Fidgety Foots

Or is it? All of us have been approached by panhandlers/beggars with requests for spare change or a dollar or two for food. What do most of us do under such circumstances? Teju and I will usually offer to buy food for the person, if they are genuinely hungry they will readily accept, if not then they are out of luck. Like the one time at Stanford, a guy who looked like his best friend was a Tennessee native called Jack Daniels, approached us at a pizza joint and proclaimed how hungry he was and if we could give him some money for food. Well, when I offered to buy him pizza, he either lost his appetite, or he genuinely hated pizza, or he realized that using food as an excuse in a food joint wasnt a profitable business prospect, but he indignantly walked away in a huff.

Now last week on my train ride home, I was approached by a lady in a nurses uniform, who needed a dollar because “her throat was parched” and she needed money for a soda. What do I do now? I could just get off the train and buy her what she needed but considering the stellar frequency of BART, that wasnt a viable option. Reading my mind she raised her right hand and firmly proclaimed. “Sir, I promise I wont use it for drugs or alcohol, I am an honest Christian and a religious God-fearing person” and then proceeded to display the cross she was wearing. Well, I ended up giving her a dollar before she decided to start reciting the Bible, but it made me wonder, what would I have done if she looked like a panhandler instead of a nurse? Probably not given her anything. Also, was my generosity just a selfish act on my part? What I mean is, did I give her something so that later on I wouldnt feel those pangs of guilt brought on by that inner voice disdainfully asking, “And what if she was telling the truth”?

Rambling Gypsy magicked up this video clip from our last office party.

What will your Mommy call you if she finds too much money in your bank account?

Ok, I did it again. I let myself be drawn into the evolution-versus-creationism debate. As always, it degenerated into bickering (I did manage to stop short of name-calling this time). For those of you who haven’t experienced one, these conversations run thus:

Creato: I don’t believe in evolution. It just doesn’t hold water. I’m a person who insists on facts.

Evo: Could you elaborate?

Creato: Well, for one, do you really expect me to believe that we came from fish? I mean, show me a fish that can turn into a man.

Evo: Ummm….would you hang around for 500 million years while I repeat the experiment?

Creato: And FOSSILS - huh! Do you know that there are jellyfish frozen in rock ? Is that even possible? Have you seen a jellyfish on the beach? It dries up! Do those paleontologists think I’m dumb? The earth was created 6000 years ago!

Evo: Well…I’m not a paleontologist, but I’m sure they’ve explained it. Besides, just because you run into a perplexing discovery doesn’t mean that an entire science is invalidated. What about carbon dating to prove the age of fossils?

Creato: It’s not always accurate. Neither geological nor biological evidence supports the theory of evolution.

Evo: (Changing tack, because this is getting annoying) Ok, since you’re such a skeptic, why do you believe that the world was created in seven days? Isn’t that a tight timetable?

Creato: The Bible. Historians have proved that many events in the Bible did take place. Given that, the rest of the events must be true. Besides, it always seemed more plausible to me than the evolution theory.

Evo: Well then, shouldn’t you take into account the other theories of Creation? For instance, one Indian theory posits that Lord Shiva danced the world into being.

Creato: (calm as cheesecake) We’re talking about fact here, not myth.

Evo: (sputters, recovers dignity) Ok then, could you introduce me to the person who can conjure up a 1.4 million kilometer wide ball of helium burning at 3000 degrees celsius?

Creato: (nonplussed for the first time) Ummm….no.

Evo: Then it’s not true! (beats strategic retreat)

This is an example of a good conversation. Usually Evo just sputters.

Got an email from a friend which contained cool one-liners regarding the pitfalls of marraige (see the PJ’s page). As I was reading it in my Gmail account, I noticed this ad in the sponsored links on the right of the Gmail page. Well, I guess thats the price you pay for free email service.

But my point is that the ad was only about how to catch cheating hubbies, what about them cheating wives? No book for them? How sad, they must feel left out. Women’s lib please take note.

Well, patent it, after all these people did. Hmm, maybe I should have filed a patent for my idea - a device that would automatically power off a cell phone whenever the owner starts belting out sordid details of their personal life in a public place at mind-numbing decibel levels. Good no?

So what do you do if science inconsiderately keeps piling on evidence that are at odds with your right-wing Christian ideology. Well, taking a page out of the Bush administrations grand scheme is definitely the way to go.

Global warming is due to more forest fires:

Global warming induced by human activity? Pshaw, a bunch of lies spread by scientists that aren’t funded by organizations with vested interests in energy. The National Academy of Science has agreed that the evidence in support of global warming is consistent with greenhouse gas emissions? Well, don’t they know that the temperatures are a little higher because of all those forest fires we keep hearing about? Turn your damn AC’s on and quit complaining about the heat while we fund a few scientists who aren’t even qualified to study atmospheric science to conjure up data that appears to refute some of the evidence as long as you don’t look too closely. Oh and along the way we will do our darn best to sideline renowned scientists who are considered world experts in this field.

Contraceptives lead to over-sexed humans:

What’s that? The FDA panel has approved over the counter purchase (OTC) of the birth-control pill Plan B? Well, then I am glad my hand-picked cronies have managed to completely circumvent trained physicians, bury all the scientific data that support it and decided to stall their recommendations. I mean, cant you see all those women having rampant sex and destroying the very morals that have helped our society prevail over their European counterparts? What’s that, Plan B is available OTC in most of Europe and they still seem to be doing fine? Well, hogwash, Euro-trash, whatever, all I know is that it is against the principles of the Catholic church, so there.

My grand-grand-grand-grand-grand-pappy aint no ape:

Fossils? You really expect me to believe that I originated from an ape because some old bones say so? Blasphemy!! My Book says that my ancestors were made by a Supreme Creator.
What? You have a theory called Evolution based on proven scientific data? Well, I have a better one, its called Creationism. Wait, did I say Creationism? I meant Intelligent Design. And yes its a theory, its irrefutable because you cant design an experiment to disprove it and it has solid supporting evidence written in this one Book. As for your theory, I don’t care how much research has gone into it, there are a few holes here and there, while mine has no holes in it. And no, its not because I don’t have any scientific data for it, its because it says so in my Book and because this “research institute” that we fund says so.

Stem-cell research=abortion:

So now you want me to approve a senate bill designed to destroy unborn babies by sacrificing embryos in the name of life-saving research? Why should I care that most of those embryos would be destroyed anyway? I am going to veto the bill and have a photo-op with a bunch of families who had children born from some of these frozen embryos and proclaim how these children wouldn’t even be born if those embryos had been used for stem-cell research, even though I know that it is a gross misrepresentation of the facts.

But then hey, my administration has been very good at that, so why reinvent the wheel to push an agenda that looks like it was formulated by Pat Robertson?

Maybe this thief just wants a better R’s!!

Because bras are what you should invest in. Well, dont pooh-paah me, read it for yourself. Quite an enlightning piece about the many faux pas that women commit with their “unmentionables”. I cant wait for the next one in the series where they discuss the inner workings of the men’s “under”-world.

Hope they dont offend any religious sentiments, they may be treading in some “hol-ey” territory.
Just noticed, cant help but quip, faux pas for men, faux mas for women?

Update: Men, take a “brief” moment to read this article.

This post was inspired by a conversation with Meeta on the nasty, creepy nature of blog trolls. Is it ok for someone to be rude, annoying and judgemental in your blog space? Should they get a life instead of making yours miserable?

My initial response was “of course they have a right to judge you, since you put yourself out there in the virtual cosmos”. Then I researched some blog trolls who obsess and obsess about their trollees and my reaction changed to “Ewwwwww - line them up and spray them with Baygon!”. Then I thought some more and I’m back to my initial “you-lay-yourself-open-to-judgement-by-starting-a-blog” response (by this time I had brain-ache).

Let me explain. As a blogger, I can choose to hide the unattractive facets of my personality from the public. A blog is a reflection of blogger unmarred - my portrait for the world to see. I am never on the spot when I write. My posts and responses are modulated and thoughtful, unlike real life where there are ugly reflexive moments. I cannot be perfect in real life, so I do it on a blog.

Since I have chosen to beam forth a perfect image of myself, I’m ok with the trolls commenting on it. Their right to speech (or sputter) and fantasy is as inalienable as mine.