Salon Broadsheet's Rebecca Traister had an awesome rant about reaction to a New York Times piece that gave the Netroots Nation convention far more coverage than BlogHer, which happened at the same time. As Traister pointed out, NN had guest speakers like Nancy Pelosi and Al Gore, but wondered why they hadn't showed up at BlogHer, too. Here is something Traister forgot to mention: BlogHer is a non-partisan organization while NN is unabashedly progressive. It makes sense that high-profiled Democrats would go to a convention with nothing but Democrats over a non-partisan one. I do not want to diminish BlogHer though as it is an awesome conference with a lot of talented writers. I hope to go next year.

This is something I did not think about: The impact of the housing bubble on home makeover shows like ABC's "Extreme Makeover: Home Edition." At least one family that was on the show is now facing foreclosure, according to Strollerderby. The family cashed in the equity of the home for a new construction business -- which failed.

Also in Strollerderby: A Canadian woman gave birth to her 18th child. The Duggers can suck it!

Daddy blogger Rand Richards Cooper over at Wonder time was wondering when it was appropriate -- if ever -- to give into your two-year-old's tantrum. Good question.

Here is a good question posed by an Urban Baby reader: How long did it take you to lose the baby fat? Unfortunately, my scale is broken but last time I checked I was 20 pounds away from my pre-pregnancy weight. I gained 50 pounds total. With Ari, I also gained close to 50 pounds and bounced back a year later. It's just not happening this time around...

Roxanne Hack over at OC Moms blog bemoans the misinformation surrounding pregnancy online.

This is disturbing: The Bush Administration is drafting regulation that contains such a strict definition for when pregnancy begins that it could potentially ban birth control pills and the IUD device, according to the Wall Street Journal. Because birth control prevents fertilized eggs from implanting in the uterus, the regulation considers this destroying "the life of a human being." Thanks to the Motherhood for the tip!

Via Mombian: Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick just signed a repeal of a 1913 law prohibiting out-of-state couples from marrying in the state if their home states forbid those unions. Basically, out-of-state gay couples may marry in Massachusetts.

Thanks to Salon’s broadsheet, I began reading the comments to this Newsweek “My Turn,” by a woman who decided not to legally marry her life partner who proposed to her.

When I read the original piece, I thought nothing of it. In her column, Emeryville, Calif. writer Bonnie Eslinger, wrote she did not need a “piece of paper” to validate her relationship with partner Jeff. Here are the reasons she cited:

I don't need a white dress to feel pretty, and I have no desire to pretend I'm virginal. I don't need to have Jeff propose to me as if he's chosen me. I don't need a ring as a daily reminder to myself or others that I am loved. And I don't need Jeff to say publicly that he loves me, because he says it privately, not just in words but in daily actions.

Our married friends say you can make a wedding—and a marriage—what you want, but that is not true. It's a specific institution with defining principles and values. If it weren't, there wouldn't be so-called marriage-protection laws in the majority of this country's states.

And for me, that's the bottom line when I consider cashing in on all the benefits our heterosexual relationship is entitled to. My gay friends can't do that. I don't want to send a message to anyone, including my daughter—who may someday choose a same-sex life partner—that the value of her relationships can be determined by law and the affirmation of others.

Jeff and Bonnie plan to have a commitment ceremony without clergy or the state. The reason she wrote this piece for Newsweek -- at least this is my interpretation -- is because she hopes that family will show up to the commitment ceremony; that she is tired of nosy questions such as, “When are you going to get married?” -- which, BTW, should be filed away with the annoying “When are you going to have a baby?” -- or, the insinuation that her relationship is less “real” because they are not legally married.

My husband and I did go the legal route, although no one except the judge and a security guard and clerk who acted like our witnesses actually saw it. We decided to get the "piece of paper" because my husband needed health benefits from me and we wanted to legally protect the children we planned to have. I do think there are financial benefits to marriage especially if you start out young and broke like us.

But we also had  a non-legal and non-denominational commitment ceremony in El Salvador, which was met with skepticism by especially older family members. DH’s grandmother refused to show up because “it doesn’t mean anything.” My grandmother almost did not go because there was no priest at the wedding. At the end of the ceremony, which was marked by a bonfire at the beach and the writing of our own vows, she told me it was the most beautiful ceremony she had ever witnessed. There you go.