And this ridiculous world gets more ridiculous still... First, "Merry Christmas" was banned from the public lexicon. Now, it's "Bless You" after a California teacher docked one of his student's marks on a test for "blessing" a fellow student who'd sneezed.
As one student said, "Man, you gonna lose points if you say bless you in the classroom. Man, that's messed up."
That is, indeed, messed up.
After so many parents and students complained the punishment violated the First Amendment, the high school principal, Cliff DeGraw, promised no one would be penalized.
While "Bless you" originally had its roots in Catholicism (a sneeze was believed to dispel evil spirits from a person's body), the expression is essentially meaningless today. More an endearment than anything.
According to thenydailynews.com, the teacher claims he penalized the student, not for using the phrase itself, but for causing a disruption in the classroom.
The school administration is still investigating the incident.
In an effort to demystify labour and promote home births, an Ottawa mom and birth coach plans to stream the arrival of her baby on the Internet.
"Women and young girls used to be exposed to birth throughout their lives," said 32-year-old Nancy Salgueiro, who is due on October 7. "When we took birth out of homes and moved it into the hospital we took away the generations of information handed down from one woman to the next."
Though Salgueiro has been accused of attention seeking, CBC News reports that over 800 people have already signed up to watch the 'big event' via her site.
Salgueiro hopes to give women a realistic idea of what to expect during pregnancy in a way that TV and books do not.
To sign up to watch the birth, all you need to do is provide an email address and name. Once labour begins, users will receive an email with a link to the live-stream video.
Salgueiro plans for a water birth, though it's unclear what will happen should complications arise during her broadcast. Will she provide a running commentary throughout the proceedings? Watch this space.
Is it appropriate, or even necessary, for the public to be privy to such a private experience?
The women of Brooklyn aren't impressed. Following ten unsolved sexual assaults in the area, the New York Police Department (NYPD) stopped several women on the street, warning them they were dressing provocatively.
"[An officer] pointed at my outfit and said, 'Don't you think your shorts are a little short?'" a woman, identified only as Lauren, told the Wall Street Journal.
Two others, wearing dresses, were also stopped and told they were showing "a lot of skin" and that such wardrobe choices would give the suspect think he had "easy access."
The officer went on to tell one woman: "You're exactly the kind of girl this guy is targeting."
Not surprisingly, more than a few people have a problem with the NYPD over the incident.
"Officers are not telling women what not to wear -- there's a TV series that does that," quipped NYPD spokesman, Paul Browne.
Browne added that police were only acting with the best of intentions. "They are simply pointing out that as part of the pattern involving one or more men that the assailant(s) have targeted women wearing skirts."
Do you think police were right to warn the women in the area or were they overstepping the mark?
Printer-friendly version