Emerald Gryphon

Ramblings from an ex-squid on politics, religion, current events, and whatever else catches my attention.

Archive for the ‘Rules’ Category

Life, death, and illness

Posted by emeraldgryphon on Thursday, 28 October 2010

 

Over at Bobbi’s place there is a little discussion on this post about palliative care for infants. First, RTWT.

Maybe I look at things differently than most, but I didn’t see the horror in that article the same way as others. It seemed to me to be a real look at how to help both infants and parents / families deal with a terminally ill infant after the decision is made to stop keeping them alive. The horrors I came away with is that we are prohibited by law from helping ease the process. We cannot give an overdose of morphine or any other common drugs that would end the pain quickly. All we are allowed to do is remove food and water until their bodies fail. That’s barbaric. If you would do that to a terminally ill dog you would go to jail. Why do we treat people worse than dogs in end of life situations?

This has made me reflect some on the recent serious illness in my home. My daughter was born in mid-September. When she was two weeks old she came down with pertussis (whooping cough). She almost died. She is home now, after over three weeks in the hospital, the majority of it in pediatric ICU. There were a few days in the middle that we weren’t sure if her heart could take the stress, and there were worries about brain damage from the hypoxia. There seems to be no damage, thankfully, because during the incident at home when she quit breathing, turned blue and went completely unresponsive my wife was able to give rescue breathing (CPR) while we were waiting for the ambulance. The second time she reacted this way she was in the hospital and they were able to intubate her to maintain both her airway and her blood oxygen levels while she didn’t have the strength to breathe on her own.

So, back to life and death decisions. What if the hypoxia had left her in a persistent vegetative state? You know, autonomous functions active (breathing, heart beating, etc) but no higher brain function? Legally, it would be up to us (her parents) to make the decisions regarding end of life, but if we decided to let her pass the only option would be to pull the feeding tubes and let her starve to death. The law prohibits us from helping the process. As I commented over there, it feels like a throwback to the catholic rule that fasting was the only acceptable method of suicide, as all other methods imply a lack of faith in God. That’s unacceptably barbaric, and you wouldn’t do it to a pet. Why, if we revere human life, do we treat people so horribly at end of life?

Would we have made the decision to let our daughter pass? I don’t know. That would have depended on a lot of factors, from amount of damage to possibility of recovery. Thankfully we didn’t have to make that decision.

Regards,

Pol

Advertisements

Posted in Family, Rules | Leave a Comment »

Breaking News: Armed Family seen in local Bar!!

Posted by emeraldgryphon on Wednesday, 15 July 2009

Lol….

So, in celebration of the new Tennessee ‘Guns in Bars’ bill, my wife, my 6 month old daughter, and I went to go have a pleasant dinner at the Ruby Tuesday’s in Smyrna tonight. And yes, two of us were armed. Openly. (bonus points if you can guess which two… heheh)

No PSH, and neither of our firearms leapt out of their holsters and shot the place up. Had a good meal  (have you tried the fruit lemonades they have there? Outstanding!) with great service (thank you, Jenn! Ask for her – she was incredible!), and just spent a pleasant hour and change. I would encourage everyone who is a friend of firearms owners and gun rights to patronize Ruby Tuesday’s. They started here in Nashville, and they came out very early in this whole shouting match by declaring that they weren’t going to post any of their Tennessee restaurants “No Firearms” since they haven’t had a problem in any other state. They, like Walmart, McDonalds, IHOP, etc; will simply follow the laws of the state that they are in regarding arms. They have just become our new favorite restaurant locally, whether we are carrying or not. And, it seems we are not alone:  The Squeaky Wheel goes to RT’s in Memphis (i think) and  Shots Across the Bow details more terrifying incidents involving guns and alcohol in the same building. (h/t) Say Uncle.

To the restaurant owners who don’t want guns carried in their restaurants: Cool. Plainly post that you don’t want our business, and we will leave you alone. Carving the exception for permit holders ( as well as carving the exception out for off duty police) out of the general prohibition on carry in restaurants that serve alcohol only increases liberty for everyone in Tennessee. Permit holders get added liberty to choose different places to eat, and restaurant owners are no longer prevented from allowing carry on their premises, but can prohibit carry of they choose (it is their property, after all) Win all the way around, I say.

To those who are getting their senses all out of whack and claim that they will not eat at any restaurant that allows guns, well, i guess that you wont go to McD’s, Wendy’s, Chick-fil-A, IHOP, Subway, the food court at most malls, the snack bar at Target or Wal-mart….. There are really too many to list. The only restaurant that I know of in Middle Tennessee that prohibits carry in Waffle House. I guess that they will be packed from now on… heh.

 

Regards,

Pol

Posted in Food, Guns, Idiots, Politics, Power, Rules | Tagged: , , , | 2 Comments »

Getting it backwards, again….

Posted by emeraldgryphon on Thursday, 4 June 2009

SayUncle has this post about the recent New Hampshire decision to officially recognize and subsidize gay marriage in NH. I agree with the spirit, in that this is a good thing on net. No courts, no lawsuits, this was the legislature acting to enact the will of the people. Republican form of government in action, and all that.

Where Unc gets it wrong, however, is in his statement that

New Hampshire set to become sixth state to butt out of contracts between two people whose genitalia aren’t different.

This isn’t about their freedom to contract. This isn’t about their freedom to marry. These were already freely available, no one was getting jailed for performing a ceremony, and no one was having their legal contracts overridden. This is purely about the taxpayer subsidy for married couples being extended to same-sex couples.

I get disappointed when I see thoughtful, intelligent people apparently completely misunderstanding the actual root issue here. There are no civil rights at stake.  You are free to enter into a same sex marriage, anywhere in the US. There are no contract rights at stake. Your wills, living wills, and powers-of-attorney aren’t being summarily set aside, and if they do, that is an issue where the courts should intervene on a civil rights basis for freedom to contract. You do not get the marriage subsidy extended to you in 44 states currently. That’s the difference. I feel that the taxpayers of a State have the right to decide what actions and behaviors to subsidize and which to tax, and that their legislators should enact the will of their constituents. If you want to be married in a state that does not subsidize your marriage, it takes a couple of grand and an attorney to get about 90% of the benefits of marriage via contract. The rest are state tax savings and whatever state welfare payments are restricted to married couples. (And social security, but I’m dealing with state level here, not federal) That’s far better than if you happen to be involved in a polygynous relationship – your marriage is not only not recognized, you can go to jail for it.

I became ordained years ago specifically to perform a ceremony for a lesbian shipmate of mine and her partner. (Yes, we were active duty at the time). Since then I have performed about a half-dozen marriages or commitment ceremonies for gay or lesbian couples. Big deal. However, I do not support extending the subsidies to same-sex couples on the following basis: I believe that the government should get all the way out of recognizing marriages. There should be a single legal protection package (what to do if the arrangement ends – property protections and all that) for civil unions that covers everyone who live together and have commingled finances, from roommates to siblings to lovers to parents, etc. Everyone. Extending the recognition business is the opposite of what I feel should be the norm in a liberty – focused society.  Yes, I know that this is the real world, not my ideal liberty based society, but I (and other likeminded individuals) am trying to get us closer to it all the time.

Regards,

Pol

Posted in Politics, Power, Rules | Tagged: , | Leave a Comment »

Tennessee Restaraunt Carry bill vetoed by Gov Bredesen.

Posted by emeraldgryphon on Friday, 29 May 2009

Wow. Just wow. newsish link here.

I’ll let all the political evaluation be done by those with better insight than me. For example, SayUncle has a good (though short) roundup of reactions, including this little gem:

I guess he really doesn’t have future aspirations for political office in the state.

That really about sums it up. As a gun owner and licensed carrier here in Tennessee, i am particularly upset that our Governor doesn’t believe that our citizens are as mentally competent as those of ALL our neighboring states. yes, thats right, every state that touches Tennessee allows people with a permit to carry in restaurants as long as they are not drinking. Virginia goes as far as requiring that the weapon be carried openly.

Is this so hard? The Governor wants to restrict a fundamental civil right based not on any evidence but on his gut. I’m sorry, that is neither the power nor function of government. Gut feelings (all guns are bad, m’kay? Unless I am the one directing the usage of those guns!) don’t pass constitutional muster as ‘providing a compelling state interest’ to restrict a fundamental civil right.

I don’t need a nanny. I just need to be left alone.

In the immortal wods of Captain Mal Reynolds, “I’m done runnin’. I aim to misbehave”

 

Regards,

Pol

 

h/t instapundit

Posted in Guns, Idiots, Politics, Power, Rules, Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

Introductions and assorted miscellania

Posted by emeraldgryphon on Tuesday, 13 February 2007

Where to begin… I’ve been spending (wasting) time lurking on various blogs, rarely commenting, and I guess I’ve finally decided to join in the fray. I have a smattering of opinions, political, social, and other, and I’m going to display them all here for no apparent reason. (heh)

This blog will tend to be politically oriented, and my vaguely formed opinions on current events will be assisted by a smattering of links. If I offend, you’re welcome to respond, but as with all media, you are free to change the channel. You have come to my site, and you are free to leave.

Regards,
Pol

Posted in Introduction, Rules | Leave a Comment »