anonemouse

I wish I had taken a picture of it, because I can't find one on the internet. I'll keep trying, though. Here's an article about it that ran in the county paper: Here is an example of the artist's work (but much better than the Moses statue):http://www.crossville-chronicle.com/homepage/images_sizedimage_004153815/resources_photoview

You can't really do that in college. At some point, they have to keep up with the class or fail. And I think letting people learn at their own pace earlier in their life is probably contributing to the problem. Yes, it seems like a nice idea, but when do people learn that they can't really succeed at their own pace in the real world? If you tell your boss that you will be getting your work done on your schedule instead of trying to meet his deadline, what do you think he'll do? He'd probably think you were joking and then fire you when he realized you weren't. I noticed the propensity of the school system to "dumb down" the curricula when I was in school. I could literally coast through all of my classes in high school without studying more than 5 minutes before a test and still get As and Bs. Did that help me? Hell no. I had a rude wake-up call in college when I realized that the professors aren't required to make you pass and don't dumb down their curricula to the nth degree. I struggled with my classes and ruined my GPA for the first 3 semesters. I still struggle with studying, even though I should have learned how at this point in my academic career (I'm getting a Master's in biology.) Teachers and school administrators are so afraid to push students and potentially make them feel or look "stupid" that they are making the majority of the students mediocre.

The embryos used in stem cell research may have originally had the potential to become an unborn baby, but that potential would never have been realized, whether or not they were used in research. The embryos being used were being discarded. I don't know about you, but if I had the choice of either dying without possibly helping someone or dying in the act of possibly helping someone, I know which option I would choose.

I think that it has been around for a while. I can remember in elementary school and high school that a lot of people wouldn't put any effort into their work just because they didn't want to appear smart. There is this belief that you can't be very smart and be popular at the same time. I have run into it in college and as an instructor, as well. I see all these people who apparently believe that popularity and being first in your class are mutually exclusive. You know, the ones that would rather sit around and joke with their fraternity brothers than pay attention in class. But really, I think it is ingrained in a lot of the students from high school that you somehow can't be popular and be the most successful (classwork-wise) at the same time. And unfortunately, most of them choose acceptance over success.

One more thing I wanted to throw in because I think it is sort-of funny. My home town is a smallish community (<45,000 people) in middle Tennessee. As you can imagine of a town in the bible belt, churches outnumber just about every other type of business. Well, there is a local artist that does large wood carvings out of logs. He carved a Moses standing with his head thrown back and hands raised and the ten commandments at his feet and gave it to the city. Where did the city put it? Smack dab in front of the court house. What made it so funny at the time were the other statues it was grouped with. You know how some cities will have artists make themed statues and auction them off? Well, my town had otters. Five foot tall otters dressed in clothing. They are all over the city, and there happened to be two of them in front of the court house. I think those were the Plumber-Otter and the Insurance-Otter (or lawyer, it was wearing a suit). Anyway, it gets better, IMO. As you can imagine, there was a lot of fighting about the statue. Honestly, it wasn't a very good carving, because if you looked at it straight-on, it looked more like a chimp or orangutan holding its arms up in the air. That is actually what some people (including me) started calling it: "The Moses Chimp." Finally, the ACLU got involved, and rightfully so. It is ridiculous when an entire town government decides to blatantly break the law and expect to get away with it because they are Christians. Finally, the ACLU got them to remove it because they said that if the city wanted to say that the front of the courthouse was a free demonstration area (the excuse the government was using to keep the statue), then they had to allow everyone else to demonstrate there and put up statuary of their own. THAT made the city take the statue down in a hurry. Wimps.

Exactly. Anyone who says that homosexuality exists only in humans has obviously never researched it. No, they based the constitution on Deist values, which aren't any more Christian than Jewish values are. If you say, "But wait, they obviously believed in God!", all I can say is that so do Jews, and they aren't Christians, either. There are no Nativity scenes allowed on government property. What part of "separation of church and state" don't you understand? The government CAN NOT favor one religion over another. Hell, it isn't supposed to favor any religion at all. I don't get how a lot of conservative Christians are all, "Liberals are destroying the world!!!", when THEY are the ones that don't want to obey the laws. Seems to me that the consevatives are the ones destroying everything this country stands for.

From what I have been seeing on the news, they are going to have Bush justify the extra troops. If he can't give justification that they agree with, they can refuse to fund it. Personally, I don't see how he is going to be able to justify it, because it seems like all the arguements that they are giving for more troops are the same ones they have given in the past.

I would check with your insurance, just in case. You never know, there might be a misunderstanding.

Not trying to shoot your hopes down or anything, but don't forget about having to get your dress altered. Most alteration places usually require you to have it done fairly far in advance of the occasion. To be honest, I wouldn't even try to set a goal. The time around your wedding is going to be stressful enough that you don't need weight loss hanging over your head in addition to everything else that will be going on. Besides, I have always found weight loss to be easier when you aren't worried about it. The more you stress, the more likely it is that your body will freak out on you.

Centennial Center for the Treatment of Obesity in Nashville, TN offers Lap-Band surgery for $14,400, which is pretty decent for U.S. surgeons. There are three surgeons that work there.

We definitely agree on something!

When I call the insurance company next week and start "gently harassing them" (the surgery center's advice) to see if I have been approved, who should I talk to?

My financial counselor at the surgeon's office finally got all my paperwork! She had been waiting on the pulmonologist's report. The only fax number I had with me at the time of the appointment (mid-December) was for the specific surgeon's office, not the financial counselor's office, and apparently they can't transfer documents between offices. I didn't know she didn't get the report until yesterday, so I had to call and give the pulmonologist's office a different fax number. Now, the fax number for the insurance company apparently didn't work this afternoon when she tried to send them everything.:faint: She will try again tomorrow and if it still doesn't work, she will get another fax number from them. She said that I should start calling them and "gently harassing them" next week.

My surgeon requires that you stop all BC and other hormone drugs 30 days before surgery. I don't know why. I really want to keep taking BC, since it is the only thing that controls my acne. But I have also heard people say that their surgeons require them to start BC before surgery, since weight loss affects fertility.

Don't forget "Doctor Approved!" And then they put doctors up on the screen that have had their degree for less than a year. No lie - one of the commercials I remember seeing had the doctor's graduation year in small print.

I just hate the ones that are constantly being aired, like the Nutrisystem ones. THOSE are the devil.

Or even the people that keep them around with emotional blackmail. You know, the people who KNOW their loved ones are in extreme physical or emotional pain and that they just want to rest and have some peace, but try to keep them around by saying, "But it would hurt me so much if you killed yourself. Why don't you think of me?" A lot of people think of suicide as the ultimate selfish act, and it is. But once a loved one gets to a point where it is literally more painful (physically or emotionally) to live than it would be to die, isn't it more selfish to try and make them live so that you don't feel pain? I have seriously considered suicide in the past. I used to fantasize about slitting my wrists or giving myself a shot of euthanasia solution (my dad was a veterinarian and I knew where he kept it). Looking back on it, I realize that my physical condition, home life, and school life all factored in to it. At the time, I thought my home life was wonderful, and it was in some respects. I was never abused by my parents and I always had enough to eat (obviously, or I wouldn't be getting banded). I did have an older brother though, and looking back it is obvious now that he made my life a living hell. I think my weight was a direct result of his emotional, verbal, and occasionally even physical abuse. Do I like admitting that? No. I would love to continue to say that I had a wonderful childhood, but I can't. I realize now that I was completely miserable, and that it could have been made a lot better if my parents had bothered to realize just how bad it was. I can basically pin most of my emotional baggage on my brother. His taunting made me lose myself in food, which made me gain weight, which led to more of his taunting and taunting from my school mates, which led to depression and suicidal thoughts. I found out a few years ago that my parents knew about a lot of what he was doing, but as my mom said, they were afraid that saying something to him would make it worse. Thanks, Mom and Dad, that makes me feel loads better! In my psychological evaluation for banding, the therapist asked why my grades had gotten so much better when I went from elementary school to high school (I was a low C student in elementary and was an A/B student in high school.). I had never thought about it before. It hit me in his office that it was because of my brother. I was exactly 4 years behind him in school. When I went to high school, it was the same time that he moved out of the house to go to college.

I've noticed that, too, and it really burns me up. I personally believe that I should be allowed the same number of breaks as a smoker is, or that they should be forced to sign out and lose pay every time they take a smoking break. I don't like people getting paid to smoke, especially if it means that I have to work more because of it. Yes, I know it is a physical addiction and that people think they can't go without smoking, but alcoholics aren't given paid drinking breaks, are they? All I can say is that if I had a business and caught my employees sneaking outside for smoking breaks without signing out first, they would get fired. I feel that they would essentially be stealing from the company because they are getting paid for time that they did not work. I wouldn't be able to prosecute them, but I would fire them if they had done it repeatedly. I know people will say, "It isn't that much.", but it does add up. If you use the figures that Carlene provided, and the person is earning $10/hour (which isn't that much), you could be potentially losing $750 per month, per person. If you have several employees, and you live in an area of the country where smoking is very common, it could severely affect your bottom line.

I don't necessarily disagree with companies putting restrictions on their employees, or at least making them choose between smoking (or another health-harming habit) and getting insurance that is provided by the company. They are, after all, the ones paying for it. I can understand them not wanting to pay for someone's health problems that were caused by an unnecessary habit. Should they be allowed to fire or not hire someone because of that habit? No. But I do think that they should be allowed to set standards of behavior for their employees, including behaviors that can effect their bottom line. Even as an obese woman, I believe that my employers should be able to tell me to lose weight or lose health benefits. Would I be happy about them telling me that? No, but I think I would be better for it in the long run. To be honest, I think a lot of us have to have the effects of our obesity (or other bad habits) shoved in our faces before we truly understand the repercussions of it. I know I did. I never really thought much about being fat until I started having some potentially severe effects. I have been overweight since I was a child, but I always had the belief that it was "baby fat" that would come off as I reached adulthood. I was most definitely wrong. It wasn't until I started having problems with asthma (coughing and unable to stop), insulin resistance, PCOS, joint problems, etc. that it finally hit me that I was FAT and I was going to stay that way. So I definitely think that having someone give me an ultimatum would have helped me. You know. "Lose weight or lose your benefits." I am not sure what freedoms that I enjoy that people would want to take away. I don't smoke. I don't drink. If they want to take away my right to eat trans fats and refined sugar, they can go right ahead. That should only help me lose weight. Seriously though, I think the only rights that are in danger of potentially being taken away are those that are likely to negatively effect others. And I am not talking about those that others just don't like, I am talking about those that have the potential to harm other people. And in cases like that, I prefer to think that another person's welfare trumps my right to do something. Don't you?

Army asks dead to sign up for another hitch POSTED: 9:39 p.m. EST, January 5, 2007 WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Army said Friday it would apologize to the families of about 275 officers killed or wounded in action who were mistakenly sent letters urging them to return to active duty. The letters were sent a few days after Christmas to more than 5,100 Army officers who had recently left the service. Included were letters to about 75 officers killed in action and about 200 wounded in action. "Army personnel officials are contacting those officers' families now to personally apologize for erroneously sending the letters," the Army said in a brief news release issued Friday night. The Army did not say how or when the mistake was discovered. It said the database normally used for such correspondence with former officers had been "thoroughly reviewed" to remove the names of wounded or dead soldiers. "But an earlier list was used inadvertently for the December mailings," the Army statement said, adding that the Army is apologizing to those officers and families affected and "regrets any confusion." Copyright 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

The thing is, all those things you wrote don't hurt other people. Smoking does. There will probably never be a law passed that denies people the right to smoke. If a law was passed that said that people could no longer buy cigarrettes or denied them the right to smoke in their own homes, I would probably not support it. Where someone can smoke is another matter. Personally, I don't think I have been around that many smokers who truly cared about the people around them when they smoked. The vast majority didn't care that they were blowing their smoke into the wind so that it blew back in other people's faces. They didn't care that they made people walk through a haze of smoke to get into a building. This is the way I think about it: If a large group of people have a habit that is harmful to other people, and the majority refuse to consider other people's well-being, then the government has every right to make them consider it. Consider my analogy to alcohol laws. I don't drink much alcohol. I don't care if other people drink alcohol, it's their bodies. I can't stop them legally and I don't want to stop them. On the other hand, it is illegal for them to drink and do something that can potentially harm others. I view smoking laws the same way. I don't care if the average Joe smokes, he has that right. But when his smoke has the potential to affect my health, I expect the law to protect me by limiting where he can smoke. I also find it stupid for people who hate smoke to deliberately expose themselves to it and then complain about it, when they had a reasonable smoke-free alternative. For example, as a non-smoker, I never eat in the smoking section of a restaurant. I will always choose the non-smoking section, even if there is a much longer wait. I avoid restaurants that do not have a non-smoking section. I don't want to smell the smoke or wind up with the stench of it on me for the rest of the day. I don't go to bars or clubs, because the vast majority in my area allow smoking.

What were your favorite or least favorite movies of 2006? My favorites (no particular order): Superman Returns Blood Diamond Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest Ice Age: The Meltdown Cars Happy Feet Rocky Balboa Least Favorite: The Departed (good except for crappy ending) Casino Royale (liked Daniel Craig, but not a fan of Bond movies) X-Men: The Last Stand (crappy compared to first 2)

How weak did you get after surgery? Did it impact your life severely or your work?

To my knowledge, no one has talked about restricting people's smoking inside their homes. What has been discussed is the restriction of smoking in businesses and in public. If someone chooses to have a business in their home, they are consciously agreeing to abide by laws governing businesses, including smoking laws. There is proof that second-hand smoke can give you cancer. It may take a lot of it, or it may not. I am certain that some people are more susceptible to cancer caused by smoke. Now, if someone wants to kill themselves, they can go right ahead. But things are different if they are doing something that can cause other people to become ill or die. Let me put it this way: As long as you are at least 21, you can legally drink as much alcohol as you want. Heck, you can kill yourself with it if you want, and no one can stop you. But if you sit behind the wheel of a car or do something else while intoxicated that puts other people at risk, it becomes illegal. Again, I couldn't care less if someone wants to kill themselves with cigarrettes. But if they risk my health or the heath of the people around me, you better believe that I will lobby to have their smoking rights restricted.

Try to contact the walk-in clinics. They should have kept records of seeing you. If they weighed you when you were there, that would count toward your five years.