|Initial World View||Discussion Threads -- Read and/or Post||News Items|
|Membership||What Is A Moral Group?||Direct Moral Decline Thread||Moral Decline News|
Wow! I've come to the end of an emotional review of an emotional book and have no idea if there is even a slight claim to facts and logic, much less morality, in this Book.
I suggest you read a comic book!
And yet all these efforts at transparency and disclosure were derided as manipulation by our opponents, who, furthermore, accused us of lying about what we knew. Ignoring the chronology of events, as well as the government's efforts, some of our opponents invented a parallel reality, accusing us of a "coverup" even though the government was keeping the public informed, practically in real time, of all the evidence available and of the course of the investigation. Those who twisted the facts in this way cannot feel very proud today. Instead of backing the government during the worst crisis in Spain's recent history, our opponents declared that truth and transparency were on their side.
WSJ: September 24, 2003: Federal Court Strikes Down National Do-Not-Call Registry
OKLAHOMA CITY -- A federal judge has ruled that the Federal Trade Commission overstepped its authority in creating a national do-not-call list against telemarketers.
Either this judge is one of the infamous liberals, and his ruling should be overthrown? Or, the law was badly drafted so it could be struck down? Possibly the people who issued this Registry knew that it would be thrown out, but wanted the glory of the announcement. Because, now, they got the glory and the Court gets the brickbats!
There are obviously great cultural divides in the world. There is an article here that suggests that technology is the factor which differentiates the primitive from the advanced cultures. I would argue, in this article, that technology seems to be the most obvious explanation for culture divides, but that in fact it is "awareness levels" in the different groups and that this (internal) awareness level is outwardly manifest in moral or immoral behavior.
African Americans have been disproportionately affected by HIV/AIDS since the epidemic’s beginning and the disparity has deepened over time.1 African Americans represent 12% of the U.S. population but now account for more than half of all new HIV infections estimated to occur in the U.S. each year and approximately half of newly reported AIDS cases.2 They account for more people estimated to be living with AIDS and more deaths among persons with AIDS than any other racial/ethnic group. HIV was the number one cause of death for African Americans between the ages of 25 and 44 in 2000. The epidemic has had a disproportionate impact on different subgroups of African Americans including women, teens, children, and men who have sex with men, and the epidemic’s impact varies across the country. Moreover, African Americans with HIV/AIDS may face additional barriers to accessing care than their white counterparts.
The latest statistics show that African-Americans account for 54% of the 43,000 or so new cases of HIV infection in the U.S. last year, up from 35% of new cases in 1993, according to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Most troubling, in 2001 AIDS became the leading cause of death for African-Americans between 25 and 44 years of age
Ironically, the current struggle of same-sex marriages might be a continuation of the decay of the country’s biblical standard on marriage, which started with the acceptance of divorce.
With the gradual societal embracing of divorce over the past 50 years, the traditional marriage image has been utterly shattered. However, no one established a satisfactory replacement for the traditional moral authority — the Bible.
U.S. Supreme Court upholds decision that finds the Child Pornography Protection Act of 1996 unconstitutional
"technology may evolve to the point where it becomes impossible to enforce actual child pornography laws because the Government cannot prove that certain pornographic images are real children. In the event this occurs," he said, "the Government should not be foreclosed from enacting a regulation of virtual child pornography that contains an appropriate affirmative defense or some other narrowly drawn restriction" that does not violate the First Amendment.
Judges. Too many judges are unfit for their position. How else can one explain the New York State Supreme Court ruling that women can bare their breasts in public because men can? How to explain the judges who liberate criminals only to have those criminals murder and rape again? Or the many judges who regard their primary role as imposing their values on society? This has led to an undermining of the democratic process beyond the wildest hopes of any homegrown fascist or communist. (Dennis Prager)
Kansas City Star, June 27, 2003: Supreme Court invalidates Texas sodomy law
In Kansas, the decision was likely to affect several criminal cases in Johnson County District Court, where prosecutors have used the state's law to combat sexual activity in public park rest rooms.
Lewd Behavior -- Will The Laws Now Change?
The Sheriff’s Office is getting its message out through a series of periodic undercover sting operations, the most recent of which resulted in eight arrests last week. The rest area is located on the east side of I-4 near where International Speedway Boulevard branches off from the interstate. While the rest area has no bathroom facilities, there is a parking area along with picnic tables and an open field that has become a popular meeting spot for men looking for sex. The Sheriff’s Office’s Crime Suppression Team has targeted the area for periodic sting operations where a male deputy working undercover waits to be approached by suspected offenders. Once approached, the suspects strike up a conversation that quickly turns to sex. When the suspect exposes himself or commits any other offense, a signal is sent for the take-down team to move in.
"The petitioners," wrote Kennedy, "are entitled to respect for their private lives. The state cannot demean their existence or control their destiny by making their private sexual conduct a crime." The drafters of the Constitution, he concluded, "knew times can blind us to certain truths and later generations can see that laws once thought necessary and proper in fact serve only to oppress. As the Constitution endures, persons in every generation can invoke its principles in their own search for greater freedom."
Fox News: June 26, 2003: Close Look at the Supreme Court Reversal of the Anti-Sodomy Law
In Georgia, they outlawed sodomy for everybody. Texas, only for homosexuals. So what Justice O'Connor did is said is when you make that distinction, that triggers the Equal Protection Clause, and I can strike it down on that ground, not the ground the rest of the justices today used.
HUME: All right, now, Justice Scalia says in his dissent, that -- notes that the majority here said that they are not dealing with marital gay rights. He says do not believe it. What is he talking about?
An Act in Addition to the Act, Entitled "An Act for the Punishment of Certain Crimes Against the United States."
SEC. 2. And be it farther enacted, That if any person shall write, print, utter or publish, or shall cause or procure to be written, printed, uttered or published, or shall knowingly and willingly assist or aid in writing, printing, uttering or publishing any false, scandalous and malicious writing or writings against the government of the United States, or either house of the Congress of the United States, or the President of the United States, with intent to defame the said government, or either house of the said Congress, or the said President, or to bring them, or either of them, into contempt or disrepute; or to excite against them, or either or any of them, the hatred of the good people of the United States, or to stir up sedition within the United States, or to excite any unlawful combinations therein, for opposing or resisting any law of the United States, or any act of the President of the United States, done in pursuance of any such law, or of the powers in him vested by the constitution of the United States, or to resist, oppose, or defeat any such law or act, or to aid, encourage or abet any hostile designs of any foreign nation against United States, their people or government, then such person, being thereof convicted before any court of the United States having jurisdiction thereof, shall be punished by a fine not exceeding two thousand dollars, and by imprisonment not exceeding two years.
Is It OK For A Catholic University To Feature A Pro-Abortion Commencement Speaker?
Our concern is that many Catholic colleges and universities are inviting and honoring commencement speakers who are publicly and often stridently in opposition to clear, fundamental Catholic teaching. Most often we protest the selection of abortion-rights advocates, not because we are obsessed with this one issue, but because for some reason Catholic educators repeatedly invite speakers who are outspokenly "pro-choice."
Supreme Court to Decide: Can You Yell "Mom" in a Crowded Mall?
Americans tend to view First Amendment rights as near absolute, but another exception may soon be created as the Supreme Court considers the case of MegaDale Inc. vs. Lisa Hvizdos. The issue, say store owners, is that yelling "Mom" in a crowded shopping mall threatens their livelihood.
We have seen the power of amateur videos taken at events such as the Chicago School Hazing Incident. It is hard to ignore the "truth" in these videos. Obviously these videos are incomplete slices of life, but we tend to think of them as accurate for that slice. It is hard to find any other explanation for what was seen in these videos -- other than "wrong behavior" gone wild.
|Home Page||Table Of Contents||Discussion Threads||Membership||Copyright Notice|