Fourteen Is Enough

Debate topic for today: The world would be a happier place without the news.

The reporting of live octuplets born this week in the Los Angeles area was intriguing enough. Now comes word that the mother has 6 other children, all under the age of 8. Wow. Make that WOW. It's no shock that the woman used fertility treatments, but it is rather amazing that with so many children already she would either want or need to use artificial means in order to have more. No doubt anticipating the incredulity such news would inspire in readers, the above story ends with quotes from several fertility specialists. "Who am I to say that six is the limit?" one said, while the other commented, "I don't think it's our job to tell them how many babies they're allowed to have. I am not a policeman for reproduction in the United States." True enough, but I don't think there will be any shortage of others willing to fill in the passing judgment void.

My grandfather always decried the unhappy focus of the news, and today's headlines would offer him no respite. First we have the latest depressing statistic on the economy; apparently we're doomed to a deep recession. (Side note: I'm rather surprised the media hasn't started stirring up fears of a depression. Probably they want to hold onto that one for next month, so as not to waste the recession momentum they've built up. UPDATE Mar 11, 2009: The Freakonomics post today is entitled "Yes we're in a depression", referring to the opinion of a new book.) Elsewhere in the news we hear that the peanut plant responsible for countless contaminated products should have recalled their peanut paste--or at least checked production thoroughly for source of salmonella--2 YEARS ago. And then there's ExxonMobil, who posted ANOTHER record breaking year of profits. Happy news for stockholders, but a sad statement for those of us concerned about deep imbalances in the world.

And last but not least is the news that former San Francisco Giant Bobby Estalella is ready to testify against teammate Barry Bonds in the grandaddy of all steroids cases. It's obvious Estalella was on something during his time with the Giants. No one gets as ripped as the catcher was during the 2000 season just naturally. And given that he and Bonds shared a locker room and a trainer, it's not surprising he may have some insight into Bonds' fellow bulkiness at the time.

Some may view the firming up of the anti-Bonds case as good news, and you might think that as a fan of baseball I'd be one of them. But in this instance I can't get happy over news of impending justice. In truth, the steroid years offered some of the most fun, exciting sports spectating I've ever witnessed. And in fairness to the doped-up players, the use of all performance enhancing drugs was not strictly forbidden at the time (never mind that users hid their habits because they sensed it was wrong and were playing Russian roulette with their bodies to boot--idiocy and self destruction have never been outlawed). As much as I may want to, it's not fair to judge past actions using today's standards.

But then Bonds isn't being tried for his use of steroids, past or present; it's the lying about it that is at issue in this case. Which is why my unwillingness to celebrate his demise befuddles even me. Maybe it's my compassion coming out. After all, Bonds has become persona non grata in what was virtually his entire world, which can't feel nice. Maybe it's me healthily letting go of the past. But more likely it's just a desire to not have to hear about unpleasant things and a wish to return to a slightly delusional present. After all, how can bad news get me down if it doesn't exist? There, I'm feeling much happier now. :)