An October serving of mulligan stew

A bunch of loose topics...
The "should Kerry have mentioned Cheney's lesbian daughter?" stink - was answered, for me, for all time by Chicago Tribune columnist Eric Zorn (see it here). Short version: mentioning that Cheney's daughter is a lesbian is only "cheap and tawdry" if you feel that way about GLBT people in general. It's only shameful to talk about someone being gay if you believe it's a shameful topic. It would be just as "shameful" to mention in public that I'm overweight...it's not comfortable to hear someone say it, but hey...it's true. Move onto something more substantial, folks - there's plenty of real stuff to get excited about out there.

Chicagoans are dancing-in-the-street happy over - the reopening of 47 Chicago-area Fannie May candy stores. Since I'm not a chocolate fan, and only had Pixies around when my former wife got a box from her father, this is about as exciting to me as "How'bout dem Bears (Cubs, Bulls, Chiefs, etc...)?" Woo-hoo. But trust me - I'm happy if you're happy.

Anglicans ask for Episcopal apology - over the American Episcopal Church's ordaining a gay bishop. And I think they should, too... just as soon as the Anglican communion apologizes to the entire Christian world for what its founders did to "the sanctity of marriage." Makes one wonder whether Britney Spears is an Anglican... Grrr.

A transplant arranged by MatchingDonors.com - has been cancelled by the Denver hospital where it was to happen, over concerns about the ethics of how the transplantee/donor match was made (see the article here). The hospital administration questioned the rightness of having a for-profit Internet PR agency essentially promoting the cases of potential transplantees, thus giving an advantage in arranging an organ donation for those who are willing and able to pay to have their transplant needs publicized on a web site. I agree - only because I'm more than a little afraid of the slipperly slope of commercialism in transplants. Yes, it's true that people can't get into bidding wars over organs - yet - because paying for donated organs is illegal, so far. But this concept makes me more than a bit nervous.

Identity badges worn under the skin OK'd for health-care - so, is this a blessing to folks like me, who (as a diabetic) might be misdiagnosed about passing out in public? Or is it just the first step down the road to "the mark of the Beast," a universal identification to destroy our freedoms?

Having known of one diabetic who died in jail because she passed out in public (from low blood sugar) and was tossed in a drunk tank instead of taken to a hospital, I'm all in favor of the proposal to have a little chip set under my skin that could unlock my medical records in a flash. But several friends have told me how much this kind of technology sounds suspiciously like the brand of the Devil that is mentioned in end-times scriptures. Of course, there are darn few folks asking to trade in their cell-phones because of the GPS locators in them - not to mention all the OnStar vehicle tracking systems. (But I'm sure those are different, right?)

I guess so long as it is entirely voluntary, then those of us who could benefit from it could use it. Making it mandatory, however, would be a big deal. Wonder what Jerry Jenkins and Tim LaHaye would say about me getting a medical implant to save my life now, and whether it would damn my soul if it were made mandatory later? Nah, strike that...I can guess what they'd say.

These all may be news, but I'm sure findin' it hard to find Good News in anything I read in the news today - online, or on hard-copy. Sheesh.