@randtntx thanks, after you get back do you think home grown aquaponic systems might be viable? I worked in aquaculture for about five years, doing everything from fingerling to filet. That way was not sustainable, not at all.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aquaponics

I like "symbiotic" things, even the parasites can be beautiful. mistletoe
There is a groovy demo just north of me, medical dispensary attached. It is where I got my water filter system, thanks goodness for clean water. This is their hydroponic part, downstream from the above ground fish tank.

https://realgoods.com/solar-living-center-virtual-tours

#2 and the fish.

Speaking of fish, I see that you commented a few days ago about the nutrient content of food and how to maximize nutrients on a limited budget. We all know that is an issue for many of us and I think will increasingly get worse. In the interest of health and resilience, this is a problem that needs an immediate solution. Fish are a wonderfully, nutritious food. Unfortunately much of it is toxic if not endangered. But you of all people know that.
(have to take the dog out, will finish comment later)

@enhydra lutris @enhydra lutris
petrified white men, whose wicks wilt at the notion of any world without them at the center, rail against "identity politics," "social justice warriors," etc. In the early '70s, the preferred pejorative was "therapy." Which moved Carol Hanisch to write this essay, upon which Shulamith Firestone slapped the title "The Personal Is Political." Cro-Magnons have been trying to separate the two since Aristotle, when he pronounced the political the public sphere of men, where is the bloviating, while the personal, that's whatever is the who-cares frivolousness women busy themselves with in the home. Truth is, the personal imbues the political, and vice versa: they are the same: and that is why Roe v. Wade is the decision that it is.

Harry Blackmun, the opinion's author, when not looking in a law book, lived in a matriarchy of four strong women: his wife and three daughters. If he had not written an opinion supporting a right to abortion, they would have gone maenad, and served him for dinner. Blackmun also worked many years as counsel for the Mayo Clinic, where he came to accept as gospel the belief of doctors that they are godlings who should exercise sole control over the practice of medicine: no one can tell them what to do, and that includes the government. Thus, in Roe, the primary right asserted is not that of a woman to control her body, but that of a physician to practice medicine; as Justice Ginsburg has observed: "It's about a doctor's freedom to practice his profession as he thinks best. It wasn't woman-centered. It was physician-centered." The trimester framework is in there because it reflected the godlings' best understanding, at that moment, of fetal development.

A different justice would have written a different opinion. Because s/he would have been a different person. Justice Douglas, for instance, as is clear from his Roe concurrence, would have anchored his holding deep in the right to privacy. A right that first explicitly appeared in the law of the Americans in Douglas' own majority opinion in Griswold v. Connecticut. Douglas was deeply interested in a right to privacy because in his own personal life he was in constant violation of many social norms, and often some laws, and he didn't want the government or anyone else bothering him about it. In order to ensure his own "right to be let alone," as Louis Brandeis put it, Douglas tried to stuff in the law assurances that others would be let alone, too.

Douglas in his Roe concurrence was not interested in the god/life stuff: "When life is present is a question we do not try to resolve. While basically a question for medical experts, it is, of course, caught up in matters of religion and morality." Conversely, people like Justice Scalia, and his many pepes, because they personally believe(d) there exists a god—one way more bitchin' than any doctor-godlings—who wrote a Book, containing The Rules, and is a god who is even now ceaselessly observing and judging what people do with their vaginas, or type into their tubes, etc., then the government, which the Book says is this god's representative on earth, is perfectly entitled, and in fact obligated, to Rule over everyone's vaginas, tubes, etc., and put the Americans in the Jail, if they violate any of these god Rules.

Blackmun's entire view of the law shifted as a result of the backlash against Roe, when the godknockers screamed he was Beelzebub, and demanded his head be put on a pike. Deserted by the Burgers, he entered the embrace of the Brennans. The personal manifesting as political got personal and affected the political, etc.; and so it goes; on into infinity.

#4
surreal in their attempts to find somme thread of legal justification for the imposition of religious ideologies and the need to make a woman a mere slave to the procreative process. True potato seed, if planted, will generate a potato plant. ITINTURNWILLPRODUCEANEDIBLETUBER>It might have the potential to create such a tuber, but a tuber it is not. The plant is also at no time a tuber. The tuber itself, must be harvested before it is edible, so nothing is an edible tube, in becoming, potentially, or any such thing, until there is a hrvested potato tuber.

That there is a point at which a foetus, if born, could. in theory, survive does not make any foetus a live human before it is in fact born and surviving. It is unconscionable to force a woman to undergo a caesarian in order to attempt to therby reate a living human out of what was, until then, parastic protoplasm (though one such court has done so).

There is, in reality no human before birth, so murder is not at issue.