Two Faint Cheers For the Colorado Supreme Court in “Jerk vs. Jerk”

It looks like the political correctness Furies who have been swarming around Jack Phillips, the Masterpiece Cakeshop owner whose refusal to bake, decorate and sell same-sex wedding cakes had him targeted for destruction have finally been foiled.The Colorado Supreme Court has dismissed the latest lawsuit against him, though not on the merits. Legal Insurrection has detailed coverage and a retrospective on this almost decade-long drama here.

Remember the old Mad Magazine series called “Spy vs. Spy”? This has been “Jerk vs. Jerk.” I sided with the baker in the original lawsuit over the same-sex wedding cake, though holding even then that the adversaries were being unreasonable. Ethics Alarms advised one, “Oh, bake the damn cake!” and the other, “So find another bakery!” That battle got all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, where the baker won on what non-lawyers call “a technicality.” Then Phillips was targeted again, as LGTBQ activists apparently considered it a matter of honor to bend him to their will.

Continue reading

Ethics Dunce: The University of Kansas [Corrected]

No, what’s insane is for anyone to watch that video and misunderstand the clear meaning of what lecturer Phillip Lowcock said. I doubt anyone did misunderstand him. This manufactured scandal is conservatives acting like political correctness-addled progressives.

“[If you believe] guys are smarter than girls, you’ve got some serious problems. That’s what frustrates me,” Lowcock says in the video. “There are going to be some males in our society that will refuse to vote for a potential female president because they don’t think females are smart enough to be president. We could line all those guys up and shoot them. They clearly don’t understand the way the world works.”

And he clearly doesn’t understand how university administrators work in age of The Great Stupid. They are weenies. They sacrifice common sense and principles to avoid conflict.

I have read conservative piranha claiming that he said that any man who didn’t vote for Kamala Harris should be shot. No, he said that thinking that women aren’t smart enough to be President is an idiotic reason not to vote for a woman, and they “should be shot” means that such ignorant bigots are useless and a blight on the culture, which isn’t that far off the mark. Now, thinking Kamala isn’t smart enough to be President is something else, and completely reasonable, but Lowcock didn’t say that.

As for “Did I say that? Scratch that from the recording. I don’t want the deans hearing that I said that,” it’s obviously a joke, not a serious cover-up. His tone is humorous. I’ve been a stage director long enough to know when a line is not intended to be taken seriously.

Any conservative social media troll or university administrator who seriously thinks Lowcock’s comment was anything but facetious exaggeration and completely benign should be shot.

I wish Lowcock would stand his ground and refuse to be sacrificed to the God of Perpetual Offense, but he’s already groveling. This is how the censors break you: it’s like Winston Smith having the hungry rats at his face. No job is worth surrendering one’s self respect to save.

So…The Second Gentleman Running For First Gentleman Impregnated His Nanny During His First Marriage and Slapped a Date In the Face: Is That a Problem?

By the established standards of the news media and the rest of the Axis of Unethical Conduct, it should be, don’t you think? But apparently not.

Huh.

A throbbing example of wildly varying standards in the media depending on whether they are covering Donald Trump or Kamala Harris just raised its warty head. Did you see that Doug Emhoff, Kamala Harris’s husband who was largely invisible until she pushed President Biden off the Democratic ticket, admitted he had an adulterous affair with his nanny and got her pregnant, leading to his divorce? That happened in August, after the slimy Daily Mail broke the scandal and Emhoff came clean to CNN. I missed it entirely, which means that, for example, the New York Times either ignored it or soft-peddled it because, well, you know. But the story burst on the social media scene this week after ex-Obama paid liar Jen Psaki, now a full-time Axis propagandist at MSNBC, interviewed Emhoff and gushed that he had “reshaped the perception of masculinity.” “Has that been an evolution for you and do you think that’s part of the role you might play as first gentleman?” Psaki continued. Yecchh. That was nauseating enough (no Vice-President’s spouse has the power, visibility or status to “reshape” anything), but Emhoff’s answer exploded heads from coast to coast.

Continue reading

Here’s Your Ethics Challenge: Argue Convincingly That It Would Have Been More Ethical For This Horrible Couple To Abort The Baby…

Early favorites for “Parents of the Year”!

Darien Urban, 21, and Shalene Ehlers, 20, decided to sell their baby to a stranger while they were at a camp ground. (No, they weren’t married: why would you even ask?) As Mom explained later, having to deal with a baby while taking care of three dogs was just too much. All they asked for was a six-pack of beer and a thousand bucks. What a deal!

“I, Darien Urban and Shalene Ehlers, are signing our rights over to [Cody Martin] of our baby for $1,000 on 9/21/24,” their contract read. Good: these things should be legal. “After signing this there will be no changing y’all two’s minds and to never contact again,” it concluded.

Continue reading

Ethics Dunce: Rep. Anthony D’Esposito (R-NY)

Would it be unfair of me to write, “Now there’s a face you can trust!”? Sure it would, but I don’t care. He is exactly the kind of unethical politician that Congress has way, way too many of. He upsets me so much, I ended a sentence with a preposition.

Shortly after taking the oath of office following his election to Congress in 2022, D’Esposito hired his fiancée’s daughter to work as a “special assistant” in his district office at a salary that eventually reached $3,800 a month. Then D’Esposito hired a woman with whom he was having an affair. Devin Faas collected $2,000 a month for a part-time job in the same district office as his fiancée’s daughter. (Uh, this is not the smartest way to cheat on your beloved.) When D’Esposito’s fiancée discovered the affair with Faas in July of 2023, she broke up with him, and both of the dubious hires had to find other employment.

Apparently the lovebirds are back together again. That’s nice.

She’s an idiot.

Continue reading

Ethics Quiz: The Offensive… Wristband?

Apparently a biological male who “identifies as female” plays on the Plymouth Regional High School girls’ soccer team in New Hampshire. When the team played its regional rival Bow High School, some Bow parents, protesting the presence of the player whom they regarded as a danger to the born-female players on the Bow team, wore wristbands like the ones above as a silent protest. The Bow High athletic director had told concerned parents before the contest that “in the wake of a federal judge’s ruling that the term ‘girl’ includes males who identify as female,” he felt he was powerless. (He’s a weenie. If he agreed with the parents, he could simply have his team refuse to play the Plymouth team, accept the consequences, and raise the issue.)

When the parents’ “XX” bands appeared at the game, school officials stopped the soccer match, ordered the parents to remove the wristbands, and even “issued [a] police-enforced ‘No Trespassing order’” against two parents who refused.

Continue reading

From The Res Ipsa Loquitur Files: ‘Nah, Pro-Abortion Fanatics Haven’t Lost Their Minds’

I presume I don’t have to explain all of the ethics alarms pinged by this amazing tale from academia….

An event this week at Arizona State University, “Jenny Irish’s HATCH: A Speculative Future for Reproductive Rights” held both in person and via Zoom, featured Irish, an English professor at ASU, and Professor Angela Lober, director of the Academy of Lactation Programs [ Wait, WHAT???] at ASU’s Edson College of Nursing and Health Innovation.

Professor Lober began the one-hour moderated discussion by stating that she “got into this space because the United States hates women and everything the female body does.” Okaaaaythat’s certainly not “misinformation”…or inflammatory. Lober went on to say a “lack of financial incentives in breastfeeding and maternal-child health care” was proof of this hostility and showed that economic interests often override health concerns.

Continue reading

From the “Ethics Corrupters” File: “Law and Order SVU,” “Part 33.”

I got sick of “Law and Order: SVU” long ago, so this 2019 episode, from the 20th season (and it’s still going!) escaped my ethics radar until I reached it by accident this morning and had to watch the whole thing as an obligation to Ethics Alarms.

The episode titled “Part 33” is a perfect example of how popular culture is corrupting American values and ethics problem-solving skills with Hollywood’s constant propaganda opposing personal responsibility, the Rule of Law, and promoting emotion-based judgement rather than decisions based on fact and logic.

Continue reading

Everything Is Seemingly Spinning Out Of Control: Meet GOP Candidate For North Carolina Governor and Incompetent Elected Official of the Month Mark Robinson

The Trump-endorsed Republican candidate for governor in North Carolina, Lt. Gov. Mark Robinson, either went nuts, is nuts, or has been nuts all along. CNN’s Andrew Kaczynski reported that Robinson called himself a “black NAZI” and a “perv” online, boasted about sneaking looks at nude women in public showers, loving pornography (“I like watching tranny-on-girl porn! That’s fucking hot!”) and reinstituting slavery. “Slavery is not bad. Some people need to be slaves. I wish they would bring it (slavery) back. I would certainly buy a few,” the black politician wrote. All of this was on Nude Africa, a message board for sharing porn.

Naturally, Robinson is denying everything, says he won’t be forced out of the race, yada-yada. He’s an idiot. Be proud, Republicans! How do utter jerks like Robinson—although he does appear to be a very special kind of jerk— keep getting nominated and elected? The parties don’t vet them, the media doesn’t vet them, and the public doesn’t check on what it is voting for either until the damage is done.

May I also suggest that Donald Trump try to have someone on staff perform a little due diligence on such characters before he endorses them?

We’re saving democracy for this?

Gee, I Wonder Why the Public Is Losing Trust In The Justice System….

I am heading to Richmond to do a three hour legal ethics seminar, and in my preparation, I ran across this depressing story. The seminar is called “Legal Ethics Unmasked,” and man oh man, has watching lawyers, prosecutors and judges reveal the creeps beneath been disillusioning.

The ABA headline was certainly clickbait: “Judge settles suit accusing lawyer of threatening to release her intimate photos in bid to scuttle deposition.”

Continue reading