is it not proper etiquette to acknowledge someone when they enter the room? This can be done with eye contact, a quick nod and a smile. Technically, Bush snubbed everyone except Gordon Brown, and everyone except Brown snubbed Bush.

BUT, everyone had their spot for the photo shoot marked on the floor. We all know that Bush is not the brightest of the bunch. How could we all have expected him to make eye contact with the other world leaders and look for his mark AT THE SAME TIME? Bush is not smart enough to realise that he was snubbing almost everyone. Technically, he was just avoiding bumping into the man in front of him.

BUT, he is known to procrastinate. Taking an extra second to acknowledge the other world leaders would not have killed anyone. It is highly unlikely that all the other leaders are equally as inconsiderate/dimwitted as Bush. Eventually, someone would have noticed that Bush was silently greeting them. Technically, Bush snubbed almost everyone.

So was there snubbery or not? If so, was it mutual? You be the judge:

On Bishops, Politicians and a tiny bit of bread

I recently came across this article about the aggressiveness coming from the Catholic Church in the Philippines (an overwhelmingly Catholic nation) against the proposed family planning bill, which would require the government to promote artificial contraception.

I could write about the irony. How the Church, who cares for all of the Lord’s people, would allow them to dig themselves into an even deeper hole, instead of allowing legislation to pass that might help provide desperately necessary population growth control. I could write about the families left in abject poverty due to the Catholic abstinence-only dogma. I could write about the deeper problems with the church’s insistence on over-stepping the constitutionally prescribed separation of church and state.

Instead, I would like to address the bishops’ threats of refusing the Eucharist to politicians who support the bill. It seems to be the common Modus Operandi for meddling clergymen.

In Catholicism, one cannot accept the Host whilst in a state of mortal sin. Doing so would compound the transgression, causing eternal damnation. The theological process of transubstantiation gives weight to the argument. In refusing to serve the Host, the clergy is saving souls. Hence, they believe it is their duty to refuse. If this were the full extent of the refusal, all would be well.

Unfortunately, more appears to be at stake. Taking my previous thought further: if said sinner were to go to confession before mass and receive absolution, theoretically he/she cannot be refused communion.

How can anyone then refuse the Eucharist if absolution is already granted? The Church already knows that if any of the involved politicians receive absolution, they are fully eligible for the Eucharist, making this threat unenforceable. So what is it about?

These bishops are entering dangerous ground. Are they spitefully inducing the wrath of God to prevent this bill from going through? Is the Catholic Church prepared to play for politics and influence on the backs of impoverished and malnourished individuals? I certainly hope not.

Oxymoron of the Year

For the past few months, it seemed that Bush, a.k.a. Procrastinating Destructor Supreme, was playing catch-up to actually accomplish something positive. According to Tina Brown, that is no longer the case. All that is on Bush’s mind is his library.

Bush? Library? Does something not sound off? Are those two terms not mutually exclusive? I think it should be called the “George W. Bush Presidential Lie-barry”. Yup, that sounds much better. Underneath the library name it should read a play on Brown’s description – House of Horrors and Half-Truths.

Tackling young and novice drivers

Young drivers (21 years of age and younger) and novice drivers in Ontario may soon face new laws in regards to alcohol consumption and the number of young passengers with them in the car. I have mixed feelings about them.

The new rules require young drivers to have a zero blood alcohol level whilst behind the steering wheel. This will also apply to novice drivers of all ages for their first year of driving. I am in agreement with this aspect of the proposed laws. Germany already has such laws in place, with the difference that novice drivers must adhere for two years instead of one.

What I disagree with in the limit set upon the number of youth in a car, which makes it illegal for young drivers to drive with more than one passenger 19 or younger with them in the vehicle. Don Forgeron, the Insurance Bureau of Canada’s Ontario vice-president, rightly says that saving lives is of more importance than inconvenience. They are, however, essentially making it illegal for young people to carpool to work, or to drive their two younger cousins to their swim class. This also affects the responsible party-goers – the designated driver will no longer be able to chauffeur their friends home. This inconvenience is utterly unnecessary.

This limit comes as a result of a fatal crash that occurred on the south shore of Georgian Bay. Five teenagers died, three of which were not wearing seatbelts. According to police, alcohol did not play a role in the crash. Speed and road conditions likely did.

I do not understand how that crash would lead to the limit proposed. Instead, I believe that higher fines for speeding and failure to wear seatbelts are in order. Significant speeding should also warrant immediate license suspension.