This sounds very awkward to me.
Generally accepted styles change over time and tastes vary. De gustibus non disputandum!
Let me preface this by saying that I’m going to screw this post up in any number of ways. Feel free to count them and inform me by e-mail.
I engaged in an ongoing war with my lawyer-superiors over this issue for several years. The rule as I learned it was that when naming items in a series, such as “lawyers, historical researchers, and their clients,” the comma before the article was essential to prevent some sort of inadvertent conflation of the last two items. The lawyers disagreed with me.
Then one day, the former Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs, Kevin Gover, wrote an article entitled, For want of a comma, a casino is lost. I felt vindicated, although I’m sure someone will take issue with my opinion.
(It’s worth noting that a certain former Governor of the state in question was only dimly aware of the fact that he even had such a thing as an American Indian tribe within his borders. His primary concern, I think, is the placement of commas after every three digits of a number.)
To the contrary, the Chicago Manual of Style calls for the serial comma. From the 13th edition:
I don’t think anybody was saying that Chicago Style is against the comma. In fact, it seems that AP is the only major stylebook against the use of a comma before the conjunction in a series. There must be another major style guide somewhere (OK, I guess the Little Brown Handbook has been mentioned, but I’ve never heard of it before today) which doesn’t use the final comma, but I’ve no idea which it is.
Y’know, I hate to sound nitpicky, but as long as we’re on this topic… I think that sentence demonstrates an extremely common misuse of the comma.
I usually don’t call attention to such things, but since we are talking about the proper usage of commas, I felt it would be appropriate. 
My vague memory from long ago (before a bunch of you were born) was that the “comma before ‘and’” was basically U.S. while omitting the comma was British (although there were Yanks who preferred to omit it).
My choice was easy. My instructor in sophomore year of high school (whom I really enjoyed) was pro comma and his boss, who taught me the next year, (but whom I did not like), preferred to omit it. Therefore, I always use it and hope that my prose passes before my junior year instructor frequently.
JThunder, what, the second comma? Yeah, I wasn’t paying attention.
jiHymas, yes that sounds awkward, but what does that have to do with the comma? It’s not like the comma makes a sound in the sentence.
AHunter3, look again at that example you cite. That is not the same usage. We’re talking about terminating commas in a list preceding the conjunction. That example is either offsetting the paragraph number or separating two independent clauses (see…, and note…)
I always thought that the comma before “and” was one of the primary distinctions between English and French, and one that I am perpetually forgetting.
If you’re curious, “Dédié à mes parents, Ayn Rand et Dieu” means the silly interpretation; the nonsilly interpretation (at least as far as grammar goes) is “Dédié à mes parents, à Ayn Rand et à Dieu,” repeating the preposition.
It’s the comma or lack thereof that we are discussing. If it makes no difference. then it is mere ornamentation and therefore no longer a matter of style, but just plain wrong.