Wow! This Story Is Embarrassing to SO Many People Who Deserved to Be Embarrassed!

An easy “Nelson.”

A British jury last week convicted Lydia Mugambe of forcing a young Ugandan woman to work as her slave after tricking her into coming to the U.K.

Mugambe, studying for a doctorate in law at the University of Oxford when she got into the slave business, is a high court judge in Uganda (DING!),a criminal tribunal judge at the United Nations (DING!), and previous Human Rights Fellow (DING!) at Columbia University (DINGDINGDINGDINGDING!—Is Columbia having a bad month or what?)

Mugambe’s passionate social justice activism for “gender-based justice” (DING!) previously earned her the People’s Choice Gavel Award from Women’s Link Worldwide (DING!). In 2022 Mugambe also won the Vera Chirwa Human Rights Award of the University of Pretoria, South Africa (of course DING!) , for her work to ensure gender-based justice in Africa.

Continue reading

Unethical Quote of the Month: “The Ethicist” (Kwame Anthony Appiah)

“We are, as I’ve argued before, entitled to a life informed by the fundamental facts about our existence. Even the painful ones? Perhaps especially those. This truth belongs to her.”

—New York Times advice columnist Kwame Anthony Appiah, aka. “The Ethicist” concluding his advice to the inquirer who asked, “My Adopted Cousin’s Biological Parents Were Siblings. Do I Tell Her?”

Kwame is pretty clearly the best of the various “experts” who have manned the long-time feature in the New York Times Magazine; at least he’s a real ethicist, a philosophy prof at NYU. (I say “manned” because the Times has never given the post of “The Ethicist” to a woman. Go figure…) Lately, however, I’ve been a bit worried about the guy, and wondering if “The Great Stupid” is getting to him. More answers like this one, and I’ll be tempted to dub him the “Un-Ethicist,” in honor of the old 7-Up campaign branding the soft-drink as the “Un-cola.”

I’m just going to focus on the quote above and not the whole column, because The Ethicist is stating an absolute principle that is absolute hooey. The inspiration for the edict “The truth belongs to her” was the usual participant in the column, “Name Withheld,” asking whether he or she, as the only living relative who knows the actual family origins of a cousin, (or as Kwame puts it, is “the sole custodian of an intimate truth concealed from the very person it concerns) should spill the rotten beans now, when they both are seniors.

Because the dark family secret can be nothing but disturbing or worse, I see no possible benefit to anyone by revealing it to the cousin now. She knows she was adopted, but she does not know that her biological parents were brother and sister—at least that’s what the inquirer’s now-deceased mother told her “in absolute confidence.” All records are sealed: there is no way for the “truth,” if it is the truth, to come out, as all involved except the adopted cousin are dead. The clueless cousin has a husband, children or grandchildren.

Even in his (as usual) prolix answer, The Ethicist struggles to find any real benefit to the inquirer revealing the secret. Any genetic abnormalities, from which the Clueless Cousin has apparently been spared, would now be detected with modern medical screening and are increasingly unlikely with succeeding generations. So he defaults to the “rule,” encomium, or whatever he thinks it is, that the cousin must have this depressing, disturbing and useless information because “this truth belongs to her.”

Continue reading

The Latest Disingenuous Excuse For Harris’s Defeat: “No Daylight”

Kamala Harris lost the election because she was an empty suit, DEI Vice-President who tried to fake her way to the finish line while running one of the most incompetent campaigns in American Presidential history. There’s no mystery. It didn’t help that she was inextricably linked to the worst administration ever, slowly being revealed as a four year fraud on the American public. What’s the mystery? The constant, futile and insulting efforts we keep hearing by apologists for the Harris debacle are continuations of the denial and the “it isn’t what it is” gaslighting that has been the standard operating procedure for the Axis of Unethical Conduct since 2016.

Now comes Amie Parnes at The Hill to explain the real reason the Worst Presidential Candidate Ever lost to Donald Trump. President Biden kept insisting that “there be no daylight” between the policies of his adminsitration and what Harris advocated on the stump, in interviews, and in the statments of her surrogates: “Almost everywhere she went, Harris walked among former Biden aides who sought to defend his presidency. Her campaign was run by a former White House deputy chief of staff…and a phalanx of department heads who had served Biden until the previous month.”

Continue reading

Ethics Movie: “The Company You Keep”

2012’s “The Company You Keep” was the last film directed by Robert Redford, which tells you something. Redford is an excellent director but often not a commercially popular one: this movie, about aging Sixties radicals and their slow-dawning realization (or not) that their “movement” was ethically and logically flawed did not do well at the box office, and after his previous ethics movie (“The Conspirator,” which I posted about here) bombed, Redford’s days of getting studios to bet on his work were over.

“The Company You Keep” is not as good as “The Conspirator,” but it is surprisingly relevant in 2025 as we watch the American Left struggling with its hypocrisy, foolish utopianism and increasingly obvious hatred for its own country. Redford plays a former Weatherman (“The Weathermen” was the violent faction of the Students for Democratic Action) who has been in hiding in plain sight since a domestic terrorism action by the group turned fatal. When his long-standing alternate identity as a prominent lawyer is outed by an idealistic young journalist, Redford goes on the run. In the process he encounters former fellow-revolutionaries, some of whom still burn for the cause.

Continue reading

An Eternal Ethical Dilemma at Arlington National Cemetery

Once an institution publicly embraces or endorses something that wasn’t that institution’s proper role to endorse, the mistake cannot be remedied without the undesirable result of appearing to reject what should never have been embraced in the first place. The reverse is also true: as EA has pointed out, when the government starts legalizing previously banned substances, it appears that society now approves of their use.

The Trump administration is falling victim to the first version of this phenomenon in its admirable purge of DEI propaganda and practices across the government and its agencies. Naturally, this is being weaponized by the Trump-Hating news media. Today’s example: “Arlington Cemetery Website Loses Pages on Black Veterans, Women and Civil War” at the New York Times.

The story goes on to say, after the deliberately inflammatory title (President Trump is a racist and a misogynist, you know!), that the pages were taken down in response to the administration’s policy of ending promotion of the woke “diversity, equity and exclusion” fad, which is designed to inject “good discrimination” and group preferences into the culture.

The cemetery is operated by the Army, and issued a statement that it is dedicated to “sharing the stories of military service and sacrifice to the nation with transparency and professionalism.” The missing pages are being re-drafted. Representative Adam Smith of Washington, the ranking Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee, accused the Trump administration of trying to erase the accomplishments of women and people of color.

Of course he did.

Continue reading

Why Is So Much of the Public Ignorant, Badly Informed, Confused and Stupid? THIS….

I had several other posts on the runway (including a Kennedy Center Symphony crowd booing J.D. Vance: stay classy, you patrons of the arts!, but with the developing theme today of The Great Stupid, I couldn’t resist this one. We began with a moronic “influencer,” proceeded to a state-appointed adviser who thinks she’s a reptile, and now an apparently respected black journalist named Karen Hunter.

For some ridiculous reason (that’s the second time I’ve used that intro: it’s a quote from “The Pirates of Penzance”), I was sent an email by SiriusXM about “host SiriusXM host Karen Hunter’s podcast today.” It featured loudmouthed, race-obsessed sports commentator Stephen A. Smith, who because he always drags politics into everything, is now being treated like an expert on politics.

What follows is the exchange during the podcast that was sent to entice me into becoming a follower, springing from Hunter’s questions about “buzz” around Smith being a possible Presidential candidate for the Democrats in 2028. To his credit, he said that the idea was absurd, but I’m more concerned with what this radio host said:

Continue reading

Peak “Great Stupid” in Oregon (Again)

I heard some mocking talking heads on Fox News joking about this yesterday and it made no sense to me at all, so I ignored it. Then I found out what had provoked all of the giggling about turtles.

The state of Oregon has appointed JD Holt to an Oregon Mental Health Advisory Board. JD says her pronouns are “they/them/terrapin.” She/they/it is not kidding. So she is out of her frickin’ mind.

From Fox News: “JD Holt, who also goes by “JD Terrapin” on Facebook, is one of roughly two dozen “consumers” on the OHA’s Consumer Advisory Council (OCAC). The council, established by administrative statute, is appointed by OHA Director Dr. Sejal Hathi, who was appointed by Gov. Tina Kotek (D, of course.) The purpose of the OCAC is to advise Hathi on the state’s provision of mental health services, including through investigations and reviews of current practices.”

Continue reading

Friday Open Forum!

The first post today already has me dreading what is to come, and, believe it or not, the next one is even more stupid than that one.

Help me out here by adding some challenging, enlightening, erudite discussions on the finer points of ethics while I stand over here wondering what the world is coming to, and trying to avoid the most likely answer…

Psst! Sam Jones! The Idea of Being an “Influencer” Is Not To Influence Stupid People To Be Even More Stupid!

I can already tell: this is going to be a Great Stupid day.

And what better way to start it off than to visit the idiot above,Samantha Jones, also known as @samstrays on Instagram? For some ridiculous reason, the American has over 92,000 followers on social media platforms, where she purports to be a wildlife and hunting enthusiast. Below Sam is shown in an earlier incident, molesting what looks like a giant echidna, though maybe Sam is only two feet tall.

Her current infamy, however, has resulted from the incident shown in the photo under the headline, when she recently, while visiting Australia, snatched a baby wombat from the side of a road and ran to her car with the creature’s furious mother in desperate pursuit. After the “influencer” posted the sequence, it sparked an international incident.

“I caught a baby wombat!” Jones says to the camera. “OK, momma’s right there and she is pissed,” Jones adds, as the animal’s mother runs towards her. Jones then put the wombat down and drove away. The footage, which she shared on Instagram, sparked immediate fury in Australia.

Foreign Minister Penny Wong called out the ‘ugly American,’ saying, “It looked pretty dreadful, didn’t it…I think everyone who would have seen that would have thought, ‘leave the baby wombat alone. Leave it with its mum.’” An online petition calling for her deportation from Australia started amassing signatures, as home affairs minister Tony Burke announced that the conditions of Jones’ visa were being reviewed. Reportedly, Jones has left the country before she could be kicked out, deleting the offending video in the process. The Australian Wildlife Rescue Agency WIRES has weighed in to state that separating a baby wombat from its mother is a crime.

The Australian prime minister, Anthony Albanese, even got involved. “Maybe she might try some other Australian animals,” he said at a press conference, when asked about the incident. “Take a baby crocodile from its mother and see how you go there. Take another animal that can actually fight back rather than stealing a baby wombat from its mother. See how you go there.”

Please, God, don’t let President Trump get involved in this and start a wildlife harassment war. Just have a bunch of birds shower this idiot with droppings, like that scene in “High Anxiety,” or something. Maybe have her social media followers bombarded as well.

Ethics Quiz: Scattering Ashes

See? The Washington Post still has some uses! A recent sort-of, kind-of, tongue-in-cheek essay by Rick Reilly raised an issue that has gnawed at my consciousness for a long time, namely the practice of scattering a loved one’s cremated remains in public places. A brief summary of my gut reaction: “Ick!”

Reilly writes in part,

Can you stop scattering your dearly departed’s ashes all over my favorite golf course? I want to play Pebble Beach, not your grandpa….Oh, and please stop littering your labradoodle’s ashes on the beach near my house. (A) Cremated remains include tiny fragments of bone and teeth and God knows what else, (B) I run there — barefoot, dammit — and (C) It’s illegal for dogs to be on the beach, whether on a leash or in a Folgers can. In fact, this obsession with unauthorized scattering of dead things all over America’s prettiest places needs to perish, too. Our most famous ballyards deal with these messes all the time….How many Cubs base runners have slipped rounding people’s uncles?

That’s pretty much the flavor of the whole piece, but as it coincides with a bias of mine—I think scattering ashes is pagan nonsense and stupid—it has the ring of truth. (And Tom Cruise sure didn’t love getting covered with the stuff in “War of the Worlds.”) The author concludes,

3.2 million people die every year in America, and, according to the National Funeral Directors Association, 62 percent ask to be cremated. That’s more than double the rate 20 years ago. And nearly half say they “would prefer to have their remains scattered in a sentimental place.” Which would mean nearly a million incinerated Americans annually coating the sequoias at Yosemite and choking the loons on Golden Pond and sprinkling the churros of Santa Monica. It’s just bad taste.

Is it “ick,” unethical, or a perfectly loving and spiritual practice? As usual with the ethics quizzes here, I have my mind open at least a crack.

Your Ethics Alarms Ethics Quiz of the Day is…

Is scattering incinerated human remains in public places, in the air or in the oceans responsible, fair and justifiable?