I was outraged when Dharun Ravi was convicted in bullying Tyler Clementi, who committed suicide. Yes, it was invasion of privacy, a very stupid thing that Ravi did. But to be treated as a criminal? After watching his interview on 20/20, I am more convinced that he did not intend maliciousness toward Clementi. He never broadcast any sex tape on the internet as was alleged in the media when the case first came out. He sent an e-mail apologizing to Clementi and wanted to stay as his roommate. This does not seem like an action of an anti-gay person.

Unfortunately, Clementi probably never read the e-mail. This is an example of how new technology allowing people to communicate without talking to each other actually hurt. Both Ravi and Clementi read each other's tweets. But they hardly talked to each other, even after the incidence had occurred. If they had just talk instead of looking at tweets and sending e-mail, maybe this tragedy would have been avoided.

What Ravi did what stupid. But what 18 year old does not do stupid things? I doubt it that Clementi killed himself over this. It was reported in 20/20 that he was depressed before this. There was also a note that was found. Was it a suicide note? Would it help to understand his state of mind? That was not possible because the prosecution did not give it to the defense. That was one possible area of appeal.

What about the 30 year old that was Clementi's partner. He was shielded by the prosecution for his identity. I don't think that a 30 year old who had sex with an 18 year old should be excluded in the discussion of the suicide. Was Clementi more depressed because this older man had used him and then dumped him? I don't know but if a 30 year man had sex with an 18 year old woman and then the woman committed suicide shortly after, I am sure everybody, including the woman's parents, would find him very creepy.

I had wondered why Ravi did not take the plead deal where he would get probation and community service but no jail time. Turns out he would have to admit that he did all these because he was anti-gay. Ravi would rather take the chance with jail time than admit something that is not true. I don't know if that was a smart thing to do, but now I certainly respect his decision.

Couple of comments on the NFL. I don't understand why Denver needs to trade Tebow. Sure Manning is the starter but he is old and just came off an almost career ending injury. How can they be sure that he can even finish the next season? Sure, Tebow is not a good starting qb yet but he is young and can learn under Manning and get better. Denver got a 4th and a 6th round draft choice for Tebow. But they drafted Tebow in the FIRST round! So after starting for most of the season plus winning one playoff game, Tebow's value is much lower than 2 years ago? Plus God is not going to forgive them for this. This may be the curse of the Broncos!

The big suspension of the Saints head coach and former assistant is just one publicity stunt for the NFL. This is a league that glorifies violence. If not for that violence there would be a lot less fans who would watch the games. I think there must be some understanding among the players, coaches and league that this type of bounty hunting is tolerated to a certain degree. I mean there are a lot of switching teams among players in this league. Wouldn't something like that be common knowledge? I think once it was exposed, the league had to clear its image of caring for the safety of the players and so it had to come down hard on the Saints. My question is: Are there other teams with the same policies? And did the league knew about these type of things before this revelation? Also for the fans who criticize the Saints, are you not a little hypocritical?

I read in the LA Times that Mary Brown, who is one of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit against Obamacare that has reached the Supreme Court, has just filed for bankruptcy. Among the debts that she and her husband owe are thousands of dollars in medical bills. She is one of three individuals that conservatives put out as Americans who belief that the health care law is unconstitutional. Whether the law is unconstitutional or not will be ruled by the Supreme Court soon. Meanwhile ironically, she is an example of why a mandate is necessary.

There are many flaws in the new law but it was the only law that could have passed two years ago. The law does not offer much control regarding skyrocketing cost of health care. The insurance companies still do not have much competition, can continue to raise prices and rake in huge profits. Sure, they are being forced to take in people with preexisting conditions, cover young adults up to 26 years old under the parents' plan and may have to pay for contraceptives. But the insurance companies will get lot more clients under the law and let face it, contraceptives will decrease pregnancies and pregnancies would cost insurance companies a lot more money than contraceptives.

The polls show that most people don't think the law is a good idea. One reason for that is that the majority of people HAVE insurance. Many of them get the insurance from their job and so they are afraid of any change. But anyone can lose their job or get a catastrophic illness and then suddenly they will feel different about the law. If you lose your job and have a preexisting condition, insurance companies will not take you. Many people can't leave jobs they hate because they or their spouses are sick and can't afford to lose the insurance. But of course in order for people with preexisting conditions be guaranteed coverage, everybody has to be in the risk pool. Otherwise, nobody would buy insurance until he is sick!

Mary Brown believes it is her right to decide whether she buys a product. But this is not a product of choice. We all are or will be consumer of health care unless we die suddenly without going to the hospital! Sixty billion dollars in health care cost were not paid by patients last year. Hospitals and doctors raise prices, when they can, on people who can paid. Thus the $10 aspirin the hospital charges. The government pays a big portion of the 60 billion now. So it is not a free lunch for taxpayers. Mary Brown will probably add to that uncompensated care amount with her bankruptcy.

One more thought on this case before the Supreme Court. I am sure the outcome will ride on Anthony Kennedy's decision. So there is a good chance the law will be overturned regardless of its merit. The other 8 judges will be split 4-4, I am sure. This is all so partisan as are so many things in our country today. The take I have is this: Whatever side wins in the Supreme Court may well lose in the presidential election. Which ever side loses will be so angry that they will come out in force to try to elect their candidate in November because they believe the Court is stacked against them and they want their presidential candidate be able to nominate the next justice.