Above: Orkid - a female killer whale housed at SeaWorld San Diego. Jason and I went over Thanksgiving so I could do some "recon" for my paper. This was the most tragic pic of the day I think. She was being kept in a tank all alone in between shows. (A little background on Orkid: her mom, Kandu, bled out in front of her after trying to ram another whale during a show. Kandu missed and shattered her lower mandible, which severed a major artery in her jaw. Orkid was right there by her side during the 45 minutes it took for her mom to die... Orkid was just 11 months old.) There wasn't anyone around and so I called out to her from the skywalk viewing area above the tank - you can't get right next to the tank for safety reasons. She stopped swimming looked up at me and just sat there for about 5 mins. If you click on the picture you can see her eye looking right up at me. As much as I try to avoid anthropomorphizing, I couldn't help but feel this was a silent little cry for help. Perhaps the greatest indicator of our humanity is how we treat what we believe is beneath us. Poor Orkid. Hey family,
I just wanted to give myself a little study break for some blog time to let you guys know what's up in my life as we move into the Christmas season.
First, I completed my Evidence final on Monday... and it was a bear! In fact, lots of 3Ls said it was the most difficult final exam they'd had in all of law school. Great. lol. I know I missed issues because the test had too many to cover in two hours with two essays roughly 6 parts per essay with multiple sub-issues in between. I was able to answer all the questions, hopefully I did alright. In other news, a new killer whale calf was spotted in L Pod the same say as my exam. It's been designated L117 and they aren't sure who mommy is just yet, but baby appeared to be healthy. I'll take that as a good sign for my exam. lol.
I decided to come home to Anaheim to study for my second final, Criminal Procedure, as things were a bit "uncomfortable" at my place in Santa Monica and I didn't want to sacrifice study time to dwell on emotional/girl issues. So... I've been back home spending time with Jason while he takes his finals and I prepare like a crazy person for Criminal Procedure, which I will be taking on Wednesday. (I go back to Santa Monica on Sunday night... after Dexter because a girl needs a good study break. Not to mention Dexter involves police investigations, so I feel it's somehow relevant - please don't tell me otherwise.)
Michael comes to see me next Saturday and I can hardly wait to show him around and have him stay at our house. I wanted to take him on a tour of the grad schools, so he can get ideas of what direction he needs to take in undergrad in order to get into grad school, but they aren't giving tours during the holiday season due to state budget cuts. I suppose he'll have to wait til he comes out for the wedding or maybe during a summer once he's started college.
I've recently spoken with professor Steven M. Wise, an animal law ad junct prof at Harvard, Lewis and Clark, etc. (See his credentials here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_M._Wise.) He is currently working on a "personhood" suit for "Class 1" animals: apes, parrots, bonobos, and dolphins. This suit would not involve giving them human rights, but is more along the lines of allowing them to sue as a named party (currently a government agency has to sue on their behalf). The reason this is important is because, surprise surprise, the government isn't doing its job to ensure these intelligent and emotionally sensitive creatures are being well cared for. Case in point: the Miami Seaquarium. In fact, Lolita could possibly end up being the animal in his first suit to initiate the process. According to Wise, there is no recourse for these animals when the protective agencies, namely APHIS, don't do their jobs. Giving the animals the right to sue for violations on their own behalf would cut out the governmental middle man and potentially create a greater incentive for better care. I contacted him because I was curious about the implications of his suit on captive cetaceans and he said he wants me on the project! So... starting next semester I will be in a research group that meets on Mondays on Skype to discuss how we might be able to use civil habeas law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habeas_corpus) in order to assert personhood rights for certain highly intelligent animals - similar to the way slaves asserted their rights when they were deemed as sub-humans. (Not saying the situations are equal, but they have similar legal treatment because all animals are currently given the legal status of property, the same way slaves were.) Needless to say, I'm excited to help out and it is likely this suit will go to court after I graduate, so I may even be able to serve as a consulting counsel on the project. Exciting stuff!
Finally, because I can't help myself and would prefer a little longer break, I'm sure all of you have been watching Sarah Palin's Alaska, whether for a good laugh or genuine interest. While no parent is perfect, and everyone has a different walk of life... I personally believe she is NOT the uniting candidate she claims to be and that her show is a classic example of this. It's no secret to all of you that I am a republican. While I have voted for liberal-leaning candidates where I believe their views correspond with my own, I've found that conservative (note I didn't say republican) views most strongly align with my own. That being said... Sarah Palin and I disagree on many things: using the word faggot to describe someone is beyond unacceptable, while I am not a supporter of the homosexual lifestyle, you better believe I support homosexuals... as people who deserve our respect and love regardless of their sexual orientation. I also do not believe that pimping your family out on reality TV is the best way to go about your political campaign - especially when you stress your family values. I have no criticism of her views on abstinence, while I think they are mildly outdated considering what I hear goes on in high schools (and shockingly moreso, junior highs), I think it's important that kids realize that they have a choice and once they choose to have sex, they can never go back. However, I also think teaching them how to be safe is paramount to avoid disease and teenage pregnancy. That being said, I admire the fact that Bristol did not have an abortion, as that would have been an easy out. I have no personal criticism of women who choose that path, however, I believe that a baby is a baby... all it takes it one trip to any Bodies exhibit to see the little miracle that is a "fetus," or as I call it: a child. I suppose some may use science to "disprove" God, but it's my stance that the more I learn about the wonders of the world and our own bodies, the more the case for God is made.
Now, on to my biggest beef with Sarah Palin... the one you were all expecting: her environmental policy makes me want to puke. I grew up in Michigan and, while I would never have any desire to kill anything beyond a spider in my house, I understand the importance of hunting as I've matured and gotten over my own Bambi-complex. However, I do not think that bludgeoning halibut, ripping out their hearts while they are still beating in your hand, and then talking about how gross they are will "unite the nation." I respect blue-collar workers, especially those who have risky jobs that are necessary for our food and energy. But, I do not believe her killing of animals on national television makes her a pioneer and lover of the blue-collar worker, I think it makes her a political hypocrite (note the manicured nails and perfect hair as she laughs at the beauty of nature while clubbing a fish to death). The purpose for this little stunt doesn't appear to be to understand the fishermen, show the importance of conserving the last great American fishery, or even showing us the dangerous jobs of Alaska: it appears to me that her purpose was to show she could get down and dirty with the boys and if you don't like it - then you're not a true American. Pshhhhh. Ridiculous. I eat meat, I wear leather shoes, and I don't have problems with people who fish or hunt as long as it's under permit. But I cannot respect killing for any purpose other than food or humane population management.
I suppose my biggest disappointment is that people these days seem completely averse to criticizing their own party because... that's THEIR party. I'm not ashamed to agree with Barbara Bush: she's a pretty lady, she loves Alaska, and she should stay there. I still think it's too bad that women in politics are portrayed as ball-busters (Hillary) or Barbies (Sarah). It's unfortunate that Sarah has become so in love with the media... although I don't think she's the only candidate or office-holder out there to be a self-righteous media-whore. It's also too bad that people who identify themselves as "conserv"atives don't seem to recognize the importance of conserving our environment. There are some real whack-jobs out there in the political arena and perhaps instead of attacking them because of the party they align themselves with we should attack them based off their morals and what they "are bringing to the table." The great unifier is not going to be any one politician... it's a mentality that we voters need to understand when electing people into office who truly want to make a difference. I'm done with the arrogant figure-heads. This isn't the middle ages people!
Ok... time for some leftover pizza and more crim pro outline memorizing. lol. Have a wonderful holiday season!
