Friday Open Forum!

Facts don’t matter, history doesn’t matter, logic doesn’t matter. All that matters to “these people”—I say “these people” because I don’t want to be associated with them in any way—is to mislead and confuse dimwits and know-nothings into not trusting the President and his administration regardless of the policy or decision.

Lincoln fired five generals leading the Army of the Potomac, one of them twice (McClellan), before finding the one he needed to win the Civil War. As a Marine veteran of of combat said succinctly when I told him about the Atlantic’s nonsense, “During a war is when firing generals is most important.”

But I digress. Write about any of the gazillions of ethics issues out there.

I have to watch Opening Day at Fenway Park now…

OK, It Is Indisputable That Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson Is An Incompetent, Woke, Partisan Hack. Now What?

How do you fix a Justice who’s a moron?
How can you help a judge who cannot judge?
Is there a phrase describing Justice Jackson?
“A DEI curse,” “a Justice whose brain is fudge”?

Many a thing you know you’d like to tell her
Many a thing she ought to understand
But how can you justify
A Justice who will defy
All logic and law to follow a woke demand?

Oh, how do you fix a Justice who’s a moron?
Can law survive this fool who can’t be canned?

The recent horrified response to Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson’s assorted gibberish and idiotic comments during the oral argument regarding the birthright citizenship issue only amplified the dawning realization that President Biden inflicted on the Supreme Court and the nation the most unqualified Justice in its history, and that’s saying something.

Richard Nixon almost got Harold Carswell on the Court, and he was so mediocre that a GOP supporter in the Senate argued that he should be confirmed because less-than-stellar people should be represented on the Court too. Justice Harry Blackmun, who wrote the abysmal Roe v. Wade opinion and the even more head-exploding decision “explaining” why Major League Baseball should be exempted from the antitrust laws (“Baseball is cool” would adequately describe his logic), looks like Oliver Wendell Holmes compared to Ketanji Brown Jackson. Heck, Justice Sotomayor is a veritable Scalia compared to her fellow DEI Justice.

This is incredible a depressing. What can be done about it?

Presumable nothing. If one could impeach a Justice for manifest incompetence, Jackon’s dissent in the recent case of Chiles v. Salazar would surely justify it. Colorado had banned “conversion therapy,” so licensed counselors could not engage in “any practice or treatment” that “attempts or purports to change” a minor’s sexual orientation or gender identity. The law imposed penalties for those violating the law, including a $5,000 fine and the potential loss of their licenses, even if the therapy was exclusively talking.

Ring any bells? Here’s a hint: “Freedom of speech.”

These bans on such “talk therapy” that endangers LGBTQ orthodoxy are scattered through the statutes of “blue states” across the nation. As I find the arguments for conversion therapy denigrating to gays and others, I had to check the blog archives to make sure that I have been consistent in opposing efforts to make such treatment illegal. Whew! I have.

During the oral argument on this case in October, I wrote,

“One more thing: if this dispute doesn’t prove for all time that progressives are remarkably skilled at holding opposing beliefs in their heads without feeling any discomfort, nothing will. The Left is fighting like honey badgers to allow school personnel to talk kids into thinking they are girls trapped in boys’ bodies or vice-versa, resulting in life-wrenching hormone treatments and surgery, but insist that conversion therapy for gays must be banned as harmful.”

What’s the Matter With “Kindness Is Everything”?

Oh, just everything.

This lawn sign message (and it’s on bumper-stickers too) was referenced in a sympathetic blog post about the ridicule being heaped onto Kristi Noem’s cross-dressing husband Byron. I will write about poor Byron later, if I can work up some enthusiasm for the job. Right now I’ll focus on the fatuous message above.

Kindness is not “everything.” It’s not even close to everything. Anyone who publicly declares such nonsense is either stating something they don’t believe in order to be nice (or seem nice), shamelessly virtue-signaling, or is too stupid to trust with sharp objects. Ethical living, thinking, inter-personal relations and problem-solving requires an acknowledgement of all the ethical values and virtues and a carefully learned and practiced system of balancing them.

Consider the Six Pillars of Character. None of those virtues designated by the Josephson Institute of Ethics are “everything,” and many, though legitimately important ethical consideration in the right context, have proven to be catastrophic when societies consider them to be “everything.” Perhaps the most blazing example is loyalty. Loyalty was the engine of the Third Reich. Even honesty isn’t “everything”; there are situations in which honesty is disastrous.

I find it significant that kindness didn’t even make the cut when the Josephson folks were compiling their “pillars” and the components of each. It could easily be included in the “Caring” pillar, which isn’t #5 in the hierarchy by accident.

“Kindness” is a favorite obsession in the Age of the Great Stupid. Kindness rationalizes open borders, “restorative justice,” and, naturally, “diversity, equity and inclusion.” It also undergirds irresponsible socialism, the destruction of personal responsibility and accountability, and the forgiveness of conduct that should not be forgiven or forgotten. Kindness was exploited to allow Joe Biden to be a zombie President.

No, kindness isn’t everything, or even the most important thing. I recommend caution and suspicion toward anyone who extols kindness to the exclusion of the other ethical values. The Ethics Alarms “Brel” designation comes to mind, awarded to those who embody the French troubadour’s memorable quote, “If you leave it up to them, they’ll crochet the world the color of goose shit.”

Ethics Dunces (and Most Offensive Donation Plea): The International Fellowship of Christians and Jews

This ad has been around for a while and running frequently on Fox News. I never paid attention to it until this morning, because I was watching a debate among some legitimate legal experts about the birth-right citizenship issue.

KABOOM! Basically the ad directs donors who identify with the ethnic group behind the plea to be concerned about the victims of the Ukraine war with Russia who belong to one specific group (tribe, race, religion, whatever—pick your word) as if nobody else’s lives count. I know there are many, far too many, Americans who think like this, and the more Americans who do think like this, the weaker, more divided and more imperiled our nation, society, culture and democracy is.

The message is literally “Jews are suffering in the Ukraine, so please send money to help them. Let other groups take care of their own. They aren’t our problem.”

I am not picking on Jewish groups here, for a TV commercial calling for donations to poor black people or poor whites to the exclusion of everyone else equally in distress would be similarly unethical…and disgusting. So far, I’ve never seen such an ad. This thing compounds the offense by making the invalid appeal to emotion represented by playing the Holocaust card. The suffering of elderly Ukrainian Jews at the hands of Russia is particularly cruel today because of what Germany did 80 years ago?

Don’t insult my intelligence. I was a fundraiser for many years: I know the drill. This ad, however, is indefensible. Shame on The International Fellowship of Christians and Jews for creating it. Shame on Fox News for running it. Shame on anyone who gives the group a dime in response to it.

Yecchh.

Ethics Quiz: Freaks in Sports

Olivier Rioux is a 7-foot-9-inch college basketball player for the Florida Gators. Rioux is a freshman center weighing approximately 305 lbs. Born in Canada and already known as the tallest college basketball player in history, he also holds the Guinness World Record for tallest teenager.

He raises issues related to the transgender sports controversy as well as some that Ethics Alarms has discussed in earlier posts. Several involved intersex runner Caster Semanja, who has always identified as female but who regularly crushed female competitors in sports competitions because of an unusual amount of male hormones. When she was required to artificially lower her natural hormone mix to compete against women, I wrote,

“We can’t have special leagues and categories for however many gender categories science identifies and activists fight to have recognized, and there is no justification for creating artificial standards to eliminate outlier performers. The “solution” imposed on Caster Semenya—force her to take drugs that eliminate her natural advantage—is horrifying. How is this different from banging brilliant kids on the head until they have brain damage and no longer dominate their less gifted fellow students in school? What right do the sports czars have to declare an unprecedented, unique competitor unfit to compete because her, or his, unique qualities are advantageous? Why are so many woman condemning Caster as a cheat, when they should be defending her as a human being with as much right to compete as she is as anyone? Because she’ll win? Because it’s unfair that God, or random chance, or her own dedication rendered her better at her sport than anyone else?”

“No Kings” Hangover Notes

  • I found the responses of the two grinning protesters empty and fatuous, but not incoherent. They are protesting to protest, because it’s “democratic.” It’s fun being in all that energy and shared emotion. I marveled at this back in college; I’d venture that most protesters at these large rallies can’t articulate what it is they are so upset about.
  • I also think the mother might have brought her daughter to the “No Kings” rally as to experience democracy in action, and because they probably live in a community where the schools and institutions and communities are knee-jerk Left, and the mother can boast of her commitment and virtue. It’s sort of nice in a way.
  • In New York, there were Palestinian flags, plus signs and chants calling for defunding the police. Communist groups were part of most of the demonstrations. Of course, pro-open borders, anti-ICE signs were in abundance too. Question: how do mostly moderate, educated, otherwise rational  Americans  appear to be allied with such groups—pro-terrorist, anti-law enforcement, anti-American—and not wonder, “Wait, why am I associating with these people?”
  • There were riots in the demonstrations in Portland and L.A. “Peaceful protesters” threw bricks at police officers in L.A. Nice. How many of those people know that the “right to protest,” aka free speech, does not include throwing things?
  • Doug Emhoff, Kamala’s Beta Male hubby, posed for pictures in Malibu with Trump Deranged D-list celebrities like Kathy Griffin. How low can you go?
  • According to a copy of the permit for the “flagship” “No Kings” march in St. Paul, Minnesota, Indivisible, a national Democratic political advocacy organization funded by radical Left billionaire George Soros is the lead coordinator for the protest. Fox News reported that Neville Roy Singham, an American tech tycoon and self-proclaimed  communist living in China also finances many of the activist groups that fueled the “No Kings” tantrums, including the People’s Forum in New York, the Party for Socialism and Liberation, the ANSWER Coalition and CodePink, whose co-founder Jodie Evans is married to Singham.

My father used to tell a joke about a man who kept snapping his fingers compulsively. His wife sent him to a psychiatrist, who asked him, “What’s with the finger-snapping?” “It keeps the elephants away,” the man said.

“What?” said the shrink. “There are no elephants for hundreds of miles from here!” “See?” the man said. “It works!”

The “No Kings” protests are like that.

Another Dispatch From The Trump Deranged:

I keep posting these because I regard them as snap-shots of how the combination of irresponsible biased journalism, bubble-bases ignorance, and peer reinforcement is warping our social discourse and pushing the public into foolish and dangerous misconceptions. Is it an ethical problem? Sure it is. Posts like the one below make readers upset and irrational. They create false framings that warp perceptions of reality. The activate cognitive dissonance, in which the people who like, admire and respect the writer are moved to feel postively about the absolute garbage that he has published.

The author of the screed below that arrived on my Facebook feed yesterday is a wonderful human being. He is kind and effusive in his positive rhetoric; he sends me a birthday card every year, and I have only spent time with him face to face twice in 30 years. He never posts political rants: he is a lifetime showbiz writer, scholar and producer.

I assume this was triggered by the latest “No Kings” lunacy. My friend is also virtue-signaling to his showbiz connections, including me; since he likes and respects me, he assumes that I must agree with his sentiments. My friend is way, way out of his lane.

Open Forum, With A Prompt…

Get this…

Alyssa Izatt and Kimberley Brownlee wrote in the paper titled “Justice for Girls: On the Provision of Abortion as Adequate Care” that abortions should be forced on young women—legal minors— even if it requires “sedation or physical restraint.” This in a journal recently published by the University of Chicago Press.

The adults responsible for an underage girl’s care “should never pressure or compel her to continue a pregnancy,” they opined. “Nor should they confront her with the three ‘options’ of abortion, adoption, or mothering, as medical professionals are currently advised to do. Instead, her adult caregivers should view her impregnation as a malady and take steps to terminate it.”

They recommend sedation or restraint if necessary. Forced abortions. Not to save the mothers’ lives, but to eliminate the human lives that pro abortion activists believe are mere obstacles that need removal in the best interests of the mothers.

My opinion as an ethics expert: HOLY CATS! This is the reverse of “The Handmaiden’s Tale”!

But write about whatever you feel is ethically urgent.

The Great Stupid May Be Even More Stupid Than I Thought…

…which is terrifying.

At the beginning of this week, Chicago prosecutors charged an illegal immigrant from Venezuela, Jose Medina-Medina, with the murder-murder of Loyola freshman Sheridan Gorman. Medina-Median allegedly killed Gorman at a nearby beach early on the morning of March 19.

Loyola’s campus newspaper, “The Phoenix” first reported the charges in an Instagram post titled: “Immigrant Man Charged in Murder of Sheridan Gorman, DHS Involved,” and referred to Medina as an “illegal immigrant.”

There was student indignation, however, that the paper called an illegal immigrant an illegal immigrant. The paper, being staffed by students that Loyola’s campus indoctrination and The Great Stupid have rendered incapable of coherent thought, quickly rewrote the report to refer to the accused killer as a “Rogers Park Resident.” Then, to guarantee their place in The Great Stupid Museum, which I am hoping to fund, with this head-exploding apology:

“On March 23, a post on The Phoenix’s Instagram page carried the following headline: “Immigrant Man Charged in Murder of Sheridan Gorman, DHS Involved.”

That headline didn’t reflect the most important elements in the story, and it was taken down minutes later to prevent any further harm to affected community members.

Additionally, in the body of the original post, we described the man who was charged as an “illegal immigrant,” using language provided by the Department of Homeland Security. That language does not align with Associated Press style, nor does it align with the values of this newspaper.  No human’s existence is illegal, and we quickly changed our wording to reflect that.”

Wow.

Ethics Hero: Ruth’s Chris Restaurants. Ethics Dunce: Chilli’s. Civilization’s Prospects: Dimming…

Last night a client visiting D.C. took me to dinner at a local upscale restaurant. It was a nostalgic and bittersweet evening in addition to being, you know, yummy. (Stone crabs!) My late wife Grace loved going out to eat at a great restaurant, dressing up, feeling like this was an event and not just a meal. Since she died, my business crashed and my finances went to hell, I haven’t had a single meal at such an establishment. Oh, I’ve had some meals at decent places with excellent food, but the staffs are casual and a lot of diners—even me— are in jeans. That’s fine; it doesn’t interfere with the social experience or my enjoyment of the meal. And yet…

The Ruth’s Chris restaurant chain recently posted about the steakhouse’s dress code, reminding patrons that the desired atmosphere is “business casual” and “proper attire” is mandatory. Guests are to remove hats when entering, and if you have a baseball cap on, you will be stuck at the bar or the lounge.The main dining room will be off-limits. Dining rooms will not allow “gym wear, pool attire, tank tops, clothing with offensive graphics or language, revealing clothing, or exposed undergarments.”

Well, good. Civility, etiquette and respect for others are always victims of entropy, as air travel and theater-going have proven. Ruth’s Chris wants to hold the line, and that takes courage and a sense of responsibility. Being with other diners who care how they present to everyone around them is part of the positive experience of dining out at an excellent restaurant.

The slobs, as well the progressives, socialists, working class heroes and aspiring termites in the foundation of society, of course, do not agree. One critic on social media wrote, “Ruth’s Chris isn’t fine dining, it’s like one step up from Outback. This is going to make a lot of people not go.” I agree the restaurant is not The Prime Rib, but it’s about five steps up from Outback or Applebee’s. What’s the matter with classing up the joint a bit? The whole idea of maintaining levels of personal deportment is that it makes everyone feel better and behave better.

Thne some marketing whiz at Chili’s (which I would place a notch below Applebees’, but it’s close) saw an opportunity to virtue-signal man-on-the-street virtues. “The only dress code at Chili’s is that you have to be dressed,” it tweeted, setting off a tweet war.

Victory Girls, the right-ish blog, notes that “a general disdain about dressing for the occasion is a bit more indicative of an illness our culture cannot afford to ignore” and quoted writer Robert Heinlein, who once observed,

“A dying culture invariably exhibits personal rudeness. Bad manners. Lack of consideration for others in minor matters. A loss of politeness, of gentle manners, is more significant than is a riot.”

Bingo.