Earth Day and Origins: Why Celebrate Accidents?

Well, it's time for Earth Day, when New Age and pagan Earth worship takes center stage, and many theists go along for the ride. I'm all for conserving God's creation, but I recognize that the creation is wearing out, even with the best conservation efforts. Only a resurrection will redeem it.

I prefer to worship the Creator, and admire the creation.

Speaking of that, from letters to the editor printed in the Los Angeles Times around Earth Day 2008, inspired by a commentary by Richard Dawkins:

Ken Savage or Palm Desert chimed in:

Everyone has faith in something that is beyond science to prove.

That is true. Even a statement such as "Science discovers all truth" is a philosophical statement outside of science itself, and thus can't be true.

Dawkins has a similar problem to those who cannot explain where a complex God came from. Where did the Big Bang come from, and what existed before?

As I understand it, one of the explanations is "nothing". If the entire universe could come from nothing without a cause outside itself, how can we trust any lab results? How do we know matter/energy is not emerging in the middle of such experiments, thus skewing the results? Another answer I've been told is "We don't know, but we know it wasn't God!"  Uh, okay.

A Safe and Reliable Water Supply is a Basic Element of Civilization

The Leftist Democrats controlling California and Los Angeles county are failing again. They are failing at some basic, core responsibilities.

Despite people literally fleeing the state, there is again a water "shortage" and residents are yet again being told to reduce their water usage.

Ever look west? California, including Los Angeles county, is on the world's largest body of water.

There isn't a shortage of water. There's a shortage of competent, dedicated service to the residents of California by people who are supposed to be public servants.

The Leftists running the state will blame "climate change" for their failure.

Hogwash.

Earth Day and Origins: Why Celebrate Accidents?

Well, it's time for Earth Day, when New Age and pagan Earth worship takes center stage, and many theists go along for the ride. I'm all for conserving God's creation, but I recognize that the creation is wearing out, even with the best conservation efforts. Only a resurrection will redeem it. [This is bumped up from past years.]

I prefer to worship the Creator, and admire the creation.

Speaking of that, from letters to the editor printed in the Los Angeles Times around Earth Day 2008, inspired by a commentary by Richard Dawkins:

Ken Savage or Palm Desert chimed in:

Everyone has faith in something that is beyond science to prove.

That is true. Even a statement such as "Science discovers all truth" is a philosophical statement outside of science itself, and thus can't be true.

Dawkins has a similar problem to those who cannot explain where a complex God came from. Where did the Big Bang come from, and what existed before?

As I understand it, one of the explanations is "nothing". If the entire universe could come from nothing without a cause outside itself, how can we trust any lab results? How do we know matter/energy is not emerging in the middle of such experiments, thus skewing the results? Another answer I've been told is "We don't know, but we know it wasn't God!"  Uh, okay.

State of the Union Wish List 2018

I'm so glad we have President Trump instead of HRC. And make no mistake about it. Those were the choices. Ford, Dole, McCain, and Romney were all fine men with much experience who got the GOP nomination, and they all failed to get elected. Did we need to add to that list?  No.

This doesn't mean I think Trump has done everything right or well. The attacks on him by the Left, including judges, media, activist groups, and the Democratic Party, have been over-the-top and unprecedented in modern American politics, acting as though everything Trump does or says is the worst thing ever and will be the end of the world.. I'm sure they'd argue that it is warranted is because they see him as an unprecedented in his actual/potential danger to the country.

Trump is a populist, not a conservative ideologue. His public position on marriage law, for example, was more to the Left of Obama as he entered the Presidency.  He was steeped in the culture of NYC and has long had public appearances with, and donations to, Democratic candidates and causes. He's been governing as a conservative, and that's what really matters.

If we focus on what he's actually done and not what the media has said he's done or has planned to do and we ignore Twitter, he has quite a list of accomplishments, including reducing ISIS, the new tax law, judicial appointments, and rolling back regulations. Sure, there are Leftists and others who aren't happy with all of those things, but if the Left doesn't like it, then in general, it's good. I've seen more than one headline lamenting Trump is undoing everything Obama did, and that's GREAT!

People who ignore the activist groups, the political nerds, and media hysterics will likely not have the sense of fear or outrage that so many people have today.

Let's get to the speech.

If You Don't Want Babies Slaughtered You Have to Grow OSHA or Something

You've encountered this in different forms, probably, but we'll deal with this specific example for now.

Notice they don't deny that elective abortion kills innocent humans.

Instead, they try to either silence pro-lifers or co-opt them into Leftism by listing off a bunch of other things these Leftists CLAIM must be part and parcel with being pro-life.

Yes, "chemical" spills (I assume they mean toxic substances) into water can kill people. Dumping of toxic substances into the water support is already banned, and I don't know of elected or significant Republicans who are trying to make it legal.

Gun rampages anywhere are already illegal, too, and again, I don't know of any Republican who is trying to make them legal.

What Are You So Afraid Of?

There has never been a reaction like this to an election in this Union. Oh, sure, there were people holding demonstrations after GWB won (and he did win) the 2000 election, at least through September 11, 2001. Television news personalities and others covering the 2016 election were clearly upset, and you've seen all of the people, and you certainly know some (or maybe you ARE one) who have done everything from cry to engage in rioting as they insist that DJT is #NotMyPresident. People have been talking about how afraid they are, fleeing to "safe spaces" that are like preschool nursery rooms for alleged adults, talking about "dark times", and shunning people they'd claimed as friends and even family who not only "admit" they voted for Trump, but that are even suspected of voting for Trump because they haven't loudly decried his election. Hollywood celebrities and others appeared in a futile video to implore the Republicans in the Electoral College to become "faithless electors", there are still people hoping Congress won't certify the results and for some other shenanigans to prevent President-elect Trump from taking office. Protests are being planned for Inauguration Day.

What are you so afraid of? Why are you so upset?

Let's go over the things I've heard/read one-by-one.

The Delusional Democrat Voter Returns

Hey folks, do you remember this?

Well, the same guy posted another round of stuff that Dennis Prager could write if he was trying to do a parody of a typical Leftist.

Simple question: Why is our nation so divided?

For one thing, it always has been divided. It was a massive feat to get our Constitution, and then we went through a terrible war between the states less than a century later.

A Prime Example of a Delusional Democrat Voter

A Leftist posted this:

This nation is in trouble, so let's be clear:

Someone's been listening to Obama speeches! Trouble, eh? Hmmm. Who's been President the last 7.5 years?

If you're still talking about Hillary Clinton's emails

Dismissing what Clinton did as just about "e-mails" is like dismissing what Nixon did as "just about tapes". Actually, Nixon did far less. And fellow Republicans dropped him and he resigned. You Democrats are not calling for Clinton to drop out.

instead of the urgent need to get weapons of war out of the hands of civilians, you are part of the problem.

What exactly qualifies as a "weapon of war"? I'm guess it is a gun that is currently legal to own somewhere in the country that this guy thinks is too big. Or maybe he's talking about all firearms. Whatever. Well, considering there are millions of people - PEOPLE, meaning things that are 100-300 pounds and need shelter, food, etc. so they can't exactly stay stashed under a floorboard - who came into this country and are here illegally and we "can't" find them or stop more from coming here, then how in the world would we effectively prevent firearms from being smuggled, at great profit, into this country?!? And is this guy talking about confiscation? So he's in favor of something that would certainly lead to stand-offs, barricade situations, groups retreating into fortified armed compounds with their children, and resulting shootouts???

If you're planning to vote for a corrupt businessman whose chief concern is his bottom line with no concern for the small businesses and workers who got him there, you're part of the problem.

I'm no fan of Trump as a candidate. He might be an awful President. He might be a great one. We know Hillary Clinton is corrupt, thinks she can get away with anything, and would do harm to this Union.

And don't feign ignorance. Clinton's biggest concern is her own finances, hence the Foundation shenanigans. Trump's successes and even some of his failures at least helped many other people.

Let's not even get into his overt racism, misogyny, and avocation of violence against his opponent's supporters.

Of course you're not going to get into it because you're probably thinking of parodies of what he actually has said. For example, saying that some illegal aliens coming here are murderers and rapists is not racism. And it is fact.

If you believe your 'good book' means that civil rights and equal rights doesn't apply to gay, trans, or other historically oppresses minorities, you are part of the problem.

The Holy Bible says that there are two sexes, marriage unites the sexes, and that sex is for marriage. That has nothing to do with denying anybody any rights. And MLK Jr. was a REVEREND. I know you like to forget about stuff like that. By the way, my argument against judicial neutering of state marriage licenses didn't invoke the Bible or appeal to theology or religion.

If the congress critter you elected has voted more than once to repeal the affordable care act or defund Planned Parenthood or for lower taxes on the rich, you are part of the problem.

So if  you don't want your tax money used to slaughter innocent human beings for convenience, if you don't like being forced by the federal government to buy a service, and if you think people should be able to keep more of their own money to invest (and grow the economy) as they see fit, then that's a problem?!?

Right now we need to be united as a nation

HA!!! This is from someone who aligns with people who are constantly trying to label and divide people and treat them differently based on their skin color, national origin, religion, sexual desires, and so forth!!!

to reform ourselves into a society where there is really respect for all,

Why are we supposed to respect clumps of cells/collections of molecules? And reform... wasn't Obama going to "fundamentally transform" the USA? Is he a liar or failure?

no poverty

There will always be poverty if for no other reason than Leftists will always say people who have less wealth are poor.

where healthcare is a right

Healthcare is already a "right". Say, didn't you mention Obamacare above? But true rights do not obligate others without their consent unless a crime is involved.

education opportunities are the same for the child in the highest income neighborhood as the poorest

So you're for vouchers? Yeah, didn't think so. There's no way to achieve this other than to criminalize private education, tutoring, and to get all children out of their homes (which may be chaotic) and stick them in uniform government dorms. After all, their parents might subvert the law and give them some sort of educational advantage if they are left with their parents. Say, who runs those school districts in the "poor" neighborhoods? Around here, Leftist Democrat Unionists do. Hmmmm...

and we live in a way that values natural resources

Selling oil does value natural resources!

so we can start making real inroads against global climate change.

I don't believe he really cares because he's not living in a cave with nothing manufactured.

The good news is there is a path forward and it starts this November by getting out the vote and installing elected officials who will actually work toward a progressive future.

So, Obama wasn't it? You were screaming "Yes we can!" when he was elected. I saw you.

We cannot stay on the path we're on today and expect workable solutions.

On that we agree.

State of the Union 2016 Wish List

With BHO up there, it would be great to see everyone fall asleep, not just a judge or two.

I know most of these positions will be completely avoided by President Obama, but permit me to dream. Also notice that with most of these, I'm calling on the President to encourage action by the people, not to use the force of law.

Explain That the Federal Government Is Not the Answer to Every Challenge, Problem, or Choice - Rather, it is the Last Resort Answer to Very Few. That is what freedom and liberty are all about. Challenge individuals, businesses, congregations, nonprofits, and local and state governments (where appropriate) to take action instead of relying on the federal government. The federal government is there to protect the union from foreign threats and to and resolve some disputes between states.

Esteem Human Life. Vow to prosecute anyone who is transporting people across state lines for abortions to cover up statutory rape or anyone transporting human tissue, obtained without the consent if the individual, across state lines. Encourage people to think of human life as important and valuable, whether young or old, sick or healthy.

Tout the Successes of the War on Terror. Laud those military, intelligence, and law enforcement personnel who have uncovered and prevented terrorist plans and actions.Stress that ISIS and other such organizations must be obliterated, and point to recent terrorist attacks as reminders the threat it still very real.

Border Control Is a Matter of National Security. Explain that allowing illegal aliens any advantage in gaining permanent legal status ahead of legal immigrants is a slap in the face to legal immigrants and naturalized citizens. Announce that, effective immediately, the National Guard will secure our borders to prevent terrorists, disease-carriers, and smugglers from entering the U.S. They will stay there until suitable barriers and checkpoints are constructed – however long that takes. We will NOT encourage further invasion by offering amnesty, health insurance, and other tax-funded benefits for citizens of other countries who illegally enter/stay in the U.S. Speed up the process for legal immigration for those who want to come to the U.S. legally to become citizens and can find sponsors who will ensure they will stay off of public assistance. As for illegal aliens currently living in the United States – do not offer amnesty; they can go through the same channels of those who are trying to immigrate legally. If the border is secure, this problem will eventually take care of itself because their children born here are citizens and the illegals can continue to function as they have until they die off, if they don't want to go the legal route. Any illegal alien who serves honorably in the U.S. armed forces should be granted citizenship. If a true shortage of labor occurs (meaning American unemployment is low and employers need more temporary labor), a true guest worker program can be developed.

We're One Race - Human. Yes, "race"-based slavery was our national birth defect, and injustices persisted after slavery was abolished, but hostile racists have very little power now in our overall system. Law enforcement must have limited powers, and rioting shouldn't be tolerated.

Break the Street Gangs. Pledge federal agencies to assist state and local law enforcement "sweep and hold" gang-infested urban areas.

Encourage Responsible Gun Ownership. As it is the duty of every able person to stand up to evil & crime in protection of the innocent, responsible gun ownership, training, and practice should be encouaged, and state and local laws should allow for this

Declare the Growing National Debt Unacceptable. Explain that it is a basic function of the federal government to adopt a budget, and that it is unsustainable and immoral to accumulate increasing debt, thereby burdening future generations. The government should not encourage further dependency on government.

Don't be Santa Claus. Don't propose new federal programs and expansions of existing federal social programs. Enough already. There are 50 states in the union and a few territories that are supposed to be handling their own matters – that is, the matters that are not supposed to be left up to "the people".

Stop Using the Tax Code For Social Engineering. Tell the Congress that instead of taking the carrots (taxes) from the people and then dangling some of them back in front of the people, that the people should keep their carrots in the first place and do with them what they will. Call for tax simplification and a move away from income/payroll taxes. If someone pays taxes, everyone should pay taxes.

Individuals Should Plan for the Future. Talk about the numerous options individuals and families have for saving for the future. Encourage them to save and invest for the future and not rely on the federal government to take care of them in their senior years. Point out that a reduction in federal spending will allow people to keep more of their own money to aid in saving for retirement.

Explain that Planning for Your Health Care is Part of Planning for the Future. Call for more freedom, competition, and private decision-making in health care.

Equal Access to Free Markets. Explain some of the major benefits of free markets, and that the best thing the federal government can do to foster a good business climate that provides jobs is to provide protection from interstate crime and foreign terrorists, and to be involved as little as possibly in voluntary employment and business transactions, not picking winners or losers in business, subsidizing some and restricting upstarts while protecing established businesses.

Property Rights and Personal Freedom. Most Americans understand that people should be considered as individuals and based on their behavior and abilities, not as members of a non-ideological group (ethnicity, etc.). Therefore, the federal government should no longer be involved in preventing people from renting, selling - or not - to whomever they choose for whatever reason, and should no longer be involved with who an employer hires and fires and why. Airlines, for example, should not be forced to carry anyone who makes the majority of their employees and passengers uncomfortable. It is clear that people can succeed in the USA regardless of skin color, sex, or sexual orientation, and focusing on slights, imagined or real, based on these personal characteristics, is fostering hostility and division and self-defeating thinking, doing more harm than good.

Encourage private innovation and solutions to reducing reliance on terrorist oil.

Education Is a Private Responsibility. Given the state of American public education since the Carter administration, call for the dismantling of federal involvement in education.

Strong Marital Unions Are Good For the Union. It brings together both sexes to raise the next generation of citizens. Men and women are different, and unifying them in the marital union forms a strong, inclusive building block for society, benefiting the individuals and society. Encourage people to voluntarily take marriage seriously, thinking for the long term, getting good pre-marital counseling - and counseling during marriage as necessary. Encourage individuals, families, congregations, businesses, and the media to respect and value marriage, and support marriages instead of undermining them. Encourage individuals to save sex and childrearing for marriage, because doing so is good for them and good for the country. Call on the states to reforms laws and polices that punish people, especially men, for marrying.

Encourage Proven Conservation Techniques. Quote the scientists and activists who, in the 1970s, warned that we were heading for a new ice age, and quote those who said that by 2000, the rainforests and the oceans would be destroyed. Go on to say that we must not hastily and uncritically accept alarmist warnings and use federal government force to impose destructive restrictions on the people and business that may not result in significant environmental benefit.

Civility. Call on partisans to vigorously debate the issues, but refrain from threats of violence and character assassination, as they renew their vow to defend the Constitution.

Green Jobs Don't Count

When talking about job creation, "green" jobs or any other jobs that are government jobs - or rely on government funding - don't count. The only government jobs I'm happy to see more of are police, prison guard, and military ones.

The Left thinks green jobs count because they think jobs are all about providing people with another way of acquiring self-esteem (and, getting women away from the horrible life of actually raising their own kids who made it out of the womb without being aborted).

But the real reasons why more jobs is better than fewer jobs include: 1) they generate wealth; 2) they help provide goods and services. Most government jobs consume wealth or impede the generation of wealth, and don't provide goods or services, or at least not ones that couldn't be provided more efficiently and better through free markets.

It is absurd to say - as RINO former Governor of California, Arnold Schwarzenegger did - that legislation that hinders legitimate private businesses creates green jobs because it funds the installation of solar panels.

Bagging on the City of LA

The highly disfunctional City of Los Angeles government, not to be confused with the somewhat less disfunctional Los Angeles County government, took up important issues facing the city, such as crumbling infrastructure. Oh, excuse me... I mean like... plastic shopping bags. Whiny loudmouth Hollywood types joined in the envirofascist call for further intruding into business and voluntary transactions, and now it looks lik the L.A. will be banning the use of plastic shopping bags.

Thank God I don't live in that city. It really is astounding how absurd the city government is, especially the city council.

I've already written about the banning of plastic bags:

http://playfulwalrus.blogspot.com/2011/08/i-love-plastic-shopping-bags.html
I Love Plastic Shopping Bags

http://walrus.blogtownhall.com/2010/06/03/bagging_california.thtml
Bagging California

http://walrus.blogtownhall.com/2010/06/24/its_my_bag,_baby.thtml
It's My Bag, Baby

http://walrus.blogtownhall.com/2010/06/29/defending_the_plastic_bag.thtml
Defending the Plastic Bag


And here's a good write up at Everything Must Go!
http://tunasafedolphin.blogspot.com/2008/01/heal-bag.html
Heal the Bag

Newspaper Editors Don't Trust Science

(Note: LATimes.com only allows visitors to access a certain number of articles per month for free.) The Leftist goal of portraying conservatives and Christians as ignorant, uneducated, and illogical (despite Leftism being based on emotion rather than logic) is evident in today's Los Angeles Times, in an article by John Hoeffel headlined "Conservatives' Trust in Science Has Declined Sharply".

I'm a conservative and I trust science. Most conservatives do. We must define what we mean by "science", however. People like me believe the scientific method is helpful in discerning things about the physical universe. What people like me do not trust without verification, and for good reason, is how findings by scientists are reported, especially in the Left-leaning media. Also, when a scientist makes statements that relate to metaphysics, the supernatural, or philosophy (such as expressing a worldview of philosophical naturalism), we rightly question the statement rather than trust it.

Here's how the article opens:

As the Republican presidential race has shown, the conservatives who dominate the primaries are deeply skeptical of science — making Newt Gingrich, for one, regret he ever settled onto a couch with Nancy Pelosi to chat about global warming.

Really? If we don't believe there is man-made global warming that we are able to (and better off if we do) fight through drastic restrictions on human freedom and centralization of power in government… we're "skeptical of science"? It shouldn't be news that conservatives are skeptical of political Leftism.

A study released Thursday in the American Sociological Review concludes that trust in science among conservatives and frequent churchgoers has declined precipitously since 1974, when a national survey first asked people how much confidence they had in the scientific community. At that time, conservatives had the highest level of trust in scientists.

The "scientific community" even if it were to be unified, does not equal science. This smacks of identity politics, like when the MSM reports that someone who doesn't think a brideless pairing forms a marriage is "anti-gay".

Confidence in scientists has declined the most among the most educated conservatives, the peer-reviewed research paper found, concluding: "These results are quite profound because they imply that conservative discontent with science was not attributable to the uneducated but to rising distrust among educated conservatives."

So why wasn’t the headline "The More Educated the Conservative, the Less Trust of Scientists"? That would have been more accurate. But notice how terms scientists, the "scientific community" and science are all being used interchangeably in this article. It's like saying that someone does not approve of President Obama’s job performance, or believe what he says doesn't trust the Constitution.

To highlight the dramatic impact conservative views of science have had on public opinion, [report author Gordon] Gauchat pointed to results from Gallup, which found in 2012 that just 30% of conservatives believed the Earth was warming as a result of greenhouse gases versus 50% two years earlier. In contrast, the poll showed almost no change in the opinion of liberals, with 74% believing in global warming in 2010 versus 72% in 2008.

You see, "belief" in "global warming" = science.

Chris Mooney, who wrote "The Republican War on Science," which Gauchat cites, agreed. "If you think of the reasons behind this as nature versus nurture, all this would be nurture, that it was the product of the conservative movement," he said. "I think being educated is a proxy for people paying attention to politics, and when they do, they tune in to Fox News and blogs."

In other words, conservatives don't just believe whatever the New York Times, TIME, and MSNBC say.

The study also found that Americans with moderate political views have long been the most distrustful of scientists, but that conservatives now are likely to outstrip them.

Moderates are typically less educated than either liberals or conservatives, Gauchat said. "These folks are just generally alienated from science," he said, describing them as the "least engaged and least knowledgeable about basic scientific facts."

And yet, we didn't have a headline that said "Moderates Less Educated".

Gauchat, who has been studying public attitudes toward science for about eight years, has applied for a National Science Foundation grant to investigate why trust in science has waned.

Maybe it is because of the influence of grants?

He plans to ask a battery of questions, including some focused on scientific controversies, such as those over vaccines and genetically modified foods, to try to understand what makes conservatives and moderates so distrustful.

Yes, you see, it isn't Leftists who are making any of that noise about vaccines and genetically modified foods. Oh no… it is those churchgoin’ conservatives and those uneducated moderates. Yessiree.

"cognoscenti" at 5:55 AM March 29, 2012 commented:

It's funny (ironic?) in Google News today, this LAT story is highlighted and directly beneath it is a Reuters story of how a lead cancer researcher found 47 of 53 popular scientific research 'findings' couldn't be replicated. No wonder people have lower faith in science with stories like this, Climategate, hockey stick graphs, etc etc. When scientists make up results to either gain grants, patents or notoriety for their cause the truth eventually comes out.

The same peson later added:

The one thing that bothers me about the IPCC reports over the last 10 years regarding AGW is the slow redaction of pieces of it, bit by bit. Like the claim that the Himalayan glaciers would melt by 2035 which turns out to be completely false. Or wrongly linking global warming to an increase in the number and severity of natural disasters such as hurricanes and floods. These loose 'facts' were all a result of the lack of peer-reviews and an eagerness to push an agenda.

"moristheflorist" at 6:53 AM March 29, 2012:

A lot of this distrust might be due to the sorry state of science journalism

(see graphic: http://larvatusprodeo.net/files/2011/05/phdcomics-science-news-cycle.gif)

"basswork" at 9:02 AM March 29, 2012 gets it right:

Such comedy. The headline would suggest that conservatives mistrust science in general. But no, it's anthropenic global warming that is at issue. And by people who have studied the issue more carefully than most, including presumably those who write about it in the media.

In fact, believers in AGW behave much like religionists, smiting all heretics who dare question the popular doomsaying dogma.

Why not write about liberals who believe in feng shui, not inoculating their children and that government provided services are free?

For a reasoned argument against AGW read here: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304636404577291352882984274.html

"nikkkko" at 10:10 AM March 29, 2012 wrote:

It’s not just science, that conservatives have a problem with. They have a problem with any fact or rational idea that conflicts with their views.

Pot, meet kettle. (A bunch of Leftists just remembered they were meaning to light up.)

The majority in this party do not believe in evolution, and many of those believe the earth is 4000 years old.

Conservatives are not the GOP, but I think it is safe to say that the majority of Republicans and conservatives do believe in "change over time" if that is what is meant by "evolution". But if you mean by "evolution" that everything that exists - including all of the woundrous biological diversity and irreducibly complex natural systems, sunsets and surfing, our sense of right and wrong, the mind of Einstein, the music of Mozart, Beethoven, Bach, and great sex – are the result of nothing more than the mindless interactions of molecules that emerged from nothing without the aid of God, then no, most people don't believe that.

And Young Earthers think it is at least 6,000 years, often 10,000 years or more.

I Love Plastic Shopping Bags

Los Angeles County has banned certain plastic shopping bags in all areas that are not part of an incorporated city, and some cities within the county have banned those bags within their cities. I have written about this before (here, here, here, and here) [Sorry, links might not be working anymore].

Here's an article in the Los Angeles Times by Andrew Khouri.

Brandon Martin recalls the woman who came through his supermarket checkout line, only to find that she would have to pay a dime apiece for paper shopping bags.

Plastic bags, she was told, were no longer an option.

The woman thought for a moment, Martin recalled, and then directed him to load the groceries in the plastic trash bags she purchased.

"I thought that was a pretty nifty idea," said Martin, who bags groceries at the Ralphs in La Crescenta. "I've never encountered that."

Of course he thought that was nifty. It sells more trash bags, which take up more material, by the way.

But it may not be the last time. Since July 1, large supermarkets and pharmacies in unincorporated parts of Los Angeles County have been required to charge 10 cents each for paper bags and have been banned from using plastic grocery bags. Similar bans are in effect or pending in several cities across Southern California.

It's not good enough just to ban plastic bags. They now have to charge for the paper ones. Why? To encourage using the more expensive bags (which could lead to food poisoning).

The county ordinance was designed to encourage shoppers to bring their own reusable bags and cut down on waste.

People living in these jurisdictions should protest by 1) shopping in jurisdictions that don’t have this ridiculous law, and 2) deliberately generating more waste. How many people reuse those bags to clean up after their pets? If they use something that take more material, isn’t that a net environmental loss? Everyone who used to use the grocery bags to pick up pet waste should now toss their used batteries in to whatever else they use. And their government-mandated toxic lightbulbs.

Some customers have been using odd contrivances to lug out their purchases — including baskets, cardboard boxes, old paper and plastic bags, backpacks and even their hands.

Back the car right up to the door.

Shopper Ana Castorena said that thanks to the ban, she never forgets to bring her reusable bag to the store.

Yes, but what if you don’t bring enough?

"If we're not forced, we won't make a change," said Castorena, 33, standing outside the Hacienda Heights supermarket.

Heaven forbid!

Just down the road from a Ralphs store in unincorporated Marina del Rey, a Ralphs in the city of Los Angeles remains unaffected by the ban. Sales have risen about 5% at that market since the store less than half a mile away stopped using plastic bags, a store manager said.

Great. It will be interesting to see what happens to sales tax revenue.

Long Beach's ban took effect Monday. Santa Monica begins enforcement Sept. 1, and Pasadena and other cities are debating scrapping plastic bags as well. By January, L.A. County's ban will extend to about 1,000 smaller stores in unincorporated areas.

One more reason to move.

Don't yell at the store staff. This isn't their fault.