“The Ethicist” Answers the Dumbest Question Yet…

Sure, Prof. Appiah answers the question from “Name Withheld” correctly, because if he didn’t, the New York Times would have to send its long-time author of its weekly ethics advice column to Madam Louisa’s Home for the Addled and Bewildered. But why did he feel he had to answer such an easy question at all? Slow week for the ol’ mailbag, Kwame?

A wife worried about the fact that her husband is sedentary, fat, and getting fatter asked if it was wrong to try to get him to take affirmative steps to lose some weight. “As we both approach 50,” she writes, “I worry that his B.M.I., which is 30, and his B.R.I. (body roundness index, a measure of abdominal fat) are high (he can’t even button some of his shirts around the middle), which could lead to other health issues. I’ve already tried encouraging him to move more and eat better, but I can’t schedule every one of my workouts for us to exercise together, and he dislikes some of the routines I do, anyway. He’s also very sensitive about his weight.”

“Is it wrong for me to try to get him to take Ozempic?,” she finally asks. “I’m hoping that losing weight will help boost his energy levels, which might lead to more self-care. I know it’s not my body, and I’m not his doctor, but as his wife I also know it will fall to me to care for him if health issues arise.”

Ignore her concentration on Ozempic; she’s not asking about the risks involved with that medication or about the perils of quick fixes. She’s asking if it is wrong (this is The Ethicist she’s writing to) for a spouse to try to get the man she has vowed to love and to cherish to be responsible and take care of himself before it’s too late. Ozempic, Weight Watchers, jogging, whatever: how can a wife’s diligent efforts to somehow convince her husband to get healthier be wrong, as in “unethical”?

Continue reading

More Observations on Zohran Mamdani…

To his credit, for it is both smart and responsible, the shock winner of the Democratic primary and the presumptive mayor-of-NYC-to-be, Zohran Mamdani has been having interviews with everyone who will sit down with him….well, except for Fox News and its ilk, at least so far. As the fawning interview with MSNBC’s Jen Pasaki shows, the guy is smart, articulate, engaging, charismatic, and, I would say, a skilled demagogue.

Oh-oh.

Continue reading

Signature Significance: The Democrats’ Year-Old Debate Tweet

It was a year ago yesterday that Joe Biden revealed for all to see that America had a senile President. This was established beyond all doubt when he responded to an early question in his debate with Donald Trump by muttering and slurring Authentic Frontier Gibberish, ending with the immortal declaration, “We beat…Medicare.”

Even though anyone with two neurons to rub together knew that moment was curtains for hopes of a Biden re-election, the Democrats tweeted out the flaming lie above.

Yesterday social media wags were taunting and mocking Democrats for a tweet that “hasn’t aged well,” but it’s not funny. It’s terrifying. That tweet demonstrated then and demonstrates now just how Orwellian, Machiavellian, dishonest, ruthless and untrustworthy the Democratic Party has become. It has no regard for transparency, no respect for the public, and no shame.

Even as it was engaging in “it isn’t what it is” disinformation, the Democrats were hustling behind the scenes to dump Biden from their ticket. They issued that tweet knowing full well that Biden didn’t win the debate, he disgraced himself in it. But like the committed totalitarians they are, his party directed its faithful to believe what they told them to believe. Biden won the debate as Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia.

A trustworthy, democracy-supporting, patriotic political party doesn’t issue a message like that. A dangerous political party does.

A Perfect Example of a “Trump Lie”

On both MSNBC and CNN today, a big deal was made over the fact that President Trump said that “no other country” confers automatic citizenship on those born within its borders. They were both sneering so hard that I bet they needed a lip massage afterwards, “Of course, 33 nations have birthright citizenship,” said one, with the other making a similar statement.

No question about it, they are right and Trump was wrong. What he meant, however, was “No nations anywhere but the Americas have birthright citizenship, and we are the only major power in the world that does.” Or, “Almost no nations that know what the fuck they are doing have birthright citizenship.” Presidents shouldn’t be that careless, but Trump is, he refuses to change, he’s not going to, and nobody should pretend that they are shocked when he does.

Here’s the list, as represented in the chart above: Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Barbados, Belize, Bolivia, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Costa Rica, Cuba, Dominica, Ecuador, El Salvador, Gambia, Grenada, Guatemala, Guyana, Honduras, Jamaica, Lesotho, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Trinidad and Tobago, Tuvalu, United States, Uruguay, and Venezuela.

Continue reading

Mahmoud v. Taylor: No, LBGTQ Indoctrination Is Not The Theory of Evolution

…and shame on the three Progressive, woke Justices who are implying that it is.

24-297 Mahmoud v. Taylor (06/27/2025), just handed down by the Supreme Court, should have been an easy 9-0 decision. Sadly, the three female radicals on the Court (I once had high hopes for Justice Kagan, who’s not, you know, an idiot like the other two, but she clearly has been brain-washed with Clorox or something, so the tally was 6-3) opposed the holding that families choosing not to have their children exposed to pro-gay, bi-, trans, etc propaganda in their public school classes have a right to do so. (At least the majority didn’t say parents have an obligation to do so, which would have been my position.)

The decision declared illegal a Maryland school board’s decision to deny opt-outs for religious students during such scintillating in-class readings as “Uncle Bobby’s Wedding,” a story about a child’s gay uncle marrying a man, and “Pride Puppy,” an alphabet primer about a dog who gets lost at a gay pride parade. Incredibly, the lower court and Court of Appeals had sided with the school against a group of Muslim, Roman Catholic and Ukrainian Orthodox parents who argued that the school board’s lack of an opt-out policy breached their right to exercise their religion under the First Amendment.

“The Board’s introduction of the ‘LGBTQ+-inclusive’ storybooks, along with its decision to withhold opt outs, places an unconstitutional burden on the parents’ rights to the free exercise of their religion,” Justice Samuel Alito Jr. wrote for the conservative majority. “[F]or many people of faith across the country, there are few religious acts more important than the religious education of their children…In the absence of an injunction, the parents will continue to be put to a choice: either risk their child’s exposure to burdensome instruction, or pay substantial sums for alternative educational services.”

To read the hysterical dissent from the three knee-jerk progressives, SCOTUS just returned to the bad old days of Tennessee v. Scopes (1925), when a state made it illegal to teach Darwin’s theory of evolution because it contradicted the Bible (as Clarence Darrow showed by making a monkey out of William Jennings Bryan on the witness stand, Darwin didn’t and doesn’t).

Continue reading

From the Res Ipsa Loquitur Files….[Updated]

That’s one of the anti-Musk “exhibits” displayed by Rep. Melanie Stansbury (D-NM). Yes, she’s an Incompetent Elected Official. (I can’t wait for her to scream “Those budget figured don’t add up!”) Yes, she’s an embarrassment. Yes, she’s an idiot. [Special thanks to long, LONG-time commenter Neil Dorr, who informed me who the math genius was.]

Before I proceed, HIT IT, L’il Abner and Marryin’ Sam!

Rueful observations…

1 And they wonder why American trust in our government institutions is falling…

2. If Democrats can’t find a legitimate poll to justify their positions, they just make one up. That is proof right there…

3. Even if that chart were not completely incompetent, dishonest and absurd, how is a poll on what DOGE is doing and has done relevant to anything? All it shows is that the public’s inattentive and gullible consumption of partisan propaganda from news organizations causes it to believe one thing or another. A poll has no bearing on whether a government program or action is wise, effective or necessary.

4. Consider how many government employees had to be lazy, ignorant or stupid (or all three) for that chart to get into the hearing and on TV. We begin with the Congresswoman, of course, then all of her staff and the drones who made the chart.

5. As usual, this is one more indictment of the public school system.

6. The Democrats are doing their damnedest to snatch away the GOP’s longtime title as “The Stupid Party.”

7. The social media wags are having a ball with this one. Example: “I agree with that poll 110%!”

8. Democracy Dies in Cretinism.

Open Forum, “I Wasn’t Going To Have One But Then My Head Exploded” Edition….

We just had an open forum a few days ago, so I was going to skip the Friday Forum. Then I read this, my head exploded, I already was struggling because I didn’t sleep at all last night, so I need some time to mop up and repack my head:

The Department of Justice filed a lawsuit against Minnesota Wednesday for its laws that provide free and reduced tuition rates to illegal aliens. The laws, a DOJ press release contends, unconstitutionally discriminate against out-of-state U.S. citizens, who are not afforded the same privileges at Minnesota’s public colleges and universities….According to the lawsuit [“…which names Gov. Tim Walz, Attorney General Keith Ellison and the Minnesota Office of Higher Education as defendants”], federal law prohibits states from providing illegal aliens with any post secondary education benefit that is denied to U.S. citizens….The lawsuit explains how a 2013 state law allows illegal aliens who establish residency in Minnesota to benefit from reduced, in-state tuition rates….Additionally, the DFL-controlled Minnesota Legislature established in 2023 a free tuition program for students whose families make less than $80,000 annually. Illegal aliens are eligible for the program. The lawsuit asks the U.S. District Court to declare the laws unconstitutional and prohibit their enforcement.

“We are reviewing the lawsuit and will vigorously defend the state’s prerogative to offer affordable tuition to both citizen and non-citizen state residents,” a spokesperson for the attorney general’s office said.”

KABOOM!

A few rueful points, and then you write about whatever you want…

  • Why are we just hearing about this now, when the knuckleheaded governor of Minnesota was running from August 2024 to November to be a heartbeat from the Presidency? Why didn’t Trump confront Harris with that insanity? Why did no one in the news media, Axis or not, report on it?
  • These laws are the equivalents of “Welcome, illegal immigrants!” invitations to break the law, with Minnesota being a “sanctuary state.” Minnesota citizens are that stupid, or in the alternative, that clown car crazy? How did they get that way? Can they be treated? 
  • What logic can possibly justify this?
  • Note that the Minnesota AG is still obfuscating, not having the honesty of integrity to call a metaphorical spade a spade. “Non-citizen state residents”! The state lies, cheats and steals under Walz, but this is what the Democratic Party now stands for. No wonder he thinks he has a shot at the Presidential nomination in 2028.

Back to brain clean-up…

Unethical Rendition of the National Anthem Ethics: Regarding Broadway Diva Kristin Chenoweth

Kristin Chenoweth, the long-time Broadway soprano who has won accolades for, among other triumphs, her performance as Glinda in “Wicked, has been getting flamed on social media and elsewhere for her performance of “The Star Spangled Banner” before the NBA’s Championship Finals.

Another performing soprano I know and trust was horrified at Kristin’s rendition, writing me, “She needs to be put out to pasture for this. There’s not a single redeeming quality about it. I can’t believe how amateur her technique and choices are. Shameful and disappointing.  I used to think she was talented. Now I just think she’s made a career out of being a hack.”

Continue reading

Twin Comments of the Day: “Popeye Time: I Am Finally Forced Into Responding To Woke Nonsense on Facebook”…

Two longtime and esteemed commenters delivered worthy comments of the day on the same post almost back-to-back, and I’ve decided that they should be posted that way, since the second referred to the first. The original post concerned my response on Facebook to a particularly facile and lazy defense of DEI.

Heeeeeere’s Here’s Johnny and Chris Marschner in their tag team Comment of the Day on the post,Popeye Time: I Am Finally Forced Into Responding To Woke Nonsense on Facebook

Well, one good point by [the banned commenter whose name must never be spoken, BCWNMNBS for short ]: Avoid a rush to judgment, as in “Now THIS is legitimate guilt by association”.

But [BCWNMNBS] is wrong about allowance of liberal comments here. I’ve made a few myself, sometimes sincere (I’m bi-polar when it comes to politics), sometimes playing the role of a progressive just to provoke an argument and force a stronger defense of a position. So far, I’m still here.

As to that Facebook post, the demand to be specific is rather ironic since neither DEI nor the component parts of that acronym have specific definitions.

Diversity — the high school where I taught in my second career had a welcoming sign in the lobby that said “Strengthened by Diversity.” My own thought on that was that we are strengthened by unity, but enriched by diversity. But, then, the enrichment can lead to strengthening. But, the enrichment and the strengthening come from voluntary association, not forced association which usually is counterproductive. What does the FB poster have in mind for diversity? Hmmm. Don’t know. No specifics.

Equity — for Progressives, this seems to mean equal outcomes, which is destructive of initiative, individual effort, perseverance, and so on. Or, does it mean ensuring a broadening of opportunities? Again, I don’t know what the FB poster has in mind.

Inclusion — Again, don’t know, but this sure sounds like something forced on people, which would be contrary to a basic right of freedom of association.

So, to the FB poster, from now on, be proud of your opinions, state specifically what you mean, don’t hide behind a simplistic slogan, let everyone know exactly what it is you are promoting.

And, to [BCWNMNBS], who may still be lurking, what you see as sealioning could actually be a variant of the Socratic method. Motive matters, and often enough, the motive of the one asking the questions is perceived differently by an observer, but, in either case, the effect should be to cause a refinement or adjustment of an initial position on an issue.

***

Soon thereafter, Chris Marschiner contributed Part II:

Continue reading

Announcing a New Ethics Alarms Principal: The Jumanji Axe

As regular and long-time readers here know, Ethics Alarms is fond of useful analogies and metaphors from popular culture that illustrate regularly occurring ethics breaches, self-defeating irresponsible conduct, or the proper remedies or reactions to them, in society at large or various segments of it. Hence we have the Barn Door Fallacy, the Julie Principle, the Popeye, the Nelson (“Ha-ha!”), the Ripley, the Costanza, and quite a few others.

I was, just this morning, in a discussion with a bar ethics counsel regarding a serious problem in the legal world. It is a corrupt system that neither the legal profession nor the incompetent news media has let the public know about, one that amounts to a multi-level scandal that hurts everyone except the unscrupulous, greedy lawyers who participate in it. At one point she said to me, “You know, we have had the means available to address this all along, and it never occurred to us even when the solution was not only obvious, but right in our hands.”

And I thought of that moment above from “Jumanji.” At least the kid in the movie had an excuse, since he had been turned into a monkey….

Do you have some current candidates for an Ethics Alarms “Jumanji Axe”? Let me know about them in the comments.