Senseless Tragedy

I'm not quite sure what to say. I feel that I should say something, even if nobody cares to read, if only because it will make me feel better, might help my mind make sense of things.

Yet what sense is there to be found in a situation like this? Twenty children are dead, along with seven adults. Another ordinary person suddenly went berserk and slaughtered dozens of people, only to shoot himself afterward.

I suppose we could focus on the fact that guns allow people an easy way to kill many people. We could reflect upon the fact that loss of life suddenly becomes important once it's our schoolchildren being killed, while those in power don't give a damn when it's schoolchildren in Pakistan or Afghanistan being slaughtered by our drones. We could. And I think that in the coming days those are definitely questions and aspects of this that should be addressed. We cannot ignore the fact that crazy people can easily get hold of weapons that can kill many people; nor should we ignore the fact that hypocrisy runs deep in our national psyche and that the lives of children should be sacred no matter what color their skin, the religion they adhere to, or the nationality they hold.

But to do so today, as this tragedy is so fresh, seems cheap to me. It turns these deaths, this senseless tragedy, into a political play. Whether you are on the side of gun-control or not, whether you find it mildly interesting that a rash of shootings has suddenly cropped up as efforts to instate meaningful gun control laws in the US are ongoing, or whether you really don't care either way, please don't let this incident, this tragedy, be so easily covered up and used for the gain of one side or the other.

We must talk about it, of course. As someone on Tumblr pointed out, when is the 'right time' to talk about such things--after Columbine, or VT, or Aurora? Why not now? But give time for families to grieve. We will have time to discuss the politics. For now, it is enough that this happened, and that it is horrible. We will consider, reflect, mourn, and then we can discuss the meaning of it.

Mandated Milestones

One week ago, I celebrated my eighteenth birthday. Thanks to that auspicious occasion, I can now make decisions about the health of my lungs, how to dispense of my money, and where to live. Because I am, apparently (at least according to the government) officially capable of making the most responsible decision about each of these subjects.

For instance, I can now be depended upon to not take money out of my bank account and fritter it away on drugs or sex or other irresponsible forms of entertainment. This is evident by the fact that I am now able to have my own, independent bank account, and able to draw money out of it whenever I want to, without my mother co-signing the withdrawal slip. Forget the fact that it caused my mother no end of inconvenience to take me to the bank every time I needed money, or that I couldn't withdraw money on the 21rst, but was suddenly able to on the 22nd...all of that. I am now responsible enough to make the best decision for myself.

Oh, and I can buy cigarettes now or something. Not sure why I'd want to. But I can. So go me.

I suppose the whole point of this is that arbitrary age-limits for certain aspects of life are sort of ridiculous. Because there is nothing fundamental that changes in a person's moral makeup or their thought processes when they reach a certain birthday. But the government must be seen to be doing something about certain behaviors (since God forbid people be allowed to exercise good judgement, or even poor judgement, and make a hash of it), so in the process they simply remove the ability to make choices at all.

O, Nanny State. Your ridiculousness will never cease to be amusing.

'Home Visits'- for Vaccines

Title III, subtitle C of the Senate healthcare reform bill summary talks about immunizations. And this is what it says.

Immunizations: Under this program, CDC will provide grants to states to improve immunization coverage of children, adolescents, and adults through the use of evidence-based interventions. States may use funds to implement interventions that are recommended by the Community Preventive Services Task Force, such as reminders or recalls for patients or providers, or home visits. Reauthorizes the Immunization Program in Section 317 of the Public Health Service Act. [§ 324]

Nice.

So, what exactly will these 'home visits' consist of? Pressuring people to 'improve coverage' of their children by pumping yet more harmful chemicals into their little bodies?

"Rights of the Child"

I've been hearing quite a bit about this lately. The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child is a proposed bill, I guess I could call it, to establish the 'rights of the child'. What exactly are these 'rights'?

"It spells out the basic human rights that children everywhere have: the right to survival; to develop to the fullest; to protection from harmful influences, abuse and exploitation; and to participate fully in family, cultural and social life. The four core principles of the Convention are non-discrimination; devotion to the best interests of the child; the right to life, survival and development; and respect for the views of the child."

Now I want to know. If 'respect' for my views is one of the aims...and then they outlaw taking me to church (a 'harmful influence', y'know), then I decide that church is good for me...does that mean that they'll respect my views?

Probably not. I can almost guarantee they won't.

What also concerns me is this little...gem from their website:

"States parties to the Convention are obliged to develop and undertake all actions and policies in the light of the best interests of the child."

Uh-huh. And exactly who, pray tell, is going to decide what is in my 'best interests'? Uh...I'd rather not have some government employee deciding what my best interests are. Thank you, and goodbye.

You know what, here's the deal. This doesn't sound like something to establish my 'rights'. This sounds like something to take away the rights of my parents, and put them firmly in the hands of some impersonal government employee.

Let me give you a few more jewels to ponder:

"Children are neither the possessions of parents nor of the state, nor are they mere people-in-the-making; they have equal status as members of the human family."
Wow. I didn't know, y'know, that I was actually an adult. Does that mean I can drive?!

"Children's views are rarely heard and rarely considered in the political process."
Naw, really? I had no idea. You know, I think there might be a good reason...oh yeah. We don't vote. Most of us don't care.

You know, the more I contemplate this, the more it makes me mad. This is stupid. I am not an adult, hence I have no real rights. I am nothing but a child. As much as I don't like that, it's true. Childhood is about preparing for your future rights- life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

That is all.