Thursday, June 26, 2003
More on moralism | ![]() |
Alex Knapp at Heretical Ideas elaborates on my Scalia-bashing, and applies it more broadly:
You know, it’s odd how some conservatives like to have their cake and eat it, too when it comes to the state/society distinction. On the one hand, many conservatives argue that just because the state isn’t providing for the poor and homeless doesn’t mean that society won’t step up to fill in the gap. And yet, many of those same conservatives will turn right around and say that if we don’t keep drugs illegal, or we don’t maintain the ban on gay marriage, then society will just fall apart. So apparently, people are perfectly capable and responsible enough to provide for each other without state intervention, but if we can legally get high at the coffeeshop or marry someone of the same sex, then we’ll become junkies and leave our families for crazy gay Objectivists because hey, now we can! Anyone else see the incongruity there?
Yep.
Exhortation | ![]() |
Matt Welch, in a great article on immigration policy, says:
But ignored laws, suddenly enforced, will do more than weed out criminals and terrorists. It will drive people—including good, hard-working people—into the deepest of the black markets, never to interact with a government agency except maybe in the emergency room, or at the local jail.
Yes! This applies in every area of law: immigration, tax policy, municipal laws, the sodomy ruling today from the SCOTUS, the “drug war” ad infinitum ad nausem. And all of you who have, not should read The Crying of Lot 49 now. Even if you find it to be the worst kind of pretentious wankery, and you may, you should still read it.
Oh, and also, The Soft Bulletin by the Flaming Lips is one of the greatest albums ever made. Today at least, it is the greatest. You may find it to be the worst kind of pretentious wankery. I disagree.
A Layman’s Guide To Bayesian Filtering | ![]() |
This is possibly the most boring headline I have ever written. Who cares! It’s interesting! Via slashdot comes this story which explains a Bayesian approach to email spam-filtering in easy to understand terms. Read it here!
Justice Scalia versus common sense | ![]() |
Score one for privacy!! Today, the Supreme Court issued a ruling that essentially overturned all state sodomy laws still on the books. The decision was 6-3, and Scalia, Rehnquist, and Thomas dissented. Scalia took the unusual step of reading his dissent from the bench:
“The court has largely signed on to the so-called homosexual agenda. . . .The court has taken sides in the culture war,” Scalia said, adding that he has “nothing against homosexuals.”
Oh Really, sir? And I bet some of your best friends are homosexuals, too.
Scalia is this close to being a great justice, and would be but for his willingness to let his own moral codes take precedence over legal questions.
[moreover] Although I applaud strict constructionism of the Constitution in general, I feel it has limits. Much like few Christians follow every single word of the Bible, Constitutional fundamentalism is an irrational and unsound, though logically safe, philosophy.
Outage | ![]() |
So, this blog has been rolled over to the “new” blogger template, which wiped out the ability to post yesterday.
Now, I’m off on vacation so posting from me will be light to nonexistent. Over to you, WCM and Mr. Bucket!
Oh yes, and the comments are not working.
Johnny Two-Cents at Blogspot: Not Just Another Dog And Pony Show.



