pot is harmful. It's desteroying the family unit.

So the teenager is being self-righteous. He's also correct, since pot is illegal. Were this coke or heroin or meth, hed' be just as right.

The mom is being ... a pothead. And as self-righteous and arrogant and "fuck the authority figure" as the kid. But she' not a teen. She's (chronologically speaking) the adult. She dioesn't give a damn about ehat her son feels. She doesn't care that the son is acting in part ut of fear for her health and freedom and love for his mommy. All she cares about is her "right" to do whatever she wants, whenever and wherever she wants. She's even provoking her son by dropping all pretence of discretion.

It's distressing to see grown people behave like teens, especially when they are trying to parent teens. The son is trying to be the parent, because someone has to. And that's a sucky position to put a kid in. It will screw him up for life. Because he's supposed to be the one making dumb and selfish decisions while his parents guide him to maturity and civility.

Pot-smoking is the symptom, not the problem with this "mom."

I gave that fun fact to counter the arguments that JK Rowling offed Harry Potter in a fit of vengeance, because she had grown "tired" of him. I gave evidence to the contrary.

I heard on NPR, on a recording from over the weekend, where he basically said "I think we have to give in and give up" and agree to non-transcripted, non-oath-bound, testimony.

What happened to him?

the LW clearly wants to dominate this young woman, and thinks she can do it under the aegis of "maternal concern."

I think the LW and her husband need more help than the 19-yo. Anyone who discusses their sex life with coworkers has boundry issues. Anyone who encourages a distressed teen to pursue a married man (however "poly" he might be) needs help. And whoever could, with a straight face, suggest a dominant-submissive triangle to set a troubled teen straight is in need of a lot of help.

This young woman may or may not be headed for a crisis. But I think the LW is seeing what she wants to see and ignoring anything to the contrary. I think, though, that the LW and her circle of friends have more in common with the 19-yo's pals than she realizes. The chaos of drugs and promoscuity for one set is hardly a far cry from the emotional manipulation an promiscuity of the other. Is the LW really "better" than she was when she was a teen (and did only the "safe" drugs? And hung out with only the "brotherly" stoners?) Are BDSM poly antics really the hobby of a well-adjusted, secure, self-loving adult? Or is it another attempt to drown the self-loathing in heady,transient sensations?

If the LW wants to help this young woman, the LW should stay away from her and get herself in order. Everyone out of the pool and into therapy!

as the former SG testified to congress today, this administraion has repeatedly vlued policy over science.

"the grab-bag Gore crusade, with its wild exaggerations and hypocritical sanctimony. It does make liberals look like ditzes --"

If you substitute "Bush" for "Gore" and "Republicans" for "liberals" you have America in 2006. "Wild exaggerations" might be a touch polite for the faith-based facts this administration tries to sell on every issue from WMD to stem cell research to (by God!) global warning to social security to the federal atty firings to exactly who is and who isn't a member of the Executive Branch. I prefer to call them "lies."

"Hypocritical sanctimony" is right on the nose, though for Bush and his minions.

As to whether or not fossil fuels are the dole reason for climate change or not, we human beings are going to be living on a much warmer planet in the decades to come. We should be thinking about how to adapt as both an economy, a nation and a species. This is something the current administration is unwilling to do, because it doesn't see the increasinly erratic and dramatic weather patterns as a problem. Wholesale deforestation and mountai-top removal mining is not going to solve the upcoming challenges. Neither will shopping. Since those are the only ideas I've heard from the Bush administration, I'll buy what Al Gore is selling.

I remembered a recent NPR story about this practice in Egypt. (70% of girls are mutilated, which is a huge success, considering that 10 years ago it was 90%+).

The reason is simple: without cutting off a daughter's clitoris, she is considered less marriageable.

So, probably the quickest way to end the practice is to educate young boys: if they say "I won't marry a girl without one" you can bet the practice will end.

"without one" healthy, intact clitoris, natch.

how worse off poor men are. I know. We women just complain and complain about girls getting their clitoris, labia minora, and vulva hacked off, so as sex is completely devoid of eric pleasure, so that birthing babies becomes more fifficult, so that their vagina is more proe to infection. Someone please think about the men! Who remove the hood of their glans and go on to enjoy vigorous, pleasurable, rockin' sex.

Because it's all the mommies fauklts anyway: we are the oneswho made up that silly story about Abram and Yaweh. We're also the ones who told American doctors in the early 20th century that this was more hygenic. Ditto he ones who refuse to touch an intact male. And if any one of us happens to be dating an intact male, we just might "fix" the problem in the night.

God are we women selfish! Screw the gierls, let's save the men!

What world d oyou live in?