The U.K.’s Rape Gangs and the Warning to America

A Guest Post by

Sarah Beth

There have been two major incidents that brought my attention to this problem in the UK.  I think we have all heard about Henry Nowak, but the fact that he died while being arrested for racism rather than having someone take care of him and arrest the kid who knifed him rather upset me.  In case we are confused about the problem, at least in the US Karmelo Anthony was arrested rather than Metcalf, whom he had stabbed.  However, a new report has come out regarding the Muslim grooming gangs in the UK and that, with the background of Henry Nowak, leads me to some conclusions.  Read the whole thing, if you have the stomach for it.  I cried as I read it.

If it is too upsetting to read it all, here is an article about the report.  It doesn’t hurt as much to read. 

There are three main causes that I can see for this situation.  The first cause, like the cause for much human suffering and trafficking, is poor structure, in this case, family structure.  Most trafficked girls are either sold to traffickers or, as in many of the victim’s reports, from a less than ideal, often abusive, family structure.  I don’t plan to discuss the problems or solutions to this, as it is a serious can of worms and the hardest to fix. If we work on the other two problems, this, while still an issue, will be less of one.

The next problem is that of Islam.  Islam itself is not a good religion for a civilized society.  We see that the Koran states that you may marry up to four wives and have as many concubines as you wish, as long as they are not Islamic women.   Sex with prepubescent girls is also totally okay, with child marriage accepted and consummation recommended at the age of 9 with some versions of Islam suggesting it even earlier.  Some Imams have said that it is better for a girl to not to become a woman (referring to her first period) in her father’s house, but instead in her husband’s.  We also have the precepts in the Koran for how Muslims should behave in society, peaceful as the powerless, lying to unbelievers at any time, and when reaching a majority and having power, becoming brutal. 

Before discussing the repercussions on society for those precepts, I think it is fair to address the concern that this is not all of Islam, the “religion of peace.”  We can always have the discussion of what in a holy book is to be taken literally, figuratively, or even transiently.  I know of many statements in the Bible that we could debate.  However, there are plenty of reasons to believe that the Koran is far more troublesome than the Bible.  First, many Imams today proclaim the harsher rules, and the Imams who do not are almost always in non-majority Muslim countries, which could perhaps fall under the “lying to infidels” rule.  If we compare that to how Jewish rabbis, protestant ministers, and the Pope relate to the Bible, you will see that the violence recommended in the Bible is not taken to be a command to take literally today by the majority, even in countries where Jews or Christians are the majority. 

The second reason we should consider the Koran’s violence to still be considered a literal command instead of a figurative one is the sheer number of Muslims that follow it.  We can look at Jews and Christians and see that the majority of followers of those religions do not follow the violent commands.  Consider the commands in Leviticus and Deuteronomy to stone homosexuals and witches.  There aren’t many Christians who do either, and the majority loudly denounces people like Fred Phelps and the Westboro Baptists.  We don’t see much of the Muslim world decrying other Muslim’s antisocial behaviors.  The best we tend to get is, “that’s not how we follow our faith, so don’t blame us.”

A Conversation With The Trump Deranged

A Guest Post by Steve Witherspoon

When the Trump Deranged say “I’d be happy to argue facts,” don’t believe a word of it. I did recently, and found myself talking to a brick wall.

I recently had a discussion over on Nextdoor with a gentleman we shall call “Kurt.” I had shared my recent blog post that talked about what I saw as I drove around eleven states on a recent two week vacation. The post focused mainly on how I perceived the surrounding economy as I traveled through the states, cities, suburbs, and rural areas. The content of that “The Sky Isn’t Falling!” blog post isn’t the ethics matter at hand, but rather how Kurt reacted it.

I started the whole interaction with me writing Come on folks, the sky isn’t falling” including a link to my blog post. This was on Friday morning, June 12th. I posted this because I wanted to see what kind of reaction I’d get from people on Nextdoor, especially the Trump Deranged, so you could say I went fishing and I snagged a big one. Nextdoor traffic is usually higher on the weekends. As is typically the case, I got some approving and disapproving comments. The comment that caught my attention was the one Kurt posted on Saturday morning.

Here’s the part of Kurt’s comment that caught my attention. [His comments are in quote boxes, and an my commentary to each part follows]

“Ignore economic reality and Trump’s assault on democracy and decency.”

What caught my attention within that sentence was the phrase Trump’s assault on democracy.” This is an assertion of fact claim/accusation.  I replied, in part, to Kurt,”I’m no fan of Donald Trump; but, do you understand that parroting nonsensical anti-Trump partisan propaganda like “Trump’s assault on democracy” pigeonholes you with others suffering from acute TDS? That is a rhetorical question.”

“I’d be happy to argue factsI believe he is a despicable, incompetent and immoral human being. You object to my characterization of him, while he routinely calls anyone he dislikes using terms like “vile scum,” etc.”

Comment of the Day: “Ethics Jump Ball” (or “Brilliant Guest Post by Ryan Harkins”)….

Yesterday, in near shock that a good and once wise friend posted on Facebook the head-exploding meme by a simple-minded activist named Jenny Carter, above, I challenged Ethics Alarms readers to perform the thorough defenestration of that smug brain-garbage it deserves. I had neither the time nor energy. Responding to my metaphorical Bat Signal, erudite veteran commenter Ryan Harkins came through like a champ, authoring the masterpiece below, a Comment of the Day if there ever was one. Here is his rebuttal, really a guest post in length and quality, in response to the post, “Ethics Jump Ball”:

Dear Jenny,

You can make strawmen of our principles all you want, and argue all day against them, but all that will gain you is a smug feeling and “likes” from your friends, and make absolutely no inroads with the MAGA crowd whatsoever.  But I know that your entire intent is to make me waste my time answering you.  So, perhaps foolishly, I will oblige.

To begin, a little groundwork.  A dilemma is only a dilemma if you really only have the two options.  If there is any other alternative, such argumentation falls apart.  Second, if you are going to address our principles, maybe you should determine what those principles actually are.  For example, being pro-Second Amendment is not about shooting people.  It is about the right to bear arms against, especially, an overbearing, tyrannical government.  Being pro-life does not mean that you believe that no one should die, ever.  Third, in any given situation, there may be more than one principle in play, and to ignore that to score rhetorical points is arguing in bad faith. 

So let’s get into it.

Public Education Report From Wisconsin, or “Yikes!”

Guest post by Cornelius Gotchberg

[From your host: This is one horror tale from a state’s education system. Wisconsin is surely not alone.]

The Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty (W.I.L.L.) reported,   In 2024 DPI (State of Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction) lowered the standards and cut scores for proficiency on Wisconsin DPI’s Forward Exam for the most recent academic year. W.I.L.L. also discovered that DPI “lowered school report card points in 2020-21 and changed the labels on the reports in 2023-24.

  Hurley (WI) School District officials, among others, complained that this fist on the scale made their students’ above average achievements suddenly seemmediocre. The Iron County Miner supplied the following December 16, 2024 quote from Hurley School District Administrator Kevin Genisot, who declared (bolding mine),

“It’s important to note this: The state this year, before finalizing their final numbers of the state report card, came up with a set of numbers, They ran them and they said, “Oh, these numbers are allowing too many districts to score well. That won’t look good. Let’s adjust these numbers.’ And that’s right from DPI. telling you what they’re doing as they do the report cards.”

In short, DPI “followed the science,” and didn’t like where it took them, so they pursued policy-based evidence-making rather than evidence-based policy-making.

As Paul Harvey would say, “And now, the rest of the story.” Six months prior, in June of 2024, 88 “expert educators” gathered at the Chula Vista Resort for a four-day, taxpayer-funded shindig. Its alleged purpose: To redefine what constitutes proficiency in math and reading.

After DPI had sandbagged a January 21, 2025 “Daily Sentinel” FOIA request for a full year, the Institute For Reforming Government (IRG) sent a January 22, 2026 follow up. What did they find? Not much! No recordings of the proceedings were made nor were any meeting minutes provided. And participants had to sign non-disclosure agreements! That’s uncommon secrecy for a taxpayer-funded event with mandatory transparency.

The Daily Sentinel wrote: “The agency did not provide receipts for staff time, food, travel, or lodging […] Taxpayers are left to wonder how much of that $368,885 was spent on resort amenities, alcohol, or water park access for the 88 educators and various staff in attendance.”

Even making generous expenditure allowances for three nights single occupancy lodging @$250/night, four day per diem @$150/day, and $50,000 for meeting rooms and incidentals, that would still leave over $200,000 unaccounted for.

The WI Legislature’s Joint Finance Committee has appropriately delayed $2 million in funding as they await an explanation of this spectacularly extravagant profligacy.The state’s over-burdened taxpayers deserve answers.
  

From The Ethics Alarms Archives: “What Is Wrong Is That We Do Not Ask What Is Right.”

I stumbled across this post from 2022 by accident, but feel like it is a good time to repost it. It sparks recall of one of the histories’s great thinkers, G.K. Chesterton (1874-1936) G.K. slaughtered Clarence Darrow in an Oxford debate over the existence of God—Darrow took the negative position, naturally, an assertion that he had won debates maintaining many times. After the debacle, Darrow commented, in essence, “My hat’s off to him. He was better prepared and won fair and square.” He was thinking, I believe, “Holy cats! This guy is smarter than me!” Chesterton, sadly, is mostly known today by Americans because of the PBS series dramatizing his “Father Brown” mysteries, stories Chesterton published as a lark. He was much more than second-rate Arthur Conan Doyle.

I also am moved to repost this because it was the sole guest post offered by my late wife, best friend, business partner and inspiration, Grace Bowen Marshall, who suddenly perished this month in 2024. She occasionally commented here, but her real love was literature, especially British literature. In her introduction she wrote in part,

“The first chapter of his 1910 book “What’s Wrong With The World” was a ‘bright-light’ experience for me. Though hopelessly outdated in some 21st century factual respects, it is considered to be one of his more interesting works because Chesterton examines the human thought process and how it affects the outcomes of different kinds of problems, reminiscent of the “observer effect.” G.K. was, in 1910, much more trusting of science and medicine than we are now, e.g., and did not address 21st century thought-process issues like the scientists’ tendency to do something simply because they can without considering if they should. Here is an excerpt from G.K. Chesterton’s “What’s Wrong With The World.”

On The Limitations Of Expertise

Guest Column by Sarah B.

[From your Host: This excellent essay arrived on an Open Forum, and as I sometimes do, has been elevated from Comment of the Day status to a Guest Column. I’ll even forgive Sarah for making me look bad in comparison to such thoughtful, eloquent and perceptive work.]

***

“The embarrassment is that chemistry was treated as a mere technicality rather than the foundation of the entire conclusion. The embarrassment is that skepticism—real skepticism, the disciplined refusal to accept claims without robust evidence—was framed as denial rather than diligence.”

This is, in my opinion, the money quote from The Brain, Microplastics, and the Collapse of Scientific Restraint. 

This particular article discusses the extraordinary claim that our brains contain a huge amount of microplastics.  The problem with this claim is that the study has a fatal methodological flaw.  The study relies on spectroscopy and detecting signatures of chemicals to determine a sample’s composition.  However, the fats in the brain break down into similar compounds as polyethylene, which means without further differentiation methods, there is no way to tell if the “microplastics” the study detected were actually just normal lipids found in the brain.  The whole article is worth reading, as it does an excellent job of explaining the issue. 

I recently saw a post on Facebook that decried the idea that experts could be challenged by some novice watching a few YouTube Videos and reading a few scientific papers.  This led to a long discussion in the comments, which was unfortunately extremely one-sided.  Most everyone agreed that trying to correct an expert in their field was utter hubris.

“Take something you are good at, like maybe changing transmissions.  Imagine someone who has watched a few YouTube videos comes up and tells you that you are doing it all wrong.  How would you respond?”

The main problem with this is that, in terms of changing a transmission, we can obviously see who is right and who is wrong.  The car will run, or the car will not.  Indeed, if you truly are an expert in changing transmissions, you can step up and, in simple terms, explain why your process is the correct one, what is wrong with the YouTube watcher’s process, and even perhaps teach your skeptic how to do it correctly. 

With any field of expertise, we have to remember that experts are people too, and all humans have flaws.  Experts can be tempted by money, power, prestige, and politics.  There are also limitations that even experts struggle to overcome.  For example, in many branches of research, there are serious problems (often ethical in nature) in creating a good control group. 

The A.I. Ethics Problem in News Reporting

Guest post by Matthew B.

JM Introduction: This excellent post arrived on yesterday’s open forum, and thus was immediately eligible for guest column status. It is especially timely, both because of this story from the legal ethics jungle and this more alarming one:

The top United States Army commander in South Korea revealed to reporters this week that he has been using a chatbot to help with decisions that affect thousands of U.S. soldiers. Major General William “Hank” Taylor told the media in Washington, D.C., that he is using AI to sharpen decision-making, but not on the battlefield. The major general — the fourth-highest officer rank in the U.S. Army — is using the chatbot to assist him in daily work and command of soldiers.

Speaking to reporters at a media roundtable at the annual Association of the United States Army conference, Taylor reportedly said “Chat and I” have become “really close lately.”

Great. What could go wrong? Now here’s Matthew…

***

One of the problems with AI is how often it is confidently wrong. This manifests itself all over the place. One of the most troubling is in the news industry. The news industry under tremendous financial pressure, and the appeal of moving towards AI generated content opens them up to completely BS stories spreading.

There are several great recent examples.

Continue reading

Sickness Ethics:  The Worker’s (and the Tourist’s) Dilemma

Guest Post

by AM Golden

About a month ago, I got my hair cut at a salon that is part of a nationwide chain.  It was a couple of days before my vacation.  During the cut, the stylist coughed several times into her arm.

Correction: she held her arm out and coughed in its general direction.  You know what I mean, right?  The arm is extended out front, allowing the cough to have plenty of space to spew germs out into the air with nothing to buffer them.

She complained about sinuses.  I sympathized.  Sinuses are tough.  It didn’t pass my notice, however, that one cough seemed a little congested.

At checkout, I told her I hoped her sinuses got better.  It was then that she disclosed that it was harder because she was also recovering from bronchitis.

Cue internal Homer Simpson-esque scream and flight.

I am highly susceptible to bronchial infections, especially this time of year.  It was 35 years ago that I caught pneumonia while in college which caused me to miss two weeks of classes and three weeks of work at McDonald’s.  I returned to classes the day mid-terms began.  The day I returned to work, they put me in the drive-thru and assured my mother they would take me out as soon as it got dark and too cold.  They didn’t.  Fast food work sucks. 

Probably for that reason, I am sympathetic to people in customer-facing positions because they are paid by the hour, generally don’t have sick time or much sick time and often have to make the choice of earning money to pay their bills or staying home unpaid when sick.

I get it.

Continue reading

On the Illegality of Illegal Aliens

Guest column by Ryan Harkins

We have this report from HotAir explaining that that the ICE raid on the meat packing plant in Nebraska was not simply due to the fact that the plant hired so many illegals. Instead, the focus of the raid was on an identity-theft ring running out of that plant.

I want to make it clear I am all in favor of whoever in the world who wants to come to the United States to make a better life for themselves should have the opportunity. I’d give top priority to those who wish to become US citizens, but I’m generally in favor of letting into the country far more people than our current immigration system allots. How many more, I can’t say, as I’ve not crunched the numbers. But in general more immigrants means more workers, more production, higher demand for services, all which contribute to a growing economy that enriches everyone here.

Continue reading

Off With Their Heads! The Unsustainable Echo Chamber of Bluesky

Guest Column by A M Golden

[From your host: I held this excellent guest column submission for about a week, waiting for a propitious time to post it. JD Vance’s adventure on the platform, which I discussed here, was exactly the context I was waiting for. And it gives me an0ther chance to feature Bing….JM]

Anyone who doubts the uniqueness of the American Revolution need only to look to France several years later when revolutionaries stormed the Bastille and set up a Republic.  As revolutions were wont to do, those who replaced the guys in charge eventually demanded that everyone follow their ideas in lockstep.  Those who did not were accused of lacking sufficient revolutionary fervor and risked literally losing their heads.  The self-righteous Jacobins who forced this pure ideology eventually devoured themselves as, again, revolutionaries are wont to do, until the head Jacobin, Robespierre, eventually lost his own head and disenchantment led to the installation of Napoleon as Top Dog.

That should have happened in the United States, too.  Despite the passions of the Federalists and the Jeffersonian anti-Federalists, though some nasty words were printed and spoken aloud, no one was murdered for his lack of purity (unless you count Alexander Hamilton, which I don’t because that was less an ideological battle than a personal grudge).

Ever since talented-but-socially-awkward Elon Musk bought Twitter, turned it into X and antagonized all those people who bought his so-called climate-friendly vehicles, those same Tesla owners have flocked to every other faddish social media that promises 24/7 Trump/Musk hate in addition to freedom from having to be exposed to the opinions of those who disagree with them.

It was one of our illustrious commentators here (I do not remember which one.  I apologize.  It’s been three years and I’ve slept since then) who suggested that many of the Hollywood types would realize their mistake when they exchange 80,000 followers for 80.  That person was right.

I have belonged to Facebook for years.  I’ve tried Instagram but find it unwieldy and boring.  I couldn’t help it, however, when one of my favorite performers made the Grand Announcement that he was headed over to the new Post.News in 2022, which promised conversations “moderated for civility”.  It took ten days to get me onboarded and I found the place to be overwhelmingly progressive….and small. 

Don’t get me wrong, there was a huge influx of members.  Then nothing.  Some of them even proposed that members try to make a positive platform there by building a community not based on complaining about the platform they’d just left.  I heavily curated what I followed and then began contributing content on a daily basis: I recommended books on history that I’d read myself.  I amassed over 30 followers over the next 18 months; the favorite performer barely broke 100.

Ultimately, though, it was not a sustainable platform. It folded.  Once again, members were looking for places to hide from the world, including Favorite Performer, and were pulled into Bluesky.  This time, I didn’t take the plunge.

Now, it appears that Bluesky has reached its ideological saturation point.  This week, Megan McArdle wrote this entry in the Washington Post: Bluesky’s decline stems from never hearing from other side .

Continue reading