Tag Archives: morality

“Very Contentious Issue”

Posted on by
Reply

Republican Ohio Governor Mike DeWine has vetoed the SAFE Act, which would have barred biological males from women’s sports and protected Ohio’s children from mutilation in the form of sex hormone…treatments…and related sex change surgeries until those children reached 18 years old. DeWine had had this bill on his desk since 15 December, yet he waited until the last moment to veto it.

DeWine called the debate over transgender youth a “very contentious issue….”

Riley Gaines was direct on the matter during those two weeks:

He hasn’t signed it yet. He has 2 more days to sign before it becomes law without his signature. Why the hesitation, [Governor DeWine]?

No—there was, and is, nothing contentious at all in moving to protect children. There’s nothing contentious at all in moving to protect women’s sports and the women who compete in them. Contention exists only in the minds of extremists on the Left and of cowards in public office.

Riley Gaines is right: of what was Mike DeWine so terrified?

Or was he just putting his political position at the top of the Ohio heap ahead of the safety and welfare of Ohio’s children and women athletes?

It’s embarrassing that DeWine is a member of the Republican Party.

A UN Official…

Posted on by
Reply

…gets one right.

Progressive-Democrat President Joe Biden, through organs of his administration, is moving to expand Title IX’s definition of sex and sexual discrimination to include “gender identity” and to bar schools, colleges, and universities from banning transgender athletes from women’s sports.

Even an agency of the UN sees this as…foolish.

Reem Alsalem, UN Special Rapporteur on violence against women and girls:

I share the concern expressed by women and girl athletes and women sports associations, as well as women and girls on sports scholarships, that the proposed Title IX rule changes would have detrimental effects on the participation of biological women and girls in sports, including by denying them the opportunity to compete fairly, resulting in the loss of athletic and scholarship opportunities[.]
More importantly, it would lead to the loss of privacy, an increased risk of physical injury, heightened exposure to sexual harassment and voyeurism, as well as a more frequent and accumulated psychological distress due to the loss of privacy and fair and equal sporting and academic opportunities[.]

Right on all counts. A better solution, and it is a problem that wants a solution, even as the Biden administration refuses even to consider the alternative, would be to modify Title IX to create a transgender section and separate transgender athletic programs.

A Proposal for Harvard University

Posted on by
Reply

Given the blatant antisemitic bigotry of Harvard’s President Claudine Gay, as well as her dishonesty, demonstrated by her plagiarism—She plagiarized her acknowledgments—and the antisemitism demonstrated by the Harvard Corporation, the school’s governing body, and its open condonement of Gay’s bigotry and dishonesty, when that body unanimously supported retaining her as President, it’s clear that drastic changes to Harvard University’s governance is badly needed.

A Harvard professor has suggested a pathway to that.

One faculty member, citing a carve-out in the Massachusetts Constitution that reserves authority over Harvard to the state legislature, has urged Massachusetts lawmakers to install a government official on the board to provide more transparency and public accountability.

Here is the relevant section of that constitution, from Chapter V, Section I, Article III:

…it is declared, that the governor, lieutenant governor, council and senate of this commonwealth, are and shall be deemed, their successors, who with the president of Harvard College, for the time being, together with the ministers of the congregational churches in the towns of Cambridge, Watertown, Charlestown, Boston, Roxbury, and Dorchester, mentioned in the said act, shall be, and hereby are, vested with all the powers and authority belonging, or in any way appertaining to the overseers of Harvard College; provided, that] nothing herein shall be construed to prevent the legislature of this commonwealth from making such alterations in the government of the said university, as shall be conducive to its advantage and the interest of the republic of letters….

The professor is on the right track, but one government rep on a board of 13 or 14 won’t accomplish anything. The State needs to revamp the Corporation board altogether—maybe put on the board reps from the ministers of the congregational churches in the towns of Cambridge, Watertown, Charlestown, Boston, Roxbury, and Dorchester in sufficient number that their aggregation outnumbers the remaining members, if they’re not, instead, to replace the incumbents. Additionally—these are Critical Items—the State needs to remove the President’s sole authority over the board’s agenda and to eliminate the board’s authority to select their own replacements.

 

Massachusetts’ constitution can be read in its entirety here.

Responsibility and Carping

Posted on by
Reply

A couple of letter writers in Wednesday’s Wall Street Journal‘s Letters section have some remarks about the way Israel is (trying to) prosecute its defense against Hamas’ war of extermination.

First is the Progressive-Democrat Congressman from Massachusetts, Seth Moulton. He so-piously wrapped himself in his status as a veteran and a US Marine to decry the Gaza civilian casualties occurring as Israel fights to defend itself. In his bellyaching about those casualties, he implies that they are the result of IDF action. He very carefully, though, ignores the fact that those casualties are inflicted on Gaza’s civilians by Hamas directly, as those terrorists shoot the civilians who are trying to leave the combat zone, especially including those proximate targets that the IDF routinely is at pains to identify beforehand so those civilians could otherwise depart.

Moulton further carefully ignores the fact that Hamas inflicts those casualties indirectly by placing their weapons caches, their rocket and missile launchers, and their command centers inside Gazans’ residential buildings, schools, and hospitals.

Moulton, perhaps even more despicably, provides no evidence whatsoever to support his contention that the IDF isn’t doing enough to protect the civilians even as it tries to pick out the terrorist immersing himself in the civilian crowd.

Israel certainly is responsible for its actions. So is Hamas. Carping from safety, by anyone, is not responsible action.

On the other hand, a letter-writer from outside the Progressive-Democrat Beltway Bubble, Paul Mertis of Atlanta, pointed out these items, contradicting Moulton:

[Biden to Netanyahu:] “There was no reason why we had to be in a war in Afghanistan at 9/11. There was no reason why we had to do some of the things we did.” Perhaps Mr Biden should be reminded that while it is approximately 7,000 miles from Washington to Kabul, Gaza borders Israel.

To which I add, regarding Biden’s…irresponsible…advice: yeah, that was just some people that did something. And, it’s also 5,900 miles from Washington to Gaza. It’s easy enough for Biden—and Moulton, come to that—to sit safely on the faraway sidelines and carp, while terrorists, operating from inside Gaza, try to destroy the nation on whose borders Gaza sits.

The Harvard Corporation and Antisemitism

Posted on by
Reply

The Harvard Corporation (or, formally, President and Fellows of Harvard College) is the body that, overall, governs Harvard University. That august forum has just explicitly backed Harvard President Claudine Gay in the aftermath of her antisemitic testimony before a House committee several days ago. The corporation said her testimony was unfortunate, but that otherwise everything is jake for and with her.

It’s convenient for Gay, though, that she also sits on the Harvard Corporation. Although she cannot vote on matters before the board, she does set its agenda.

I have to wonder whether the subject of her handling of antisemitism would have been on the agenda if she didn’t already know the Corporation’s decision.