Mark-chan's vital stats update

We went in for his two month checkup today.

22 inches long, 13 lb. 14 oz., and head circumference of 40 cm. ^_^ The dr. asked me what I was feeding him. "Breastmilk," I said. "What are you eating, butter?" he joked. Hmph. ^_^ I've been eating pretty darn healthy. But I will admit he's a bigger bruiser than, say, the two month old little girl who came in for her shots a few minutes after we did. Her face is still as slender and her jaw as visible as Mark's was last month. Maybe she was smaller at birth.

He was such a calm and happy baby most of the visit. I was so proud. He didn't fuss at all when the two year old triplet girls, who had an earlier appt., started squealing and fussing about something being done to them by the intake nurse checking their vitals. Just normal wiggling and vocalizations, up until the shots. He made the most heart-rending sobs I have yet heard him make, after the shots. But some cuddling and food helped soothe that away.

I was warned he might develop a slight fever and get extra fussy after the shots. I bought some baby tylenol on the way home just in case, but so far the only symptom that might be shot-related is some extra squealing and fussing. Right now he's asleep in his reclined high chair, and he keeps letting out these little screams that sound just like the ones he made after the shots, but his eyes aren't opening or anything. Poor Mark-chan.

Mark has some eczema on his cheeks. The dr. prescribed some hydrocortizone cream, to be applied twice daily for five days, and some eucerin cream, to be applied several times a day as needed. He emphasized that the two creams were not to be applied at the same time. Mark-chan also has a bit of cradle cap, but all I need to do to treat that is be extra diligent about washing his scalp, and perhaps apply some mineral oil if it gets worse.

Aside from that, he is a healthy, happy, bouncy little boy. ^_^ I am so proud of him.

Gratuitous post

http://www.ozyandmillie.org/comics/om20061204.gif

::snerk: This is so the kind of thing I plan to pull on Mark-chan if he tries getting clever and looking for ways out of chores. Also the following:

Mark: Mooo-ooom, I don't hafta do that! This is a free country!
Me: Mein schatz, it is indeed a free country. However, this household is run as a benign dictatorship. How benign it is depends on your behavior - and your parents' whim. ::evil grin::
Mark: ::whine, snivel, pout::
Me: You don't like it, work to change the laws regarding the rights of minors when you grow up. Now get to doing what I told you.

(no subject)

Sometimes the ACLU supports nutjobs and frivolous lawsuits.

Sometimes they get it right. From feministing.com

Quote: ' A few years back, (Maricopa County sherriff) Arpaio initiated an unwritten policy refusing to allow deputies to transport inmates to abortion facilities without a court order.

He told me at the time, "It's government money and this is elective surgery. What are they going to ask for next, a nose job?" '

I have no words for how furious this makes me.

Quite apart from the wildly inaccurate analogy, the article goes on to point out it isn't government money. The inmates are paying for the abortions out of their own pockets. As for the cost of the transport to the abortion facilities, inmates are already allowed to be transported out of the jail for other medical procedures, or for non-medical purposes such as funerals, without a court order. It's estimated that less than three female inmates a year have the procedure, so it's hardly a burden on the Maricopa County, AZ taxpayers.

(no subject)

Also found at feministing.com, an article describing a columnist's efforts to find just how easy it is to obtain emergency contraception. Here

Her perfect description of why EC needs to be over the counter and why doctors should not be able to decide for the patient whether or not they are 'good enough' to obtain it:
"If I entered the emergency room with a broken arm, also the result of an accident, the doctor wouldn't decide to fix it. It wouldn't be the ER's prerogative to decide whether my accident should alter my life irrevocably, the possible result of an untreated break. I wouldn't be denied medication to alleviate the effects of my mistake.

So, then, isn't a judgment of worthiness the clear message of meeting with the doctor to discuss my "situation?" The merit of my request will be assessed, and, if I meet some undefined set of criteria, I will be granted the resources I seek. The Provident nurse's "you can't just come in here and decide what medicine you want" point is well taken, but why is emergency contraception considered a "want" any less important than other remedies? I mean, I don't technically need to get my broken arm fixed. I might not be able to use it for a while, it might hurt, and it might substantially alter the course of my life, but isn't getting it repaired really a "want?" Don't I simply "want" to regain the full use of my body as I know it as quickly and painlessly as possible? These are serious questions because women across the country are not getting equal care. Until January, they are being forced to persuade their doctors to provide medical attention for a "situation" that is neither illegal nor uncommon. "

In the interests of fighting ignorance, one LJ post at a time...

We got quizzed on this at the baptism class for parents a couple weeks ago, and I was the only one in the room besides the deacon who knew about this. (I actually had a not-quite-argument with one mother who didn't believe me.) And it came up again in part of a mock_the_stupid thread. So I'm spreading it on a little farther. Besides, this is the Christmas season, so it's relevant. Some of it's Catholics-only, some of it's Christianity-wide.

So, here we go:

Immaculate conception: Does not refer to Jesus' conception. Refers to Mary, his mother, having been conceived without original sin, in order to be a fit vessel to bear God's only begotten son. This does not interfere with Jesus "being like us in all ways but sin", as the lady I argued with at that class insisted, because she still committed sins. She was just exempt from original sin, that which we all bear because Adam and Eve disobeyed God and ate of the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge.

Virgin birth: Does refer to Jesus' conception. Mary had not "known man" before she conceived Jesus, and she remained a virgin until his birth. After his birth... brings us to the next point.

"Blessed Mary, ever-virgin": This comes up a lot in Catholic practice. I'm reasonably sure this is a Catholicism-only concept. (geoduck? Anyone else?) We (and by 'we' I mean the Catholic Church as a whole, not necessarily me) believe that Mary remained a virgin her entire life, and that she and Joseph maintained a celibate marraige. So, no siblings for Jesus, not in accepted Catholic canon. (Anybody using the movie Dogma as their source for theological knowledge needs to be bapped across the head with a cluebat. Excellent movie, though. The Catholics who got in such a snit over it clearly had no senses of humor.)
The m_t_s thread I mentioned above had a few posters mention a theory that Jesus may have had step-brothers, from a previous marriage of Joseph, thus explaining the references to a couple of apostles as Jesus' "brothers", but I never heard of that before and doubt it's canonical in any faith.
Personally, I have trouble with the doctrine of Mary's eternal virginity. I just don't see the point of it. No priest or theologian has ever explained its purpose to me either; just said things along the lines of "It's a mystery of faith, but we still believe". Mary and Joseph having a normal sexual marital relationship, as far as I can see, in no way detracts from the wonder and miracle of Christ's conception, birth, and sacrifice for our sins. Maybe I just missed that day in catechism class? ::shrug::

Side note, but also something I argued about with the lady who didn't know what immaculate conception really meant: John the Baptist was related to Jesus. His mother was Elizabeth, Mary's cousin. It's mentioned first during Gabriel's trip to tell Mary she's been chosen as Jesus' mother. As proof that what he says is true, he tells her that her cousin Elizabeth, who was believed barren, is now several months pregnant. Mary visits Elizabeth and finds out it's true. She stays with Elizabeth until her cousin gives birth, and Elizabeth names her son John. Later on, when Jesus goes to the river Jordan to be baptised by John the Baptist, he's mentioned as being Jesus' cousin. (Hmmm. I suppose Dogma's concept of the Last Zion could be true, then if John had had children.... just not the exact way the movie had it.... Gah. I've been in fandom too long if I'm thinking up concepts for Biblical fanfic....)

Speaking of theology and baptism class... Mark's baptism will be this Saturday, Dec. 9th, 11 am. ^_^ Godmothers will be my mom and my aunt Lori. Ms. Spencer, the Langley parish's pastoral coordinator, says that if she can't dredge up anyone with free time to be their proxies, she'll attend and be the proxy. There will be a photo post. Dav sold his fancy digital camera, but the smaller one he bought's nearly as good, and he's played with it enough to be pretty proficient with it. I expect the photos to turn out well.