Last week’s forum was the deadest ever, so I’m hoping that injecting some holiday cheer into this one will spark more dialogue. After all, if the wind, a lamb, a shepherd boy, a mighty king and people everywhere can have a productive conversation, Ethics Alarms readers should be able to bring some Goodness and Light too.
As some inspiration, I’m reposting below the Ethics Alarms entry about the origins of my favorite of the modern—“modern” as in “post World War II”—Christmas songs, first sung by my favorite Christmas minstrel.
***
Bing Crosby memorably introduced this last of the popular Christmas songs to have a religious theme to most Americans in 1963, on this live broadcast of “The Hollywood Palace.” It was written in October of 1962 during the Cuban Missile Crisis, by a married songwriting team that wondered at the time if it would be the last thing they ever did.
Noel Regney, who wrote the lyrics, was born in France and had studied music at the Strasbourg Conservatory and at the Conservatoire National de Paris. When France was overwhelmed by Hitler’s troops in 1940, he was conscripted into the German army. As a Nazi soldier, Noel secretly joined the French underground and served as a spy, passing information along to the resistance. Once he led German soldiers into a trap where they were massacred by French fighters who cut them down in a crossfire. He was shot too, but survived.
After that traumatic encounter, Regney deserted and worked with the French underground until the end of the war.
In 1952, Noel Regney moved to Manhattan and began composing music for many early TV shows as well as commercial jingles. He also translated the 1963 hit “Dominique,” performed by the “The Singing Nun,” into English. Regney married pianist Gloria Shayne, who was a pianist and composer herself. She also authored some popular songs recorded by well-known singers in the Sixties, including James Darren’s “Goodbye Cruel World (I’m off to join the circus),” “The Men in My Little Girl’s Life,” a hit for Mike Douglas, and “Almost There,” one of Andy Williams’ best-selling recordings. He sang it in his one movie, a romantic comedy in which he was teamed with Robert Goulet. (Do not watch it.)
When Noel and Gloria collaborated, she wrote the lyrics and Noel wrote the melody. “Do You Hear What I Hear?” was the lone exception. (Quite a few distinguished song composers have dabbled in lyric writing. “The Sound of Music” is regarded by some as a holiday movie: the songs written for the film adaptation have music and lyrics by Richard Rodgers, as Oscar Hammerstein was deceased. He was missed…)
In October of 1962, as the stand-off between the Soviet Union and the United States had the world fearing nuclear war, a record producer asked Noel to write a holiday song. The war veteran wrote an urgent prayer for peace, and asked Gloria to write the music to accompany his words.
Later describing the process involved in writing the song together, Gloria told an interviewer that when they tried to sing their new creation she and Noel broke down weeping.
There have been over close to 200 versions of “Do You Hear What I Hear?” and more covers are recorded every year. Noel Regney’s personal favorite was a recording by, speak of the Devil, Robert Goulet, who shouted out the line, “Pray for peace, people, everywhere.” But, as usual, it was Bing’s version that became the standard, selling over a million copies. I’m a lifetime Crosby fan and this is my my favorite recording by Bing.
My parents put it in my Christmas stocking on Christmas morning, 1963. I played it all day.
Merry Christmas, everybody.
Ethics Alarms 
Given that our last two Presidents prove that the US has devolved into a kakistocracy.
Here is a multi-part question. Who do you want as our next President and why?
Part A. Answers are restricted to currently declared candidates and none of the above is not an option.
Part B. Answers are restricted to only meeting constitutional requirements.
Part C. List any national-level elected officials that you admire max 5.
This should be good for a few replies.
Isn’t your inquiry political and not really about ethics?
Steve,
In an earlier post of Jack’s, he was commenting on Nikki Haley’s debate performance and and her candidacy he had an issue with her ethics. It prompted me to raise the question I posed today. As Michelle K states below is there an ethical individual who could also govern? To expand on that are unethical individuals drawn to elected office or does the position require people to be unethical?
I’m not sure there is an ethical pick in the bunch. In fact, I’m sure there isn’t.
The bigger question is if it’s ethical to vote for someone you know isn’t a good choice, and won’t be good for the country, simply because they’re on the team you’re on generally.
“The bigger question is if it’s ethical to vote for someone you know isn’t a good choice, and won’t be good for the country, simply because they’re on the team you’re on generally.”
You mean like Michelle Obama, who will be inserted as the dem candidate at a well-orchestrated moment.
It is not a conspiracy theory if it’s true.
I’m wondering if it’s ethical to vote for someone you are certain won’t win. If I like a 3rd party candidate I intend to vote for them, even if I “throw my vote away”. In the past I’ve voted both sides, but I’m currently finding them both toxic and have a hard time casting a vote at all.
I regularly do so, particularly because the political landscape of my state ensures the desired party will always win the electoral votes no matter my selection.
If you don’t like that presidents never campaign in/to your non-battleground state, you might consider voting the other way to even the playing field.
If I lived in Colorado, Philadelphia, or Florida… Not so much.
Unethical fish in a barrel:
https://nypost.com/2023/12/13/news/california-preschool-teacher-fired-after-applying-mood-calming-patches-to-students-without-consent/
-Jut
HOLY CRAP!
Giving mood altering chemicals to children without the knowledge or consent of the parents? I think there is a very, very long prison sentence in store for that preschool teacher.
How about brief discussion regarding the ethical considerations of these two STARKLY differing opinions from the political left about the Biden Impeachment Inquiry…
First we have the opinion of a critically thinking classic liberal Democrat.
Second we have the opinion of a 21st century progressive aka an emotional troglodyte.
Constitutionally speaking, I’m not too sure that the Republicans will be able to come up with an offense that passes constitutional muster to actually impeach the sitting President Biden.
An ethics riddle:
My son came across a little known children’s book, written in the 60’s by a now long-dead (and little known) author, and the book has been out of print for some time. Our grandkids love it, so son tried to find a copy. He learned that a number of people remember it fondly, and secondary market prices have pushed the value to sometimes as much as $400. There is a copy or two in the PINES library system.
The libraries are apparently unaware of this.
What is the path for someone to take that would ensure the most ethical outcome for the book? Some, such as keeping the book and paying a nominal “lost book” fee are obviously wrong. How about photocopying one? Alerting the library (would some employee “lose” it, themselves?) so they can sell it for additional funds? Or……..?
Make the Library aware of the value and check out and return the book like you would any other book. You could also offer to purchase it.
Either of those could carry the same risk of the book being “lost” or “disappeared” by dishonest library staff. I think the one copy in circulation in the regional system right now is from a small south Georgia town (son is in the current request loop). May be a single librarian, or even if not, whomever is contacted may not be trustworthy. I think I’ll suggest he check with someone in our larger system here, and see if they have suggestions. Maybe there’s an established way the discovery of rare books is handled.
Is there an ethical duty to do what you can to protect even a minor cultural artifact?
What book?
jvb
Sorry, I’d rather not say. That could only increase the risk of the books disappearing. Things on the internet don’t exactly stay confidential.
I like this Christmas song. I have read it’s based off actual events.
Open Forum Question:
I’d don’t get how Mayor Michelle Wu’s and the City of Boston’s conduct in sponsoring an official event (party) and promoting it through official channels (and paying for it with public funds and holding it on public property?) doesn’t violate the Equal Protection clause if the official invitation excludes otherwise qualified persons solely on the basis of race or color. If a bunch of Electeds of Color, or Electeds of Non-Color for that matter, want to have a get-together at the local tavern on their own tab, fine. But aren’t we talking about state action here? Is Mayor Wu’s action merely ethically offensive or does it also violate the Constitution?
Curt,
The stupid part of this fiasco was of DosSantos apology which confirmed that is was intended to be racially discriminatory. When the email went out there was no mention that is was for “electeds of color” only . She should have just said that the party invitation was from the group “Electeds of Color” for all members of the council which was why everyone got one.
Therefore, from my perspective Mayor Wu is unethical for hiring a total dunce.
The song of the day reminds me of one of the most enduring memories of my first teaching job. It was at a very small college in a very small town. Everyone went to everything on campus–guest speakers, athletic events, concerts, plays, whatever–in part because there wasn’t much else to do.
My department chair, a music prof, put together a small pep band that played at some basketball games. Once, when the refs made a particularly bad call (at least in the eyes of the home team supporters), the band launched into a brief rendition of “Three Blind Mice.” The refs got really irate and declared, loudly enough enough that everyone in the gym could hear, that if that happened again, they’d call a technical foul against the home team. (Whether they had the right to do that, I don’t know.)
Anyway, I was sitting only a few feet from the band. My colleague looked suitably chastened, and said something to the band. So the next time a call went against the home team, they played… well, you’ve guessed already. The only time I’ve ever seen a pep band get a standing ovation.
GOOGLE search results for FB DIE Chief Furlow-Smiles embezzlement.
Any conspicuously absent prominent media?
PWS
I googled just “Furlow-Smiles” and the top links that I got were (in order): CNBC, CNN, Fox, BET, Business Insider, Daily Mail, Atlanta Journal-Constitution. All reporting straightforwardly on her pleading guilty to fraud.
But no NBC, ABC, CBS, WaPo, NYT, MSNBC, Salon, Rolling Stone, Bloomberg, AXIOS, Mother Jones, SLATE, HuffPo, TIME, AP, VOX, etc.
PWS
One of my favorite Christmas songs and thank you for sharing it and it’s story with us. The last verse is my favorite and I, along with it, pray for peace for people everywhere. Peace is one of the greatest gifts in all the world.
Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPad
I’d like to draw some attention to some Canadian Content, which is…. something.
Jessica McGaw and Sobeys Capital Incorporated
Jessica McGaw is asserting that she was wrongfully dismissed from her position at Sobeys, which is a Canadian grocery chain. During the trial, while a witness was on stand, the lawyers for the defense brought up an image of Charles Manson and made disparaging remarks and comparisons between the looks of the plaintiff’s witness and the serial killer. This is not great, but it happened in full view of the jury.
A jurist informed the court that this had happened, counsel admitted to it, but said that… And this is the kicker: They were going to use the image and comparison as part of their case, and so the judge should consider litigation privilege. The court, having none of this, gave Sobeys a choice: This was obviously inappropriate and tainted the jury, so they were offered a bench trial. The defense, as is their right, insisted on a jury trial… But the jury was tainted, so the court declared a mistrial.
[7] While this witness was on the stand, counsel for the Plaintiff searched called up on their computer images of Charles Manson and then huddled together and laughed between themselves. Evidently, counsel were of the view the witness bore some resemblance to the notorious cult leader who was imprisoned for murder and conspiracy to commit murder, having coerced his followers to kill a number of people.
[8] This was done within a direct sightline of the jury box. It was witnessed by a juror who disclosed it at the first opportunity when it could be reported in a confidential way. The juror indicated he found the behaviour to be very inappropriate and he wanted it brought to my attention.
[21] Counsel now submits that the image of Charles Manson on his computer was subject to litigation privilege, and it was part of the Plaintiff’s overall litigation strategy. Counsel submits that the witness’ appearance was viewed negatively by his co-workers and that his demeanour was considered to be “weird”. He asserts that it was his intention to cross-examine the witness and depending on the evidence elicited, use the image of Charles Manson as part of his litigation strategy.
[22] This submission is of great concern. It confirms counsel’s intention to discredit the witness before the jury by inviting it to make an adverse inference about his credibility solely based on his appearance; likening it to a known and convicted serial killer. This is absolutely impermissible cross-examination. It plays into stereotypes based only on appearance. It would not have been allowed if counsel had pursued this line of questioning.
During that declaration, the court alluded to the parties putting forward submissions on costs. The defense took that as a statement of bias on the part of the court and attempted to have the judge removed from the costs decisions. The court, having none of this, ruled against their motion, and later awarded costs to the plaintiff from the lawyers directly.
https://kdvr.com/news/local/on-rtd-high-schooler-used-to-dodging-fentanyl-chaos/
“Quit using fentanyl on the train”. This article really shocked me so I did a bit of research. Turns out you can smoke fentanyl and the City of Denver even has a safety paper assuring you that second hand fentanyl smoke won’t kill you. How assuring is that!? I knew it was a problem, not for me, but I have a soft spot for children and a lot of them use public transportation to go to school so I have a problem with smoking around kids.
Here’s a few thoughts for you.
“Over 156,000 people died from alcohol, drugs or suicide in 2019.”
“We are the most in-debt, obese, addicted and medicated adult cohort in U.S. history.” Brene Brown said that. I don’t think it’ll get better with all the enabling corporations and politicians do.
We, as a society have embraced the “seven deadly sins”. They are not even a blip on most people’s consciousness.
That same week my kid (he’s 13) and I were discussing the homeless because one was standing at the off ram exit to town. I said I wouldn’t want to live here if I was homeless, due to the climate. He said he’d prefer it because the tent cities are so dangerous and people get stabbed all the time. We then wondered if there would be a tent encampment where we live and decided that it likely wouldn’t happen. That said, the population of that town is roughly 3400 and there’s always a homeless person or two nowadays. I don’t think these things are being taken seriously enough. I also want to point out, in case you think it’s just because we’re close to a major city, we’re not. It’s 100 miles to a city of more than 20,000 people. The county has its own drug swat team thanks to meth. My question is how bad does it have to get before people demand that the government enforce its own laws? It’s not like you’re supposed to smoke on public busses. It’s already against the rules. You’re not supposed to live in a tent at the town park or on a sidewalk. There’s actually really good reasons for it too.
Even my libertarian streak isn’t happy about how it’s been. It definitely impacts others. In the cities it’s a public health issue, where I am addictions severely limit the workforce. Which is a huge problem. Places close, often because they don’t have the help to keep it open. You can’t even grow your economy if you don’t have reliable help to do it with and addicted people aren’t reliable.
Here is something worth commenting about.
Click to access gov.uscourts.txnd.383454.1.0_1.pdf
It does seem to me that the complaint alleged enoguh facts to get past a 12 6 (b) challenge.
We will see if X can put up, or must shut up.
An article by Jeff Jacoby that is worth commenting about.
https://groups.google.com/g/Talk.Politics.Guns/c/DVK7di5TfeY
I agree, property destruction is over the line. However a couple of factors make me feel more charitable to the Bostians. First, “civil disobedience” as we understand it today wasn’t a clearly defined concept back then. Second, the Tea Partiers didn’t hurt anyone, and the only thing destroyed besides the tea was a door lock, which I understand Sam Adam’s paid for.