The front page of the San Francisco Chronicle covers two men who dressed as nuns and went to a Roman Catholic church for the purpose of ridiculing it. (As a point of disclosure, I am a Roman Catholic.)

From the paper:

It was a typical Sunday Mass until two men in heavy makeup and nuns’ habits received Holy Communion from San Francisco’s top Catholic official.

On Oct. 7, Archbishop George Niederauer delivered the Eucharist to members of the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence - an activist group whose motto is “go forth and sin some more” - prompting cries of outrage from conservatives across the country and Catholics in San Francisco.

There is also this exchange of quotes:

Conservative Fox news commentator Bill O’Reilly, who has disparaged “San Francisco values,” called the latest flap another example of how the city is run by “far-left secular progressives who despise the military, traditional values and religion.”

On his Friday news show, O’Reilly called San Francisco “a disgrace on every level.”

San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom dismissed O’Reilly’s comments.

“This debate really is about San Francisco values. The Bill O’Reillys of the world are threatened by San Francisco because we value diversity, universal health care and civil rights for all. They will exploit any controversy to attack our values.”

It is incidents like this that discredit the diversity so many people are proud to proclaim. Diversity as I know it involves a minimum level of respect for people, especially if they are different from you or you disagree with them.

The two men are the ones who should apologize. They chose to go into a church service for the reason of disrespecting and ridiculing it. In the same way it would be wrong for a person who disagrees with a gay person’s lifestyle to go into an LGBT meeting to disrupt it or make fun of those present.

Archbishop Niedarauer has nothing to apologize for. He did not withhold the Eucharist from anyone but instead trusted anyone who entered the church and approached him for Holy Communion did so with earnest and honest intentions in accord with the sacrament.

Sometimes when intentional disrespect of people or their beliefs occurs there is a call for hate crime legislation and diversity training. From what I have read online it is hard to say a majority of non-Catholic people condemn the actions of these two men.

Many people in Berkeley do not observe Columbus Day, instead they celebrate Indigenous Peoples Day.

The Patriot would like to wish you a happy Columbus Day.

Painting by Sebastiano del Piombo (1485-1547)

Bay area officials have a “brilliant” idea: tax gasoline to stop global warming. The San Francisco Chronicle has the story:

Regional officials are taking a close look at trying to increase the Bay Area’s gasoline tax by as much as 10 cents a gallon and believe voters might agree to it as a way to help combat global warming, The Chronicle learned Thursday.

The idea is still in the early planning stages, but the money will probably end up going somewhere other then helping motorists. Aside from possibly improving roads, the article suggests the money might help BART or other forms of public transportation get money they have not secured on their own. This would be taxing one group of people to pay for stuff for another. It is the kind of social engineering the government has no right to be in.

People around the bay area already care about global warming. From the Chronicle:

“People will kill their puppies to stop global warming these days,” said Dave Snyder with a smile. Snyder is transportation policy director at the San Francisco Policy and Urban Planning Association, a think tank.

If this passes, I am going to gas up my car when I am just outside of the tax area. The next time I am driving home to Orange County the cents I would have spent in sales tax at a Berkeley station will go to an area where the global warming tax does not apply. If this is the result people want, they should pass the tax.

Yesterday UC Berkeley released a survey of its economic impact on Berkeley and the surrounding area.

From an ABC 7 KGO TV report:

The university calculates it infuses close to three-quarters of a billion dollars a year into the local economy.

$31 million is spent in Berkeley on goods and services.
$314 million in salaries are paid to Berkeley residents.
$117 million is allocated to capital projects, and $282 million in student spending.

They have a video if you want to see what Berkeley looks like on TV. There is also an interview with a Berkeley resident who said there were more important things than money, like values. Unfortunately, the report does not uncover what Berkeley values the University is corrupting.

From the Berkeley Newscenter:

As the largest employer in the city of Berkeley, as well as in the East Bay counties of Alameda and Contra Costa, the campus employs more people than the next nine largest employers in the city combined, providing jobs to 24,700 staff, including 9,700 students who work on campus.

I wish I could work out practical teleportation in one of my Physics classes. I would teleport the entire University to a different city. Then as the City of Berkeley fades into obscurity and loses the hundreds of millions of dollars dumped into its economy it can realize the error of its ways. Until that happens, I have to live here to attend the best public university in the country.

Today a judge in Alameda County Superior Court ruled the hippies could continue their nine month occupation of the oak trees near Memorial Stadium. The University wanted them removed because of health and safety issues. From the San Francisco Chronicle:

The university asked for the court order Monday when police found several propane tanks in the tree houses. There have also been an increasing number of excrement and urine spills from the tree-sitters’ buckets, UC Berkeley spokesman Dan Mogulof said.

If they want to be more in tune with nature, instead of using propane tanks the hippies could use more earthy ways of staying warm and cooking. They should make wood fires.

“We have a long tradition of honoring and protecting free speech on this campus, but we also have to protect the safety of the students, community and the people in the trees,” said Mogulof. “This is becoming a small village, and we’re seeing all the same sanitation and safety issues you see in any small village.”

While it is funny the oaks and associated tree people are now a “small village,” it is also sad. When did it become permissible to trespass and occupy someone else’s property for nine months?

A Solution

If we are going to revert to an older village based system, maybe more people should see and experience this way of life. The hippies want the fence removed so maybe they should get their wish. With the barrier separating the people suddenly gone, things will proceed very quickly. When tens of thousands of football fans are around the stadium on Saturday they can directly interact with the tree people. They can learn about each other’s way of life and values. It would be a great opportunity to experience the differences between the cultures of tree-sitting and football. The hippies will sing combiya and the football fans will chant the classic “Give um the Axe.” However the two sides resolve their differences, it will be without the lawyers and courthouses the modern world has forced upon their natural ways. Isn’t that what everyone wants? A solution where both sides can express their feelings face to face in a natural setting.

Until this dream becomes a reality, the occupation of the oaks by hippie tree-sitters will continue.

This morning the University put up a fence around part of the oak grove by Memorial Stadium where the protestors had taken up residence in trees. Official University statement here. All over campus was chalking advertising a rally at the oak grove at 5 today, so I went to check it out.

As I approached, I heard chants of “Food and Water” as people shook the chain fence around the oaks. The people on the ground outside were trying to send food and water up ropes to the tree sitters, who refused to leave.

After some food was pulled up to the people in the trees, the UCPD began stopping the shipments. They cut one of the ropes that was being used to transfer the food. Every time people on the ground could get something up to the people in the trees, there were cheers. When they failed, there were all kinds of insults thrown at the UCPD. People were also throwing food bars directly into the hippie’s platform on the trees. The Cal Band was playing on the field not too far away. It was a great experience, watching the events unfold with Cal songs in the background.

At one point a protestor on the ground ran from the police into the traffic on Piedmont. I don’t know what caused that, but the protestors decided to have a little sit in and stop the northbound traffic while they were there.

When my camera was running low on battery life and memory space, I decided to go home. On my way out I did see one interesting thing someone put on one of the cars that looked like it belonged to the protestors, a job application.

I don’t know if the hippies will leave or otherwise be forced out of their trees soon, but it will not be soon enough.

Today I had the privilege of participating in jury duty. As I was called two years ago and served a day, I knew what to expect. Both times I was in the selection pool but never sat for a trial. The last time I was in a courthouse was about a year ago, but that is unrelated.

The day started at 7:45 when I reported to the Orange County Superior Courthouse. I was one of about 150 prospective jurors. After we watched a short feel good video about jury duty, they parceled us out to different courtrooms.

From the pool of prospective jurors, people were called out and sent to specific rooms in groups around 50. In each courtroom the presiding judge gives a quick summary of the matter being tried. My case involved the taking of an automobile (it was only taking a vehicle with the intention of depriving the owner of its use, which I was told was not as bad as other vehicle thefts). Since it was a criminal case, they selected 12 people at random from the pool and 6 alternates to sit in the jury box. The judge had every prospective juror state their basic information and asked them case specific questions like their experience with car theft (from both sides). He also asked if anyone had a reason to distrust the police or any of the witnesses based on their language or ethnic background. The attorneys wrote themselves notes on Post-its about each of the jurors as they were questioned.

The judge also asked jurors if they understood different legal ideas. He used examples to explain concepts like hard v. circumstantial evidence and accessories to a crime. While the judge who presided over the case did use humor, his stories were not as enjoyable as the ones I heard from the judge during my previous service. The following example is from a Judge at the Westminster Courthouse I heard two years ago.

Possible v. Probable
Every Wednesday morning before coming to work I put my trash cans on the curb in front of my house. As I am pulling out of my driveway I see the garbage truck a few houses away picking up the neighbor’s trash. I never see the trash man empty my garbage cans, but every Wednesday I come home and find my cans as well as all the other ones on my street empty. Then I came home one Wednesday and a neighbor kid tells me my trash was not taken by the man in the garbage truck, but instead by aliens from Mars. Is it possible aliens from Mars took my trash? Yes. Is it probable the aliens took my trash? No.

Back to today, a number of people gave reasons why the current time was a bad time for them to serve on a jury. While some of the people’s excuses were legitimate, some were attempts to get out of serving on the case. The judge explained he could defer their service by a few weeks, but they would still be back in to serve. After realizing this, many of the people decided serving then was as good as later.

After the judge excused a few people, replacements were called to the jury box; I was one of them. After the defense and prosecution talked and questioned the jury for 15 minutes the action quickened. Each side could kick off 10 jurors for any reason. The little Post-its of the defense and prosecution then came in handy. They alternated rejecting people. There was no hesitation; both of them knew exactly who they wanted to kick off.

On its first or second opportunity, the prosecution kicked me off the jury. I was shocked and semi-offended. I think I would be the kind of disciplinarian who would send someone to the chair for stealing a bike. This happened last time two years ago; the prosecution kicked me off at the first chance. There is something prosecutors don’t like about me being on a jury. Maybe Physics and Classical Civilization are a secret code for I vote for acquittal.

After I was excused from the case I returned to the jury assembly room and they told me I was not needed anyone. I left at 2:30 in the afternoon.

During the day I remembered something Charles Wiley had said when he spoke on campus last year. When he was a young man during WW II, he was drafted into the executive branch and served for four years in the military. Today we are drafted into the judicial branch and asked to serve for a few days a year.

I hope we all respond to the call as our grandparents did.

I have been putting this off, but the blogroll needs to be updated. After Ben’s post yesterday that officially declared Calstuff in a state with zero or less writers following months of inactivity, the Berkeley blogsphere needs some good news.

If you have a unique perspective on things, start a blog.

The Daily Squelch is out there, bringing you SQUELCH! goodness on a daily basis.

Also, Bears Necessity has been active for a while. They actually link here, which is more then the Daily Clog can say.

Do you know of any vaguely Cal related blogs? Drop a link.

Last week the Berkeley City Council approved a measure that will extend the operating hours of businesses on Telegraph Ave. The exact details can be seen under Item 9 on the city council summary for last Tuesday.

A quick summary from ACCESS via Facebook post:

Under this package, businesses that do not serve alcohol are allowed to remain open from 7am to midnight on weekdays and from 7am to 2am on weekends. Businesses with an alcohol permit are allowed to remain open until 10pm on weekdays and midnight on weekends.

The most notable thing is the efforts students put into supporting this measure. For many months students have been lobbying the local government trying to extend Telegraph business hours. Leading the charge, the group ACCESS has been focusing action on this issue since last fall. I have received numerous messages from them asking me to write letters and attend city meetings.

There is also a lesson in leadership here. ACCESS achieved results because their members are truly concerned and dedicated to affecting local policies to directly help students. They had neither the huge budget nor the scores of interns the ASUC Office of External Affairs had, but they had persistence.

This is great for the businesses as well. They can be open longer without having to go through a lengthy permit process. Hopefully, the increased foot traffic on Telegraph later into the night will reduce crime and make everyone feel safer walking around later in the night.

It will be great to see the changes on Telegraph when school starts in the Fall.

Update: Due to a flood of public input, the resolution will not be introduced next week. See end of post.

From an article today in the San Francisco Examiner, a proposal is being worked on by Supervisor Chris Daly to stop the Blue Angels from flying over San Francisco. The popular Navy flying group has flown over the city for the past several years as part of Fleet Week, which will be October 4 to 9 this year.

From the Examiner:

Veterans for Peace takes issue with the pro-military message and the recruiting efforts that come along with the annual visit as well as what it refers to as the “noise pollution.” The group calls the event a public safety risk, pointing to the April crash of a Blue Angels plane during an air show in Beaufort, S.C.

What is wrong with a pro-military message? The flyover celebrates the skill and dedication of those serving in the Navy. If safety was truly a concern why was it not brought up years ago?

One anecdote that might illuminate the situation happened to me the other day. I was in a supermarket in Orange County wearing an Air Force related shirt. A gentleman asked if I was in the military and I replied that I was not but my Dad had served in the Army for over 20 years. He then asked me to thank him for his service. In contrast, I have heard comments around Berkeley calling those in uniform murders.

Fancy flying is not the only thing brought to the city. They also receive a healthy infusion of cash.

Fleet Week attracts about 1 million people to The City’s waterfront and sinks about $4 million into The City’s economy, according to Leonard. When the Blue Angels did not fly over San Francisco in 2004, attendance and revenue dropped by more than 50 percent, he said.

Leonard said Fleet Week comes with a variety of benefits, from boosting the local economy to providing people “a chance to say thanks for the people serving in the military now.”

I think a chance to say thanks to those serving in the military is reason enough for the festivities. While I have not been to any of these annual events in San Francisco, I do not see the harm that is being done by these flyovers. If the city really does not want the pro-military presence they can refrain from collecting sales tax during the week to avoid the risk of making money from a military related source.

I don’t know what the board of supervisors will do, but if it was my choice I would say thank you to those who are in service in the military. Then I would buy a crab sandwich and watch the Blue Angels.

Update:The day after the Examiner ran the story they had a follow up:

Supervisor Chris Daly, when asked about the progress of his resolution, told The Examiner on Thursday, “Because of you, I haven’t gotten any work done today, and because of you, I am not going to introduce it on Tuesday.”

I am glad public input is still valued. Check the Examiner for the latest details.

(Not that it really matters what the topic of the post is about, since the comments are likely to be about Israel, but hey.)

If you’ve been paying any attention at all to the GOP race, you know that by far the biggest issue to come out of the recent debate was Giuliani’s squishiness on abortion. That issue has only snowballed with the revelation that he donated to Planned Parenthood several times during the 90s. And so on and so forth.

I’ve just been thinking a little about Giuliani and his views on abortion. His whole shtick has been “I hate abortion, but I think it’s not my place to make that decision.” I think the whole “personally pro-life, but legally pro-choice” is a pretty common pro-choice position (I was once that way myself, back in high school). But it really isn’t one that holds water. Because the question becomes (and this is what I asked myself near the end of high school, when I became pro-life) why do I “hate” it? Most people who do - myself included - have an aversion to it because we believe that it is tantamount to murder - that a fetus is a human being and alive from the moment of conception. Otherwise, there’s no real reason to be opposed to abortion. And the question then becomes, well, believing that, can I really say that I think that’s a moral decision each person has to make? The answer I came to was no, because it’s not just a personal moral decision - it’s one that affects two people, one of whom is not a party to the decision. No matter how “live and let live” you may be on moral issues, I think it’s a little difficult to take that view on abortion.

So, obviously, from that, as I said before, if you don’t believe a fetus to be a living human being, there really is no case against abortion. I thought about this for a while, during a review session when I should have been learning poli sci, and I came to the conclusion that Giuliani’s “I hate abortion personally” thing could make sense. I guess it’s still possible to hate abortion, even if you don’t believe a fetus to be alive, if you are the type of person who gets very deeply upset about people not taking responsibility for their actions. But I dunno…even if that is the case, yeah, I guess Giuliani’s position would be coherent morally…but that’s sort of a jerk reason to hate abortion.

Anyway, all that reasoning comes to naught, because it turns out today that Giuliani believes abortion to be morally wrong.

I can respect a lot of pro-choicers who just don’t believe that a fetus is alive. I think they’re wrong on their premises, but given that premise they’re basing their reasoning on, they’re coming to absolutely the correct conclusion.

On the other hand, to actually believe that abortion is the taking of a human life but to still say you think it should be legal is completely incoherent. Giuliani is digging himself into a very, very deep hole here.

Last night was Raw Food night at Crossroads. I don’t mean sushi and raw meat (which would be awesome), but something else. I will point you to the website by Cal Dining.

I was eating there and I had to try this raw food they were advertising.

From the Cal Dining website:

Why Eat Raw Food?
People get into raw food for a number of reasons, and here are some of the many and varied reasons:

Ethics:
Some arrive by a path that involves a search for more natural, ethical and sustainable ways of living; a more compassionate way of life, as a natural extension of vegetarianism or veganism, or being ‘green’.

Spiritual:
Some sense the spiritual benefits, cleansing mind and body, with the widespread tradition of eating only or mainly raw fruit amongst wise men and women.

The five things featured were:

Kale Salad
Pasta with Pesto
Spicy Carrot Soup
Brownies with Cashew Cream
Apple Cobbler

I tried all of them, and the brownies were the best, but they tasted like an Odwalla bar. The apple cobbler was not as good as it looked and neither was the “pasta” (actually zucchini). I took one sip of the carrot soup and was glad it was a small sip.

I also tried the Kale salad. It was made with dinasour kale. Since it is spelled like dinosaur, and dinosaurs are cool I figured it must taste good. When I put a piece in my mouth it was so bad it immediately went into my napkin.

From my experience last night I now know to avoid anything that claims to be “raw food.”

Does anyone else have an experience with this “Raw Food?”

This article on yahoo.com caught my eye. It’s about Besho, an Afghani rapper.

It caught my attention for a few reasons:
1) It’s just another example of globalization and the spread of American culture. We don’t need a whole discussion about that. It’s been discussed, and I have nothing to add to what other’s have said.
2) It’s a shining example of the difference between Afghanistan now and Afghanistan under the lash of the Taliban. (I already know what the negative response to this point will be, that the US is killing innocent civilians left and right. My counter argument is this: the Taliban also killed people, except they did� in the name of religion, on purpose, whereas the US is accidentally killing innocent civilians while trying to fight the Taliban so that rappers like Besho can rap. I’m also not in the mood to get into an argument about the war, it’s another topic that’s been beaten to death and I have nothing new to add to it.)
3) Besho to me is like the anti-Kanye West. Both are rappers, and both preach peace. Yet one agrees with the war in Afghanistan and one does not. The one who supports the new Afghani government is the one who lives in Afghanistan. What’s that tell you?

Whether or not you agree with the war in Afghanistan, it’s neverthelss an interesting article, and I don’t think supporting a man’s newly found sense of artistic expression and message of peace is a partisan issue.

As hard as it is to believe, blogging is a form of speech, and just like television, radio, and print, most of it results in garbage, some of it is actually worthy of attention.

Whether or not this blog qualifies I’ll leave up to the general readers.

Anyway, like any other form of speech, having the freedom to post and publish just about anything you want (except for falsely yelling fire in a theater, or other such threats to public safety that can reasonably be punished) is sacrosanct in the US and most other free, democratic society.

So when I came across this online article on Iraqi blogs naturally I was intrigued. And then I got to thinking about how I, and probably most of us, take this blog for granted. Dictatorships around the world have upgraded to the modern era of instant communications. One need only look up “Tiananmen” on the Chinese portal of Google, and compare those search results to what you find on the American portal, to realize how even the seemingly free flow of information on the internet can be curtailed.

To me it’s heartening to see that Iraqis, for the first time, are able to make use of what I and most others in my generation pretty much grew up with. Next time I blog, either in livejournal or here, I’ll keep that in mind.

Anyway, these blogs of the Iraqi people are worthy of our attention. Three cheers for the internet, and freedom that comes with it!