Never assume that a woman is pregnant (and other lessons I’ve learned)

I have long known that one should never ever congratulate a woman for being pregnant unless one knows (really really knows) that she is happily pregnant. 

About seven years ago, my wife told me that one of the women living in our neighborhood was pregnant.  This surprised me, because I knew that Sally (not her real name) had told me that she had no interest in having children.

About an hour later, though, while I was walking about a neighborhood art fair, I saw Sally.  I walked up to talk with her.  I commented that we hadn’t seen each other for quite a few months.  She gestured toward her abdomen and stated “I’ve put on some weight since then.”  I had noticed that she had, indeed, gained considerable weight.  Therefore, I stated “Congratulations!”

She asked, “Congratulations about what?”

I instantly knew that I had broken a very basic rule and I was now paying for it.  Sally wasn’t pregnant.  I quickly mumbled something like “congratulations about this year’s art fair.”  Sally was a volunteer in charge of the art fair.  She looked at me as if I was acting strange, but then we talked a bit more before parting ways.

When I got home, I asked my wife how she knew that Sally was pregnant.  She said that one of the other neighbors had told her.  I had assumed that my wife had talked to Sally herself and learned about Sally’s pregnancy firsthand.  Instead, rumor had been turned into a …

Share

Continue ReadingNever assume that a woman is pregnant (and other lessons I’ve learned)

Eight ways to allow 3,000 people to die: a lesson in moral clarity

President Bush is going to send more than 20,000 more troops into Iraq and spend billions of more dollars to carry on a hideous war. Why?  To protect Americans from terrorists, he tells us.  Bush convinced Americans to invade Iraq by accusing Iraq of being responsible for the 9/11 attacks that killed 3,000 Americans.  This argument suggests that the deaths of 3,000 people is a horrible thing.

Whenever 3,000 people die, it is a horrible thing.  It might justify hundreds of billions of dollars, though certainly not the diversion of money from programs that save equal numbers of lives. 3,000 deaths justifies the deaths of more than 3,000 soldiers, we are told.  I don’t agree with this. The political party that argues that there are clear moral rules (the Republicans) isn’t convincing me.

Does it make a difference that 3,000 innocent Americans die on the same day rather than over the course of a year?  I wouldn’t think so.  A death is a death, in my opinion.  And 3,000 deaths are 3,000 deaths.

Therefore, shouldn’t the 16,000 murders that occur every year in the US require a response five times bigger than the invasion of Iraq?   That’s 3,000 every ten weeks.  Shouldn’t it require focused efforts to protect these victims?  Shouldn’t it require a revamping of our entire criminal justice system, especially our prison system, which so often trains criminals to be even more vicious, rather than preparing them for ready for release? Where is our war on criminal violence? …

Share

Continue ReadingEight ways to allow 3,000 people to die: a lesson in moral clarity

No more smoke-filled rooms at the Capitol

This is both a substantive and symbolic point, according to the Chicago Sun-Times. With the new year ushering in a D.C. smoking ban, House members could take refuge in puffing away in the Speaker's lobby, an ornate room next to the House chamber. Members, reporters and staffers hang out there…

Continue ReadingNo more smoke-filled rooms at the Capitol

Top Secret: The identities of people with easy access to the President

According to ABC News, the White House and the Secret Service "quietly signed an agreement last spring in the midst of the Jack Abramoff lobbying scandal declaring that records identifying visitors to the White House are not open to the public."  The agreement is in the form of a five-page…

Continue ReadingTop Secret: The identities of people with easy access to the President

Is it disgusting? That depends on whose it is.

I have a confession. 

If the general consensus is that I should never do this again, I will seriously consider stopping (not that I had ever done this before–see below). I know that the story I am about to relate will disgust and confound some readers. Beware that I am thin-skinned, but don’t hold back.

Here’s the short version.  While in Chicago, my family and I (my wife and I have two daughters, aged six and eight) went to a trendy chocolatier (a store that sells high-priced chocolate).  While at said store, I ate some of the high-priced chocolate left by a customer who had left the store just as we were sitting down.

As I relate this, I am haunted by the Seinfeld episode where George Costanza is caught rummaging through the trash can in the kitchen of a house eating a pastry that someone had thrown away.  My adventure also brings to mind an idea put forth by “Tim,” a friend of mine, who has long argued that all morality starts with what one puts into one’s mouth.

Here’s what happened.  We went to a chocolatier, where my wife ordered a high-priced cup of hot chocolate.  The chocolatier was located on the first floor of an upscale mall that sells lots and lots of things that nobody really needs.  It just so happened that the Lego store was on the second floor of that mall.  That was our true destination when we were distracted by chocolatier’s prominent location.…

Share

Continue ReadingIs it disgusting? That depends on whose it is.