Ethics Musings While Trying Keep My Mind Off The Red Sox-Yankee Game

Normally I’d be spending this time knocking out a post, but the Boston Red Sox are playing the Yankees, and they really, really need to win.  Typing while watching is hard because a) my netbook is literally falling apart b) Rugby, my ever-young Jack Russell Terrier, is on my lap, and c) as you might have noticed, I can’t type. So this is the equivalent of an ADS post. (I may have a bit of that problem, too.

  • The good news is that there is a school that cares this much about how its debate team does. The bad news is that everyone appears to have lost their mindseveryone appears to have lost their minds as well as their ethics alarms. A coach blames a 14-year-old for a debate loss because he’s friends with an opposing team member whose team used some of the same arguments the losing team used in practice. The 14-year-old  is then harassed  by some students, his mother freaks out, and now the former star debater is leaving the school and the school is being sued. Here’s what I don’t get: wouldn’t the opposing team using the same arguments the kid’s team used in practice be an advantage for the team that prepared for them? Anyway, who throws a debate?

Other than Marco Rubio, I mean…

  • Since they shouldn’t be running lotteries at all, this is at least a mitigation:  many states are moving to allow the winners of big lottery jackpots to stay anonymous. The lotteries want to  publicize winners—those big check photos!— to boost sales, but winners, many of whom are not used to managing money and come from poor families and communities, become instant targets  of people and organizations looking to relieve them of the burden of their windfall.  Arizona is bidding  to join at least nine other states with laws that let winners keep their names secret. Massachusetts, Minnesota and Oregon are considering such laws.

On the Dark Side, New Mexico’s Democratic Gov. Michelle Lujan killed  a similar measure  in the interests of “transparency.” Translation:  We don’t care about those poor suckers who happen to win, we care about getting all that lottery income so we don’t have to raise taxes on the middle class voters who matter.

  • Here is the price we pay for enabling  political  dynasties. Robert F. Kennedy (the son) is using his name and father’s cult to promote anti-vaccination craziness.  His is a deadly abuse of free speech. The Kennedys are the ultimate example of the progressive degeneration of talent over generations.

Well, the Red Sox lost, and discouragingly, too. Thanks for keeping me company.  I’ll have that hemlock now.

7 thoughts on “Ethics Musings While Trying Keep My Mind Off The Red Sox-Yankee Game

  1. Jack… we KNEW this season would have to be a step down from the last one. How could it not be? That was just about the best team ever put together.

    And it’s early in the season. And the Celtics and Bruins their playoff games (if you care about that).

    My point is, there’s no reason to fret just yet.

    • Oh, I’m not fretting. I just feel badly for the lads right now. When a good team plays absurdly badly for such a long stretch, a long winning streak is inevitable. But it has to be hell for Cora and the players who are struggling.

  2. The anti-vaccine nutcases really should take the time to learn the truth about the lack of correlation between autism and vaccination for common childhood diseases. I am old enough to remember the vast number of polio cases and the godsend that Dr. Jonas Salk’s development of an effective and safe vaccine was. They put their own children at risk as well as vast numbers of children who are unvaccinated.

    • …I still see this as a self solving dilemma. When large numbers of people start dying from diseases that are preventable, this problem corrects itself in two, no, three, ways.

      1. The example of people dying while the vaccinated are untouched is a powerful testimony
      2. The unvaccinated who survive will quite likely cease to be unvaccinated (at least the smart ones: Darwin applies)
      3. Those who advocate for anti-vax will be discredited for life, if not longer

      The prospect of all those deaths is horrible, but this is exactly like a meth addict: choices made have consequences, and once the result of a choice is clearly known (or at least knowable) then the natural consequences lead to death.

    • You aren’t going to make any inroads with the anti-vaccination people with logic like that. Most of them understand how vaccines work and they understand the benefits of vaccination. Look at who the anti-vaccination people are. This is an outgrowth of ‘special snowflake syndrome’ or ‘Triple S’. Vaccines do have side-effects. What are the long-term effects of more and more vaccinations at younger ages? We don’t know. But…if you can get everyone else to vaccinate their children and you don’t. you can get the benefits of herd immunity without any potential side effects (no matter how remote). This is similar to wanting a lot of illegal immigrants for cheap labor and complaining about how low wages are at the same time.

      Many news outlets have portrayed this as a religious issue, but very few religions have prohibitions against vaccination. The Church of Christ, Scientist is by far the largest. The rest are rather small, faith-healing Christian denominations. Even though some immunizations involve pig-derived gelatin, Islam and Orthodox Judaism allows it because research is underway to substitute that with other substances.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.