From the Unethical Expert File: A Pet Expert Proves She Knows Nothing About Pets

/ Jack Marshall / 18 Comments

Why would TIME magazine print such self-evident junk? Oh, I know, I know…it’s about dogs and cats, so it is guaranteed clickbait, she’s written a book, so she must be an “expert” and if you can’t believe an ethicist, who can you believe? “The Case Against Pets” is intellectually dishonest, silly, and violates the Ethics Alarms principle that advocating an impossible course of action is unethical no matter how wonderful it would be if it could happen. (My favorite: pacifism.)

The author is Jessica Pierce, a bioethicist and the author of several books, including the one this thing is obviously meant to hype, “A Dog’s World: Imagining the Lives of Dogs in a World without Humans.” Boy, talk about a title signaling a dumb book! Next up: “Imagining the Lives of Dogs If They Could Graduate From Law School.”

Has this woman actually ever owned a dog? She says she has pets: I’m betting that it’s a hissing cockroach. Here are some of her assertions:

Continue reading →

I See That Ann Althouse Has Recognized the Increasingly Totalitarian Orientation of Progressives These Days….

/ Jack Marshall / 97 Comments

The betting is that te retired Madison, Wis. law professor and longtime bloggress will still vote for Biden and the Democrats—like Bill Maher, Ann talks a good neutrality game, but always seems to come home again—but still, her observations are frequently spot-on.

This morning she notes that “the top-rated comment — by a lot — at “A.I. Is Getting Better Fast. Can You Tell What’s Real Now?” is..

“Passing AI images off as real ones for the sake of commercial or political gain should be prosecuted as fraud.The severity of the penalties should match the level of risk that disseminating these images poses to our society; i.e., they should be extreme.”

Ann adds, “How terribly punitive and repressive, and yet, isn’t it what you’ve come to expect from the segment of America that reads the New York Times?Notice the aggression mixed with passivity. The comment-writer doesn’t want to face the challenge of becoming more perceptive and skeptical dealing with the onslaught of A.I. images. They want the government to do the dirty work and do it good and hard.”

Continue reading →

Why I Won’t Be Watching the Biden-Trump Debate

/ Jack Marshall / 5 Comments

The short answer is that I don’t feel like cleaning up all the brains, blood and bone after multiple head-explosions. The long answer follows.

The fact that a Presidential election (Is it “the most important Presidential election” ever? This has been claimed about almost every election I can remember, and I remember all of them since I was 10 years old. The Chicken Little Principle applies. Maybe it is, but the whole concept has been abused) is really and truly going forward with these two epically bad candidates as the public’s only serious alternatives represents a catastrophic failure of our system on many levels. This is not a good sign. We could not reach such a dire point if both parties, the public, our institutions, culture and values had not fallen apart in chunks. For me, watching the debate would feel like watching a bloody car crash involving close friends and relatives, except in their car seats instead, without seat belts, will be the United States of America.

Continue reading →

Ethical Quote of the Month: Heritage President Kevin Roberts

/ Jack Marshall / 36 Comments

“That’s sweet. They’re illegal aliens.”

—-Heritage Foundation president Kevin Roberts, “torn between two morons,” as Mary MacGregor might sing, on an MSNBC segment when informed that “we don’t use the term ‘illegal’ for undocumented individuals.”

No weenie he! If only every thinking person confronted with this standard “it isn’t what it is” dodge by open borders advocates responded with similar force. Unfortunately the best part, “That’s sweet!” was muffled by the cross-talk.

Symone Sanders-Townsend is trying hard to catch up to Joy Reid as MSNBC’s most repulsive ideologue. Imagine: Bernie Sanders actually employed this woman as his spokesperson! While discussing an illegal immigrant’s rape and murder of a 12-year-old girl, what Sanders-Townsend is most concerned about is describing him in a manner that hides the criminal’s actual status. How can anyone of sound mind and ethical orientation respect people like this, much less vote for the party they are working for?

Continue reading →

Comment of the Day: “Ethics Quote of the Month: Banned EA Commenter ‘David’” (2)

/ Jack Marshall / 8 Comments

As I just banned another misbehaving commenter who stopped off here just to show he was smarter than me and to defend Snopes (“…But for Snopes?”), it seems a propitious time to post this Comment of the Day, the second (the first is here) to be inspired by my post about another banned commenter calling me a “Trump supporting fascist.” And he was much smarter than the jerk I just banned.

Here is A M Golden’s Comment of the Day on the post, “Ethics Quote of the Month: Banned EA Commenter ‘David’”:

***

When I was about 11 years old, my grandparents’ church showed a movie called “The Hiding Place” about a Dutch family that hid Jews from the Nazis. I was fascinated by the idea that there could exist a country so very unlike America where people could be punished for helping others. Since I was already very interested in history, I began what is now a 40-plus-year study of the Third Reich and Hitler, in particular.

I do not consider myself an expert; however, I am certainly more knowledgeable than the average layperson. I have read hundreds of books over the years concerning Nazi Germany and not just the military build-up and harassment of Jews. I’ve read a lot about the culture, the education and the day-to-day life of Germans.

And, of course, I’ve read multiple biographies of Hitler himself. Not every biography is created equal, though (Don’t get me started on movies about Hitler. The last one I tried to watch was a TV movie called “Hitler: The Rise of Evil” starring an otherwise fine actor named Robert Carlyle. I turned it off after 10 minutes due to the blatant misrepresentations and outright fabrications of Hitler’s early life. Apparently, the expert consultant had his name taken off of it for the same reason). Some biographies are pretty bad and postulate things that are not likely to be true. A good example of this are the ones that try to push the idea that Hitler was a homosexual.

Continue reading →

No, Doctors, “Do No Harm” Does Not Mean “Make Anti-Israel/Gaza War Statements in Your Hospital”…

/ Jack Marshall / 9 Comments

We knew, or should have, that the medical profession was not immune from the ethics rot brought upon us by the advent of The George Floyd Freakout, the 2016 Post-Election Ethics Train Wreck, The Great Stupid (and its DEI sub-cult) and the rest. Here is a throbbing example.

At the University of California, San Francisco, one of the nation’s most respected medical schools and teaching hospitals, medical students and doctors have been protesting the war in Gaza. Chants of “intifada, intifada, long live intifada!” could be heard by patients in their hospital rooms at the U.C.S.F. Medical Center. It doesn’t really matter what the chants were: they could bebeen “Hey, hey, LBJ, how many kids did you kill today?” (one of my personal favorites.) Medical personnel should never promote political views in a hospital. Why isn’t that obvious?

Continue reading →

Wait—Why Is Snopes Choosing Now to Factcheck a 2017 Axis Big Lie That Has Been Used Against Donald Trump for 7 Years?

/ Jack Marshall / 26 Comments

Any theories?

Two day’s ago, Snopes, the thoroughly disgraced and discredited fact-checking site that routinely covers for Democrats and progressives while spinning to attack conservatives and Republicans, posted a factcheck headlined, “No, Trump Did Not Call Neo-Nazis and White Supremacists ‘Very Fine People.'”

I’ve written several posts about this persistent lie; it was in the original draft (in 2019) of the “The Big Lies Of The ‘Resistance’: A Directory” under Big Lie #4: “Trump Is A Racist/White Supremacist.” Before that, Ethics Alarms had posted in 2017 repeatedly about the Axis’s distortion of the Charlottesville riot; it was so long ago that I wasn’t even calling the “resistance”/Democrats/MSM propaganda trio “The Axis of Unethical Conduct”yet.

It would have been helpful if Snopes had weighed in then, but that would have undermined the Trump-smearing efforts of its supporters and allies. (Others have debunked this smear against Trump in the interim, such as CNN’s Jake Tapper. Joe Biden, for one, never stopped using it.)

Continue reading →

Curmie’s Conjectures: The Pedestrian Ways of the Wisconsin Supreme Court [Link Fixed!]

/ Jack Marshall / 8 Comments

[Two Curmie’s Conjectures columns in a week! We are blessed. I was also thrilled to have this particular issue examined by a non-lawyer, because in many areas, legal training fogs clear thinking when it is supposed to do the opposite. Also, of the two options Curmie closes with, the majority of lawyers I’ve discussed this case with vote for the second.

Oh—Curmie had a standard pedestrian sign as his illustration for this post, but I saw another opportunity to use one of my all-time favorite Charles Addams cartoons, and went for it. I hope he doesn’t mind—JM]

I was tempted to call the recent decision by the Wisconsin Supreme Court in the case of Sojenhomer v. Egg Harbor a head-scratcher, but I fear that such an assessment might be a little too kind.

Sojenhomer LLC owns a brew pub/restaurant located along County Highway G in the village of Egg Harbor.  They used a small portion of that land, .009 acres, for patron parking.  The village, citing safety concerns, sought to put in a sidewalk where those parking spaces currently are.  To do so, they sought to condemn that small area under eminent domain regulations.

The problem with their plan is that Wisconsin state law bars the use of condemnation to acquire property to establish or extend “a pedestrian way….”  So the case boils down to whether or not a sidewalk is indeed “a pedestrian way.”  The majority opinion, written by Justice Rebecca Frank Dallet, says no, to which I reply, “then what the hell is it?”

Continue reading →

The Sunday Times, 6/23/2024: A Snapshot of Culture, Bias, Propaganda and Values

/ Jack Marshall / 32 Comments

I’ve been meaning to try this for some time, so “here goes nuthin.” These are the ethics-relevant headlines (with links) in today’s print version of the New York Times. If you tell me in the comments which ones you would like me to share in a special “gift” format that takes them out from behind the paywall (I can’t do that for all of them) I’ll go back and do that.

Here are the stories:

Continue reading →

Ethics Hero or Ethics Dunce? Gov. DeSantis’s Decision to Veto All Florida Arts Funding

/ Jack Marshall / 7 Comments

As the late, great Arte Johnson would say (as Nazi soldier hiding in the grass) at least once an episode of “Rowan and Martin’s Laugh-in,” “Veeery interesting!”

Arts organizations in Florida were apparently completely blindsided this month when Florida’s conservative Republican governor Ron DeSantis struck all of the arts funding out of the state budget approved by the legislature. $32 million vanished in a flash and without warning. Arts groups large and small were counting on grants from that pool to balance their own budgets.

DeSantis, a Republican, gave no explanation other than to say that he made veto decisions “that are in the best interests of the State of Florida.” He vetoed nearly $950 million in total proposed spending, leaving $116.5 billion.

Continue reading →