An open letter to pot smokers

From The Signpost

Dear pot-smoking classmate,

I'm writing you this letter to let you know that I've noticed something about you. You've changed. You don't think you have, but that's because your brain is so clogged with bong-resin that you've forgotten who you are and don't notice that you smell like a basket of dirty clothes and patchouli.

You really need a bath and a haircut, but more importantly, you need to put down your peace pipe. I know you don't believe it, but you are addicted to marijuana. All of your hippie friends tell you it's not addictive, but they are hippies, and they are in denial just like you.

Did you know that addiction is defined as a compulsive physiological or psychological need for a habit-forming substance? I'm sure you did … you seem really smart when you show up to class.

That's why I'm sure you also know that according to Alan J. Budney of the University of Arkansas' Department of Psychiatry, some classic symptoms of marijuana withdrawals include irritability, anger, cravings, insomnia and fatigue, just to name a few. Of course, you have never experienced any of those symptoms.

Budney and other researchers have also found that repeated marijuana use often leads to psychosocial dysfunction, with symptoms that include persistent procrastination, low productivity, low self-confidence, interpersonal or family conflicts, financial problems and of course memory problems.

Maybe some of your financial problems are because you are spending your money on marijuana instead of fixing your car. If your car could run on grass, you'd be set buddy … but it doesn't.

You tell me that smoking weed doesn't affect your memory. I'm sorry friend, but that's just not true. The National Institute on Drug Abuse and independent researchers have concluded that marijuana has negative affects on memory, learning and even motor coordination. Remember all those times that you told me that pot helps you focus? No?

Oh … never mind then.

I know you are an adult and you can make your own decisions. That's why I can say that without a doubt you have read statistics about the age of the typical marijuana user. Just in case you missed something, or forgot, I will summarize the data for you.

According to the National Household Survey on Drug Abuse, or NHSDA, performed by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the average age of the first-time user is seventeen-years-old, while the mode (that means most common number … we learned about that in math, remember?) was fifteen years. That means that your adult independence is leading you to act more like a teenager.

The NHDSA also found that daily users of marijuana are almost twice as likely as less-than-daily users, and almost fourteen times as likely than non-marijuana users, to use another illicit drug.

Whoa … are those ‘shrooms in your pocket? You say you forgot you had those? That's entirely possible.

We're graduating soon, and this is my final letter to you, so I'm going to be blunt.

Sorry … I shouldn't have used that word.

I'm going to be frank with you. Your band is going nowhere, and you are going to need a real job someday. Many good employers drug test, and even if they don't, they are not going to hire you unless you quit smoking reefer. There are resources out there to help you sober up. It can be extremely difficult, but I know you can do it.

Your hippie friends will try to tell you it is hip and everybody's doing it, but you know the statistics. You know the truth. I am confident that with a little support, you'll be able to kick this habit, and when they tell you that marijuana isn't addictive, you can tell them, "That's just something potheads say."

Good luck in your future, wherever it takes you. I've enjoyed writing to you this past year. I truly hope we cross paths again someday.

Sincerely,

Michael R. Addams

Little girls should not be breastfeeding

From: The Signpost

The Breast Milk baby doll recently hit shelves in the United States after successful sales in Europe. The doll comes with a special nursing top with strategically placed flowers to simulate nipples that the baby doll attaches to and suckles.

Read that again to let it soak in.

According to Spanish toymaker Berjuan, the doll is designed to let "young girls express their love and affection in the most natural way, just like mummy."

I'm trying to figure out what is natural about a little girl attaching a suckling doll to flower-shaped nipples on an apron.

Danny Lewis, Berjuan's U.S. spokesperson, said the company wants to promote breastfeeding as the most loving, healthy practice for a mother and her infant. He claims, "Little girls need to learn to breastfeed."

Some people are praising the toy, saying that this is the answer to America's discomfort with breastfeeding. These people do have a point … to a point.

There is a reason God equipped mommies with mammary glands, and to the distress of some readers, their primary purpose is to feed an infant child. Some new mothers associate breasts with sex to the point that these women are uncomfortable using that part of their body for its intended use.
There are always new studies about how breast-fed babies are healthier. According to the Office of the Surgeon General and the American Academy of Pediatrics, breast-fed babies have better immunes systems, are less likely to develop asthma and are at a decreased risk of obesity and diabetes. The mother, meanwhile, has a decreased risk of breast and ovarian cancer. There are always individual exceptions, but whenever possible, mothers should breastfeed their newborns.

But why do little girls need to learn to breastfeed? I know several people that exclusively breastfed their children, and none of them learned it by holding a doll that made suckling noises when held to a faux-nipple.

Every child is different. Some children are happy with the stork answer to the infamous question, "Where do babies come from?" You could tell your child all kinds of stories and he or she would probably believe you. My three year-old asked me that big question the other day, and it came a few too many years earlier than I expected it.

My answer wasn't a lie … but it wasn't the full story, that's for sure. I left out some key details that he just didn't need to have floating around in his young brain. If he comes and asks me again when he's a little older, I'll give him a bit more to think about. Even then, it'll be age-appropriate information.

Despite my being a hardcore, sheltering parent who doesn't want my child knowing about the birds and bees until way after his threes, I am 100 percent confident that he will grow up and know how all of that works when the time is right. (I just hope he learns it from asking his mom or me and not from a Google search.)

Likewise, when a little girl grows up, becomes a woman and bears her first child, she'll figure out how to feed her baby. However, if she does have a question, hospitals have these wonderful people called "nurses" that deal with that kind of stuff all the time. They will get her (or the baby) pointed in the right direction.

And I promise, none of them will wonder why they didn't learn this as children.

PETA gets biblical

From The Signpost

I hate the idea of animal cruelty. I support legislation that criminalizes acts of abuse or neglect towards domestic animals, as well as the poaching of wild animals. I believe that all creatures are a beautiful part of God's creation.

But that's where the boundary of rational thought ends, and the People for Ethical Treatment of Animals, or PETA, begins.

PETA, my favorite eco-terrorist nut-job club, has recently taken up an interest in the Bible, encouraging the translators of the newly updated New International Version to remove "speciesist" language, insisting that animals in the Bible be referred to as "he" or "she" instead of "it."

Bruce Friedrich, PETA's vice-president for policy, said "Language matters. Calling an animal ‘it' denies them something. They are beloved by God. They glorify God."

"It" is defined in the dictionary many ways, including "used to represent a person or animal previously understood, previously mentioned, or about to be mentioned whose gendered is unknown or disregarded."

Disregarded, because even if Moses or the other authors of the Bible's sections had known its gender, "it" doesn't make any difference.

I should point out the Bible does occasionally make reference to the gender of the animal in discussion. Take, for example, one of the earliest scriptures my dad taught me from the Bible:

"…And there came forth two she bears out of the wood, and tare forty and two children of them." 2 Kings 2:24 KJV

If any of the children had survived the pair of female beasts, PETA probably would have sued his or her parents. They tried that in 2009 when a little girl survived a seal attack. They didn't even care whether "it" was a boy seal or a girl seal.

Friedrich also believes that the Bible promotes vegetarianism.

I respect a person's choice to abstain from eating meat. I mean, it's totally weird, but I respect it. My wife used to be a vegetarian, and I used to eat red meat religiously. We've compromised, and now I eat a lot of turkey.

Mmmmm … turkey …

But claiming the Bible promotes vegetarianism tells me one thing: you should read the Bible before you try and talk about it.

"Then he take the five loaves and two fishes, and looking up to heaven blessed them, and brake, and gave to his disciples to set before the multitudes. And they did eat, and were all filled ..." Luke 9:16-17 KJV

Mmmmm … seafood …

Then, there is the parable of the prodigal son:

"And bring hither the fatted calf, and kill it; and let us eat, and be merry:

"For this my son was dead, and is alive again; he was lost, and is found. And they began to be merry." Luke 23:15 KJV

Mmmmm … fresh steak …

I'm no Bible scholar, but it sounds to me like Jesus ate meat, and demonstrated that feasting on a cow was an appropriate means of celebration. In fact, I'd say ordering a surf and turf combo is an adequate way to prove your faith while wearing a What Would Jesus Do (WWJD) bracelet.

PETA has once again proven to be nothing less than a club of activists who would rather make a fuss over something than do anything useful. There are better things they could do with their time than argue over an animal's right to be referenced in sacred text by their gender … like work to have all pit bulls spayed or neutered … but you've already heard my opinion on that one.

Besides, everyone already knows that all dogs are boys and all cats are girls.

Get an emergency preparedness kit

From The Signpost

Last summer, I joined approximately 20 other Weber State University students and traveled to San Pedro La Laguna, Guatemala, to conduct a micro-loan service project benefitting the humble Mayan women of the area. Immediately prior to our arrival in Guatemala, tropical storm Agatha crashed into Central America, causing flooding and mudslides throughout the region. One of the slides crashed through residential San Pedro.

While our group grabbed shovels and joined the locals in an excavation effort to dig out the one house still standing in the slide's path, I had the opportunity to interview the owner of the house. He told me he had grabbed his wife and children and ran to the unfinished second story of his house and watched the mud destroy his neighbor's homes.

One of the homes belonged to his brother. They stood on their roof as their aunt clung to a tree, reaching to save her 11-year-old daughter, Juanita. Unable to reach her, they watched as their cousin was washed away and buried in the mud. Juanita was one of the 190-recorded fatalities of Tropical Storm Agatha.

While 190 deaths is no small number, it is peanuts in comparison to the number of Japanese families mourning their losses after being hit by a 9.0 magnitude earthquake, followed by a devastating tsunami. As of Saturday morning, the death toll reached 7,200 confirmed dead, with another 10,900 still missing. Similar to the residents of Guatemala, Japanese families are spending hours with tools no more advanced than simple shovels and their own hands as they dig out whatever remains of their old life they can find.

We've seen disasters strike here in the United States as well. Who can forget the tragic footage as we watched Hurricane Katrina pummel Mississippi and Louisiana? Some of us may remember the bay area earthquake during the World Series in 1989, and while it wasn't in any way a natural disaster, September 11, 2001, was a disaster never to be forgotten.

Yet, with earthquakes, hurricanes and tsunamis happening around the world, how many people have actually taken the time to put together an emergency preparedness kit?

The Mormons in the audience have heard the spiel dozens if not hundreds of times, and being that you live in Utah, you probably have too, regardless of your religious affiliation. I'm sure other denominations talk about it too, but I can't speak from experience.

I'm not trying to sound like a public service announcement (visit bereadyutah.gov for more information) but we are living on an earthquake just waiting to happen. The western foot of the Wasatch Mountains is essentially a line of multiple faults, with at least six different faults just within Salt Lake City. The faults are all part of the 240-mile-long Wasatch Fault. The Utah Office of Emergency Services estimates that if a 7.0 quake occurred on the fault in the Salt Lake Valley, the death toll could be as high as 6,200 people.

Another 90,000 could be seriously injured, but not all could be treated. About 50 percent of hospital beds would be lost due to the number of hospitals built directly on top of the faults.

Apparently the Mormon pioneers and early settlers weren't avid seismologists.

But whether you are a "Mo" or no, it makes no difference. Having an emergency kit is just plain common sense. Period.

You need to first create a 72-hour kit for your family. Pack non-perishable food, water, and a thorough first aid kit. After that, build up a storage room to feed your family for a week, then a month, then three months. When your neighbors laugh, smile and let them know that you will happily share if the need arises.

And if it does, try really hard to not rub it in their face that you were prepared and they weren't.

Racial scholarships are equally ridiculous

From The Signpost

Attending college can be very expensive. Some students come from well-off families, so the tuition bill is simply a matter of writing a check. Some students are able to pay for school through military benefits, and many are left with the only option available to them: work. And there is absolutely nothing wrong with a little hard work and saving up the dough to foot the tuition bill.

One source of relief for students is the various scholarships available to them through academic achievement, civic involvement and leadership positions.

Oh yeah ... and the color of your skin.

The Former Majority Association for Equality, a new Texas nonprofit organization, has jumped on the bandwagon of scholarship opportunities for students who look a certain way. As of last Wednesday, the group had raised enough money to offer five $500 scholarships to male Texas students with a minimum 3.0 grade-point average and who are at least 25 percent Caucasian.

The media has since hammered Colby Bohannan, the president of the organization, over the issue. During a television interview, he was told by an African-American studies professor "there's no need" for this kind of scholarship because "being white in itself is a form of scholarship."

Bohannan responded by saying that after the interview he was going to go to his bank and say, "Hey, I forgot I was a Caucasian American, can you just go ahead and throw some money in my account, please?"

I tried that once. It didn't work.

The media is acting like this is the first time white students have been spotlighted for something like this.

In 2006, the College Republicans at Boston University caused "outrage" over a similar scholarship program. Their program was for only $250, but required a 3.2 cumulative grade-point average and two essays, in addition to being at least 25 percent Caucasian. Their application was headed, "We believe that racial preferences in all their forms are perhaps the worst form of bigotry confronting America today."

No one applied for that scholarship.

The Boston club admitted the scholarship was a stunt to get attention to the issue. The FMAFE, however, says they are serious, despite accusations that it is merely a similar stunt. Bohannan says $500 is a good chunk of change when you consider that it could cover a semester's worth of books for a struggling college student.

Of course, Bohannan is now being labeled a racist, because that is the easiest thing to label a person when he or she disagrees with anything involving race. The important fact that the FMAFE refuses to accept donations from white supremacy groups is inconsequential to the lame critics who preach equality for minorities. These critics want scholarships for minorities, but according to the most recent U.S. Census, two-thirds of the population growth in Texas for the last decade is Hispanics. Non-Hispanic whites are no longer the clear majority.

Do I smell a hint of hypocrisy?

Personally, I couldn't care less if an organization wants to give out scholarships to black students, white students, Hispanic students, or blue students with stripes and a tail. It's their right, whether you like it or not.

But regardless of what professors and media pundits of both sides say, "whites-only" scholarships are a step in the direction of true equality. All scholarships primarily based on race and not merit are equally ridiculous and turn students into mere ethnic quotas.

Want my opinion? E-mail me at politicalshorts@gmail.com.

IUDs prevent fetal drug dependency

From The Signpost

According to the March of Dimes, nearly 4 percent of pregnant women in the United States use illicit drugs, including marijuana, cocaine and heroin. This, of course, causes an immediate danger not only for the woman, but also for the helpless human life growing inside her.

The child's in-utero addiction is known as neonatal abstinence syndrome, or NAS. The baby, if born living, is at an increased risk of premature birth, as well as birth defects, withdrawal symptoms, and learning or behavioral problems later in life. Babies oftentimes have respiratory problems and are sent to the neonatal intensive care unit.

Depending on the drug and quantity to which the child was exposed, the withdrawal symptoms include sleeplessness, endless crying, sucking difficulties, vomiting, diarrhea, muscle spasms and tremors. Sometimes these symptoms last for months. Ask any adoptive parent of a baby with NAS, and they will tell you it's a tragic hell that the little life is suffering.

There is no law in Utah against giving birth to a baby with NAS, so no criminal charges can be filed against these women who deliver.

However, if a baby is determined to be suffering from fetal alcohol syndrome or fetal drug dependency by a doctor or nurse, they are required by law to report that information to the Utah Division of Child and Family Services. The mother is likely to lose custody of her newborn baby.

And then the toxic womb can go get knocked up again, and put another infant life in danger.

Some women recognize that they are taking dope for two. A woman interviewed by KSL said she can feel her baby getting high because it stops moving.

I have never wanted to punch a woman so badly in my life. Not in the belly, of course.

Some of these women, however, do seek out help when they realize that their drug addiction is likely to affect their unborn child. Whether it is methadone or other support, they are at least making some effort to correct their situation.

But many of the women who deliver "dirty babies" are repeat drug-addict mothers. What do we do about the women that pump out child after drug-addicted child?

According to an anonymous source, an unpublished study in Salt Lake City equipped a test group of approximately 1,400 women with an intra-uterine device to prevent delivering another NAS baby. Even with the cost of an IUD being between $600 and $800, the data collected so far shows savings of $1 million to $3.8 million on health care and DCFS costs.

In addition to the money saved on not needing to care for the child (since the mother rarely has the means), IUDs have a higher effectiveness rate in preventing pregnancy than tubal ligation and some varieties are effective for up to 20 years. That means fewer infants with tremors, and if the mother pulls her life out of the gutter and starts acting responsibly, she can have another shot at childbearing.

While part of me wants to find a way to bring criminal charges to women who recklessly endanger the lives of infants by using drugs during pregnancy, any criminal charge such women might face would deter the majority of them from seeking the medical attention she and the unborn child are guaranteed to need. Something does need to be done, however, to reduce the number of suffering children who will ultimately end up in DCFS care.

Maybe massive implementation of IUDs is the answer. It's somewhere in the ballpark of a win-win situation.

It's just a political affair

From The Signpost

Have you ever wondered why some elected officials are so stupid? From cigars, to stalls, to Craigslist, the decisions in their social and private lives ultimately lead to the destruction of their reputation. Yet, despite the notoriety earned for such ridiculous decisions, we still have scandals. And they usually involve sex.

The biggest of the scandals, of course, the Lewinsky scandal, led to the impeachment of President Bill Clinton, and should have led to his removal from office. Lewinsky was just the culminating point in a history of infidelity by our president and the former governor of Arkansas. Somehow, he figured he could keep the Lewinsky affair under the table.

Sorry, bad pun.

Then there is good ol' Sen. Larry Craig from Idaho. His "wide stance" in the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport led to his political demise when the man in the neighboring stall turned out to be an undercover cop. After waffling on a guilty plea, Craig paid a $575 fine and finished out his term without seeking re-election.

The Clinton marriage is a loveless marriage, and had already been that way for years by the time the Lewinsky thing happened, and Craig might have just been the victim of improper bathroom posture (yeah, right). But resting high above other dirtbag scandals, former Sen. John Edwards sits as the king of the hill.

While his wife struggled with the return of breast cancer, Edwards struggled to keep from knocking up a former campaign worker. He failed, and his aide bore him a daughter in 2008. He finally admitted to the affair in January 2010. His wife, Elizabeth, died 11 months later.

In her book The Monogamy Myth: A Personal Handbook for Recovering from Affairs, author and therapist Peggy Vaughan estimates that 60 percent of men and 40 percent of women will have an affair at some point in their marriage. The numbers are only estimates because of the fact that cheaters tend to lie to their loved ones and on surveys.

Somewhere between 50 percent and 75 percent of extramarital affairs occur with someone the cheater works with. That category includes Clinton and Edwards, but Craig didn't exactly fall into that category. I tried to find a statistic on affairs that occur in public restrooms, but the Google search provided everything but useful information.

One way Americans launch themselves into extramarital affairs is by way of Internet. It's unclear to what extent Rep. Christopher Lee of New York intended to go with his recent bout of idiocy.

Excuse me, former Rep. Christopher Lee of New York. Lee recently responded to a Craigslist ad in the "women seeking men" section. He responded with a Facebook-style holding-the-camera-phone-while-posing-in-front-of-a-mirror photo, in which he was shirtless and flexing. He told the woman he was a divorced 39-year-old lobbyist, "a very fit, fun, classy guy," and promised "not to disappoint." I highly doubt this was his first time.

So why do we keep electing scumbag cheaters?

In most states, if police officers are discovered to have had an affair, they lose their certifications. They are stripped of their badges and will never be able to work in the field again. Integrity is everything in law enforcement, and without it a cop is no good. Why should politics be any different?

If a politician is found to be an adulterer, he or she should be removed from office immediately and barred from the field. We need representatives who know if they fool around they will immediately lose their constituency's trust.

After all, if you can't trust a politician, who can you trust?