Month: October 2023

The Wholly Ethical “Cancellation” Of Ryna Workman

/ Jack Marshall / 6 Comments

Many NYU law students are indignant and outraged that Chicago-based super-firm Winston & Strawn has withdrawn its offer of employment to Ryna Workman. As president of NYU Law’s Student Bar Association, Workman issued a statement stating that “Israel bears full responsibility” for the long-planned terrorist attacks that left more than 1,300 Israeli citizens dead, including at least 30 Americans.

The law firm had every right and many valid reasons to reconsider its offer to Workman, who had worked at Winston & Strawn as a summer associate. In a statement, the firm said her comments “profoundly conflict” with the firm’s “values.” Yes, that, and there was also a substantial likelihood that having a terrorism-celebrating associate would cost the firm clients as well as risking tension among other firm lawyers. I would add that as a potential client, I would question the judgment of any law firm that would hire someone who showed such a reckless disregard for history, facts, and the impact of inflammatory rhetoric.

Like demented lemmings, other anti-Semites, race-baiters and critical thought-deprived NYU students issued a letter supporting Workman and condemning Winston & Strawn. The firm’s decision is an instance of the “systemic, concentrated violence” Workman has experienced since issuing her anti-Israel screed, the letter claims. That’s novel: deciding not to hire someone is “violence”! The letter’s signatories, including the Black Allied Law Students Association and the Women of Color Collective, declare that NYU is complicit “in the abuses of the Israeli government,” and condemns “the broader NYU administration for not protecting Ryna as a student and important member of our community.” How exactly can any school protect a loud-mouthed student from the consequences of her own foolishness? Oh never mind: people who reason like Ryna and her fans are always victims, and nothing is ever their fault. This is also a good reason not to hire her….or her defenders.

Continue reading →

Landscaper Ethics: Now THIS Is Contrived Ignorance…

/ Jack Marshall / 5 Comments

I know this is a ridiculous story, but I need a break from the Israel-Hamas Ethics Train Wreck…

In China Grove, N.C., a landscaper encountering a dead body where he was supposed to be mowing, just mowed around the body. 34-year-old Robert Owen, deceased, was dumped on the grounds of an abandoned house, and police are now investigating.

The news media seems to be accepting the excuse given by the landscaper that he thought the body was a dummy left in the field as a Halloween gag. “Don’t know how you can do that,” Owens’ sister, Haley Shue, told reporters. “Mow right beside someone and assume that they’re Halloween decorations at a house no one lives at?” I concur, Haley, particularly since the body was spotted on October 11, almost three weeks before Halloween.

Continue reading →

Unethical Quote Of The Week: “Squad” Member Cori Bush (D-Mo.)

/ Jack Marshall / 30 Comments

“I am grieving for every Palestinian, Israeli, and American life lost to this violence, and my heart breaks for all those who will be forever traumatized because of it. War and retaliatory violence doesn’t achieve accountability or justice; it only leads to more death and human suffering.Today I am introducing the Ceasefire Now Resolution, vital legislation that calls for de-escalation and an immediate ceasefire in Israel and Occupied Palestine, and for humanitarian assistance to urgently be delivered to the 2.2 million people under siege and trapped in Gaza. The United States bears a unique responsibility to exhaust every diplomatic tool at our disposal to prevent mass atrocities and save lives. We can’t bomb our way to peace, equality, and freedom. With thousands of lives lost and millions more at stake, we need a ceasefire now.”

—Rep. Cori Bush (D-Mo.), idiot.

To be fair, I could have found equally fatuous and ethically inert quotes from any of the anti-Semitic, intellectually vapid and ethically-challenged “Squad” members, but all indications have been that Bush is the most afflicted by the Dunning-Krueger Effect of them all, even more than Rep. Bowman of “I thought that pulling a fire alarm would open the door. Who wouldn’t? What’s the big deal?” fame, and the ridiculous AOC. Moreover, the offensive, dishonest and irresponsible statement by Bush came as she introduced an offensive, dishonest and irresponsible resolution urging the Biden Administration to push for a “ceasefire” because the October 7 Hamas sneak attack on Israel civilians was just “armed violence” (not terrorism), ‘American hostages? What American hostages?’, and “the targeting of civilians, no matter their faith or ethnicity, is a violation of international humanitarian law.”

Of course, Israel is not targeting civilians; Hamas, like the evil terrorist organization it is, is using civilians as human shields and hoping for mass civilian casualties to wield as a propaganda tool against Israel. Like so, so many on the Left for too many decades to tote up, Bush, “The Squad” and their ilk don’t get that “war” thingy.

Continue reading →

I’m Shocked…SHOCKED!… To Learn That DEI Policies Harm Black And Hispanic Students!

/ Jack Marshall / 11 Comments

Back when the Great Stupid was really picking up steam in 2020, the San Diego Unified School District (SDUSD), the second largest school district in California with over 106,000 students, announced that it would be overhauling how students will be evaluated as part of a larger “a larger effort to combat racism.” The school board voted unanimously to eliminate yearly grade averages. Meeting deadlines for assignments and classroom behavior would not affect academic grades. The district decided to de-emphasize discipline and penalties for cheating.

This crack-brain approach to education, essentially rejecting everything that had been learned over centuries about how students learn, was justified as way to eliminate the accumulated deficits of “systemic racism.” Soon “Diversity Equity Inclusion” budgets exploded and almost every school system jumped on board the latest fad. This was reparations, not education; no respectable research supported the theory that holding minority kids to lesser standards would help them succeed, but never mind: Fact Don’t Matter to ideologues and race-hustlers.

Now come Jay P. Greene and Madison Marino of the Heritage Foundation’s Center on Education Policy with a study suggesting that black and Hispanic students had “significantly greater learning loss during the pandemic in the school guided by diversity officers than those schooled in districts without one.” Minority students lost more ground than their white classmates, especially in math, the researchers found. “Racial achievement gaps went from bad to worse in these districts.” Of course they did: having an official directing policy who insists that black and Hispanic students not be held to the same standards of behavior or academic achievement as other students—must combat that structural racism!—was guaranteed to undermine minority student success.

The news gets worse: nearly half of the school districts with at least 15,000 students employ a chief diversity or equity officer, and the number is 89% for districts with more than 100,000 students, the study found.

Continue reading →

Comment Of The Day (1): “Perplexed Ethics Thoughts On This Video…”

/ Jack Marshall / 6 Comments

Michael R authored the first of three Comments of the Day on this disturbing video, and I could easily add a few more: it was a terrific thread, and one that few other sites around the web could produce (if I do say so myself).

I must admit, as I have been featuring posts about my biases of late, that I have a massive bias against anyone who behaves like the woman above no matter what the provocation. It was suggested in the comments to the original post that this was staged. I considered that, and maybe it was, but in the end the ethics issues remain the same. Her conduct is still an accurate presentation of the reaction of the entire Woke World mob to one imagined offense after another, from Donald Trump’s election and Hillary’s defeat, to the replacement of swing vote Anthony Kennedy on the Supreme Court with Bret Kavanaugh, to the long-deserved reversal of Roe v. Wade and the rejection of affirmative action as the unconstitutional discrimination it always was. It is all hate, intolerance and emotional fury now, even from the office that is supposed to represent and serve us all….

That was as close to a Presidential primal scream as we are ever likely to hear. (Nope, I’m not letting that go. I will never let that go, and I will never forgive it.)

Here is Michael R’s Comment of the Day on the post, “Perplexed Ethics Thoughts On This Video…”

***

This seems like the perfectly reasonable result of college campus culture from the last 30 years now demanding that society become a college campus. How many videos can you find of conservative speakers being shouted down by the dominant culture (the ‘tolerant people’) on college campuses? In how many cases was this tolerated by the administration, the police, the government?

After being trained by ‘higher education’ for decades that the way to deal with opinions that differ from the official orthodoxy is to shout them down, use bullhorns, and scream at them, why would you expect this not to happen?

This isn’t the only video of a woman doing this; it seems fairly common.

Here is how I see liberals dealing with heretical ideas in today’s society:

Continue reading →

The President Going To Israel Isn’t A “Remarkable Gamble”—It’s Stupid, Desperate, Irresponsible And Unethical

/ Jack Marshall / 13 Comments

According to the front page of the New York Times, President Biden is taking the trip this week “to show unwavering support for Israel — after what officials say was the deadliest day in its history — and to speak with the country’s leaders about several urgent issues, including hostages held by Hamas and humanitarian aid to Palestinians in Gaza.” The Times calls it “a remarkable gamble,” but one should gamble, if at all, only when the potential reward is somewhere close to the anticipated risks, and sufficiently beneficial. There is no rational calculation that makes this absurdly risky journey a justifiable gamble by that definition. The President of the United States is risking the stability and welfare of the nation he was elected to lead to “show support”? Joe Biden can show sufficient support for Israel from the safety of a padded room at the White House.

The trip can only be explained as a Barn Door Fallacy operation, like the reported temporary retraction of the unfrozen Iranian funds that may well have given Iran the encouragement it needed to back the deadly Hamas attack. The President is grandstanding to avoid Democratic Party accountability after that botch before the attack, and for the disgusting, “let’s look at the context,” pro-terrorism and anti-Semitic response of so many Democratic supporters after it, notably on college campuses. It is a purely political move, and not even a smart one even from that cynical perspective.

Making the visit as futile as it is reckless is the undeniable fact that the Israeli government is not going to back away from its pledge to crush Hamas, with all the carnage in Gaza that objective implies. So Joe is putting himself in harm’s way, risking the horror of a Kamala Harris Presidency, to be able to tell Donald Trump that “at least he tried” in the debates? Oh, good plan.

Moron.

President Bush’s surprise 2003 Thanksgiving appearance in Iraq was also irresponsible grandstanding, but at least he was showing symbolic support for the U.S. troops he sent into harm’s way. Biden has no such justification for taking this risk. All I can conclude is that the internal polling at the White House regarding Joe’s popularity is so bad that Biden aides decided to appeal to his macho fantasies and convince our addled POTUS that the trip makes sense. And at least Bush didn’t announce the trip in advance, as Biden has. Brilliant.

The Israeli visit shows warped values, priorities and logic at the very top of our government. I would say that at least it’s useful information, but we already knew that about Joe and his party.

Ethics Culture Notes

/ Jack Marshall / 2 Comments

Warning: the following range from depressing to disturbing…

1. I just listened to a slice of an old comedy routine from the early 60’s. The comic was Jack Carter (yechh!) and he was appearing on the Ed Sullivan Show, which was considered must-watch Sunday evening family fare for decades. Carter began by riffing on how much traveling stone-faced Ed did, and said, “Ed even did a special show in Africa, but you’ll never see it. They ate the camera man!” And this was in the middle of the civil rights movement, live, coast-to-coast. I think it’s fair to say that there has been quite a bit of progress in racial attitudes in the past 60 years, no matter what the race-hucksters would have America believe.

2. Wait…how did the Left manage to get so completely turned around on women’s rights? That was fast. After the Wisconsin Assembly passed transgender girls high school sports ban—almost certainly headed for a veto by the state’s woke governor—Democratic Assemblyman Dave Considine argued that parents concerned that their daughters could lose scholarships or a place on a sports team in college because of competition from biological males are being “selfish.” His message for the girls: If the transitioning males who are bigger, taller and stronger than you are winning, you just “need to work harder.” Other Democratic colleagues of this idiot compared banning biological males from girls’ sports to racial segregation.

Continue reading →

Ethics Hero Edward Blum Exposes BigLaw Ethics Dunces [Corrected]

/ Jack Marshall / 8 Comments

[I had a major mix-up with this post, with a discarded draft going live by accident. My fault: I was rushing. It’s right now, I think…]

The American Alliance for Equal Rights (AAER) is the group founded and run by conservative activist Edward Blum, now reviled by fans of “good discrimination”—you know, the kind that targets whites and Assians—because its efforts helped spark the Supreme Court to (finally) overturn affirmative action policies at colleges and universities. In August the group filed lawsuits against Perkins Coie and Morrison & Foerster, both major law firms, alleging that the law firms’ minority fellowships, which disqualify candidates who don’t have the right skin color, infringe on the Civil Rights Act of 1866 provision that forbids racial discrimination in contracts

“Excluding students from these esteemed fellowships because they are the wrong race is unfair, polarizing and illegal,” Blum told the news media. “Law firms that have racially exclusive programs should immediately make them available to all applicants, regardless of their race.”

Seattle-based Perkins Coie, with more than 1,200 attorneys in the United States and Asia, funded fellowships for first- and second-year law students who must be “of color,” LGBTQ+ in sexual orientation, or disabled. The first-year student program dated from 1991, and was supposed to create “legal communities that accurately reflect the rich diversity of our communities,” according to the firm’s website. Perkins added the second-year student fellowship program in 2020. The complaint argued, “Between two heterosexual, non-disabled applicants — one Black and one white — the latter cannot apply based solely on his race,” which violates Section 1981 of the Civil Rights Act of 1866.

Sure sounds like discrimination to me!

Continue reading →

ProPublica (aka. Progressives) Believe That Foster Parents Should Not Be Able To Legally Intervene To Stop Birth Parents From Regaining Custody Of Children Removed From Their Care. I Don’t.

/ Jack Marshall / 17 Comments

I’ll go farther than that. I don’t believe that parents who have had children removed from their care for neglect and being unfit parents should ever be allowed to regain custody, if the original removal was justified.

To consider and discuss the ethical issue, read this article, ProPublica’s “When Foster Parents Don’t Want to Give Back the Baby: In many states, adoption lawyers are pushing a new legal strategy that forces biological parents to compete for custody of their children.” It’s too long and detailed for me to summarize fairly, and make no mistake, it’s an excellent overview of the ethical dilemmas and conflicts involved even if the author’s bias is clear.

The author focuses on a particular conflict between birth parents and foster parents in Colorado while also revealing the different approaches taken by various states. I learned a lot: for example, having adopted our son Grant as an infant in Russia in 1995, I exhaled a long “whew!” after reading this:

“…It has become harder and harder to adopt a child, especially an infant, in the United States. Adoptions from abroad plummeted from 23,000 in 2004 to 1,500 last year, largely owing to stricter policies in Asia and elsewhere, and to a 2008 Hague Convention treaty designed to encourage adoptions within the country of origin and to reduce child trafficking. Domestically, as the stigma of single motherhood continues to wane, fewer young moms are voluntarily giving up their babies, and private adoption has, as a result, turned into an expensive waiting game. Fostering to adopt is now Plan C, but it, too, can be a long process, because the law requires that nearly all birth parents be given a chance before their rights are terminated. Intervening has emerged as a way for aspiring adopters to move things along and have more of a say in whether the birth family should be reunified.”

The article attempts to focus on what the author apparently believes is an especially sympathetic couple (above) trying to regain custody of a child placed in a foster home:

Continue reading →

Comment Of The Day: “Abortion Confusion Ethics: What Should We Call This?”

/ Jack Marshall / 4 Comments

This story, which I was hoping would spark more discussion here than it has so far, would be an excellent starting point for a question in a presidential candidates debate, or indeed any debate regarding the proper status of abortion in the law and our societal ethics. Right now, the negligent killing of two fertilized eggs that a married couple regarded, with considerable justification, as “their babies” is treated with less seriousness than if someone had murdered the family’s puppy. What is a fertilized egg, a zygote, a fetus, an embryo, and a newborn baby? It can’t possibly be that their true nature as human beings (or not) with the right to be protected (or not) under the law is magically altered according to what the mother chooses to believe, or what a legislature decrees…can it?

Here is James Hodgson’s Comment of the Day on the post, “Abortion Confusion Ethics: What Should We Call This?”:

***

Negligent homicide by the staff, and strict financial liability for the corporation, are evident here, in my view. I know this sounds harsh to some, but so is the killing of an unborn child.

Over the past decade, my wife and I caught several errors in prescription fulfillment in our own meager regimes of pharmaceuticals. This happened at three of our previous insurance-preferred pharmacies. It is also reported anecdotally by a number of people I know.

Fortunately for us, we detected the errors before taking any wrongly prescribed drugs, and we learned to double-check everything, every time. (These errors also gave us more motivation to improve our nutrition and fitness in order to escape prescription drugs altogether.)

Continue reading →