Weblog

Wednesday, 19 December 2007

Saturday, 15 December 2007

  • Chocolate Heaven

    I think I am going to sue Godiva.

    A little background.  A few weeks ago, Wendy calls me and says, "I think our order from Godiva should come today so keep an eye out for it."  Now, each Christmas, we treat ourselves (and whoever is lucky enough to be with us) to some chocolate santas and small boxes of truffles for the stockings.  When the delivery came, I found 3 HUGE boxes and one small box outside my door - all from Godiva.  My first instinct, of course, was to presume that my sweetheart hit a few wrong buttons in her rush when ordering what was supposed to be a few boxes of truffles.  "What did she order" I think to myself.  I start opening the boxes and pulling out two, three and four POUND boxes of Godiva chocolates. This is what my living room looked like when I was all done.


    In total, we had $1600 of Godiva chocolate in our living room.  At this point I knew my first instinct had to be wrong and got on the phone with Godiva to see what could be done.   Their customer service was excellent and before the night was over  (and after I had re-packed the boxes) Fed Ex was at my door to  take the boxes away.  And for my trouble  we were allowed to keep one of the 4 pound boxes.  Do you know how many pieces of chocolate are in a 4 pond box?  140!!

    Now, sounds fine and dandy, right?  That box is a bottomless pit.  For weeks I have been walking by it thinking, "Oh, what is one piece of chocolate in the middle of the day."  "Oh, what is one piece of chocolate while I am cooking dinner."  "Oh, what is a couple of pieces of chocolate for dessert."  And, I have become an addict.  You know how I know?  We are down to the last tray of chocolates and I found myself thinking (seriously!) "Hmm, its been nice having that chocolate around. Would it be so bad to get another one?  Doesn't have to be a 4 pound box, maybe just a 3 pound box."  I WAS SERIOUS!

    So, I think I should sue Godiva. They must put some secret ingredient in their chocolate that makes it addictive.  I am sure that I am not so weak that mere delicious chocolates made with the finest pure ingredients could turn me into a chocoholic in a matter of weeks.  It could be a class action.  I can't be the only one. Anyone know a good lawyer?

    Yes, we are down to our last tray of chocolates.  I sure am going to miss "Madame G."

    posted by Heather

Monday, 10 December 2007

  • NJ...paid...family...leave...insurance...(gasp.)

    So a group of nine intrepid feminists under the banner of the National Org for Women strode valiantly into the halls of the New Jersey legislature today to convince lawmakers that they had better post the gol-darned bill or there'd be heck to pay. Some NOW members had babes in arms, others just arms (kidding!!!) All told there were around a hundred activists present from several organizations who make up the NJ Time To Care Coalition, all lobbying for family leave insurance S2249/A3812.

    Let's say a little prayer to whatever deity you personally subscribe to that today's effort had the desired effect; on Thursday of this week 12/13, the NJ Assembly Democrats will be holding a caucus to decide whether or not they have enough votes to post the bill. More info as we get it. We want the bill posted, voted on and passed onto Gov. Corzine without a small business carve-out and with the ten weeks leave intact.

    (Nina Suraci, a dear Sister and former Secretary of Morris County NOW passed away this past Friday 12/7 after battling a long illness. She had sparkling eyes, she was a builder of common ground between diferent communities and she had a great sense of humor. In her memory, "¡Cada madre es una mujer trabajadora!. Nina, you will be with us always.)

    Posted by Laurie

     

Monday, 03 December 2007

  • Here we go again

    Well, I was just going to write about the joy of having a few hours to oneself (which I did have this weekend) but I made the mistake of checking my email and opening my daily blog from the Family Equality Council .  There I found a link to an audio clip of radio ads being run here in NJ by the National Organization for Marriage (not a NJ organization) that, of course, predicts the end of the world if gay people are given full marriage equality.  You know the typical fear-mongering "Your tax dollars will be spent teaching your children that it is ok for those morally corrupt gay people to marry each other"  and a sweet child's voice asking "But what if I want a Mom and a Dad?"  I  have not yet figured out how to link to the ads it but if you go to  http://www.goodasyou.org and scroll down a bit you can find not only the ads but a very good and sarcastic response.  

    I am getting so tired of this.  Every election (and these ads seem a bit soon, don't they) they roll out us scary gay people hoping to frighten people and get them to the polls to vote for some homophobic constitutional amendment or ballot initiative or what-have-you so they can legalize some form of discrimination; oh and by the way, while your doing that also be sure to vote for some Republican (and I am sorry but it is always some Republican) who will then do everything in his power to give tax breaks to those who don't need them and implement policies that weaken every family and make it harder and harder to make ends meet.  Where is the politician who will finally say to these homophobes, "Enough already.  It is not ok to demonize people. It is not ok to stigmatize any family structure.  Everyone in the USA has a right to fall in love and get married and if you are really worried about making families stronger and protecting our children then stand up for paid family leave, universal health care, fair wages, strong schools, a healthy environment.  Otherwise, get out of the way."

    I know, I am just dreaming but a girl has to have her dreams.

    by Heather



Friday, 30 November 2007

  • Federally Funded Falsehoods

    This month the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States (SEICUS) released a scary report entitled Legalized Discrimination:  The Rise of the Marriage-Promotion Industry and How Federally Funded Programs Discriminate Against Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Youth and Families.  The report is about the billions of taxpayer dollars being used under the guise of public health and social welfare to push the conservative agenda promoting heterosexual marriage(not that there is anything wrong with that) above all else - above real public health, medical opinion, scientific evidence and just plan honesty. The entire report can be found at http://www.siecus.org/policy/SpecialReports/index.html.  (You may have to click on the blue Policy & Advocacy box).  The report examines "the marriage-promotion programs and the federally subsidized industry they have created by looking at the history of the programs, the money, the messages they give both adults and young people, the under-the-radar convergence of both programs and funding, and the conservative social agenda behind these programs." (pg. 1)   To avoid any accusations of plagiarism, anything I put in quotes comes from SEICUS's report and I will indicate the page number.  Now, let me brighten your day with just some highlights:

    - $50 million in federal funds  is allocated to provide grants to states for abstinence-only-until marriage programs (which even the feds acknowledge does not reduce sexual activity among teens). While these programs have very strict parameters for operation, conservatives lawmakers were not happy SO...

    - In 2000 they created another funding stream for marriage promotion, the Community-Based Abstinence Education (CBAE) grant program and in order to have more control,  the states are completely bypassed in allocating these grants.  The allocation is done by Administration for Children & Families (ACF).  In 2006,  ACF  showing a "total disregard for the diversity of America's families and for responsible spending, shifted from promoting abstinence among teens as a way to reduce 'risky behavior' to promoting abstinence because it 'improves preparation for a stable marriage.'" (p.6).  The guidelines for these programs mandate the marriage must be defined  as a "legal union between one man and one women as a husband and wife."  (Hey, maybe gay and lesbian students can opt out of the programs - oh, that would mean they would have to be in an environment where they feel SAFE to be out).

    - These programs tell young people "marriage is more important than college or a career," "those who have sex outside of marriage lack character and are no longer marriage material," (pg.9), sexual activity will lead to guilt, anger, fear, low self-esteem, children in single parent households are at greater risk for drug abuse, suicide, depression, arrest and pregnancy. (p.19).

    - These programs do not provide information concerning STD's, contraception, gender stereotypes, HIV-prevention and provide misinformation about condom failure, pregnancy options, sexual orientation and family structure.

    The report by SEICUS is quite comprehensive and I could go on and on but I think you get the point.  Tax dollars (in the billions! The House recently approved an increase in CBAE funding from $113 million to $141 million) have been and are being spent by private companies promoting a conservative agenda that not only leaves LGBT students or those with LGBT parents feeling inferior and ostracized but also fails to adequately educate our youth and give them the information and tools needed to make informed choices in their lives.  The good news is that 14 states refuse these federal funds because the programs don't meet the states own strict guidelines for comprehensive sex education.  The bad news is that 36 states do accept the funds.

    posted by Heather
     

mcnowmom

  • Visit mcnowmom's Xanga Site
    • Member Since: 10/13/2007

Weblog Archives

Don't worry - your calendar is here… to see it in action just click "Save" above and refresh the page.