someone explain this please...

yesterday, slept a couple hours with my head on the desk at the office. woke up with a slightly stiff neck that went away in no time. last night, slept in my own bed on my lovely comfy pillows. this morning, wake up with a stiff neck that hurts when i turn my head. it's taking much longer to go away. i'm sitting here pondering whether a hot pad would help.

silly me, here i was thinking i had rights.

cohen on roe and privacy

apparently, roe shouldn't be about privacy. thus, the ruling being based on griswold, it's wrongly decided and should be overturned. shit, son, i forgot women's bodies were public property. how could i think that i had a right to my own body, much less an expectation that what goes on in my body is private, a concern only for me and my physician? you're down with privacy because you don't want the state telling you what you can do in your own bedroom, but you're all for it telling me what i can do with my own body? hello, you big fat fucking hypocrite.

you're also an asshole for saying it's cool for all the slavered states to ban abortion because a few states will still have it, and it's just unfortunate for all the women who live in red states and will see the consequences of that in real life. (and may in real life in fact die or suffer permanent physical damage as a result of desperate do-it-yourself abortions.) that, you see, is the dirty secret of the anti-choice folk who prefer to be called "pro-life" because it makes them sound cuddly and caring: they don't give a shit about women, much less children once they're born. this is all about control.

the other reason i think roe being overturned would be catastrophic is because then all those oh-so-moral anti-woman assholes would be free to concentrate on eliminating contraceptives. they're already gearing up to do it, using the same tactics they've used successfully against abortion. anyone who thinks otherwise is foolish-check out the growing push for "pharmacist conscience clauses"-somehow i don't think that's about allowing scientologist pharmacists to refuse to dispense anti-depressants. go ahead and tell me i'm overreacting. a few years ago, people were telling me talking about roe being overturned was overreacting. we're one bush appointment away from that, even if it's starting to look like it might not be justice miers casting the vote. maybe it's crazy, but i tend to take people at their word, especially when they're telling me their goals will have a very tangible negative impact on my life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness.

and yes, i also think prostitution and drugs should be legal. for the same reason: it's none of my business what another adult chooses to do so long as it meets the classic "swing your fist" test: your right to swing your fist ends at my nose. your right to take drugs ends when your drug taking affects me and not before. that i may find it distasteful is entirely irrelevant. funnily enough, other people's drug use doesn't generally affect me. (big fat disclaimer: second-hand smoke does affect other people. the previous statement is in no way inconsistant with my stance on smoking bans in public buildings/restaurants/pubs.) and it's no pie off of my plate if people choose to use the services of a prostitute. it becomes wrong/illegal in my book when the sex workers are being trafficked/coerced.

CHOICE. i'm all for it, for everyone. i'm also for a lot of people taking a big fat cup of "mind your own damn business." worry about your own morals and let other people take care of theirs, and stop trying to get the government to worry about people's morals for you-they're not allowed to, that's the whole point of the fist amendment.

yay!

talked to dad. my new rain jacket is there, and timbuk2 called back today and the order has gone through so my bag will be there hopefully sometime next week. and i ordered my goretex socks and helmet cover, so soon i will be dry even in rainy, crappy london winter weather.