Thursday, November 6, 2014

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit Upholds Gay Marriage Bans...

Rational Nation USA
Purveyor of Truth



USA TODAY - The same-sex marriage movement lost its first major case in a federal appeals court Thursday after a lengthy string of victories, creating a split among the nation's circuit courts that virtually guarantees Supreme Court review.

The 2-1 ruling from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit reversed district court rulings that had struck down gay marriage bans in Michigan, Ohio, Kentucky and Tennessee.

Read more on the socon agenda at work BELOW THE FOLD.

12 comments:

  1. The stand of most Republicans on this is one reason I am not euphoric about their recent strong victory at the voting booth.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Good link, as its warnings against abusive state power at the expense of the people and their rights cut across party lines, or "left" and "right". Helps me look past the Godwin's Law cliche of its logo.

    ReplyDelete
  3. The fact that the future of gay-rights could potentially end up in the hands of Scalia and Thomas is disconcerting at best.

    ReplyDelete
  4. About that link, Leonard Peikoff commits an internal inconsistency that is itself an exemplar of creeping fascism. His agenda says in essence: If you don’t agree with me, then you are a latent fascist. Specifically, his antipathy towards environmental protection (i.e. “ecology fanatics” and “government control over the energy industry”) has the moral equivalency of dumping HIS sewage and trash on YOUR property.

    How many of you recall Love Canal and the residential neighborhoods rendered too toxic for habitation! Notwithstanding the loss of private homes and entire communities! How many of you recall the Cuyahoga River that caught fire due to high concentrations of flammable industrial pollutants! How many of you recall efforts by the ethyl lead industry – marketers of leaded gasoline that caused brain damage and learning disabilities in children – to suppress the medical evidence. Shall we talk about formaldehyde – a major cause of leukemia in children – and the efforts of Koch Industries (with a 98% monopoly on formaldehyde production in the U.S.) to deny the medical evidence for one purpose only: To protect their filthy franchise! Student radicals of the 1960s! You mean the student radicals who protested a misguided war that wasted 55,000 Americans lives – and harassed by hard hats chanting “America, love it or leave it!” Who were the brown shirts of this era?

    Student radicals? Do you mean James Chaney, Andrew Goodman, and Michael Schwerner, who were shot on the night of June 21–22, 1964 by members of the Mississippi White Knights of the Ku Klux Klan! Those student radicals?

    Are you so in love with Randian philosophy that you refuse to sees the holes in Peikoff’s argument - and the imbedded Godwin fallacies!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Piekoff, in my opinion is more right than he is wrong. I assume you have read his book, "Ominous Parallels", which primarily concerns itself with the parallels between the USA and Germany of the 30's and 40's etc. Understanding your disdain for Ayn Rand I understand your position on Piekoff.

    I agree there are inconsistencies with respect to Piekoff's environmental stance. However, one can argue this to the extreme the other way. Suffice it to say I have had personal business experiences with environmental agencies as well as OSHA, they were not pleasant, they were unreasonable on their part, and ultimately after a great waste of time the business was able to mitigate what was a totally unreasonable emand by the agencies.

    Reasonable regulations that truly protect the environment and reasonable regulations that require safeguards for people safety and health are sensible and in the long term rational interests of everybody.

    Remember it is impossible to idiot proff and idiot. That is what Piekoff in essence was saying. IMNHO.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I wouldn’t call these “inconsistencies.” Rather, I would characterize these as sweeping generalizations loaded with weasel words:

      Liberals who demand public control” [first bullet point]

      devoid of principles” [third bullet point].

      anti-intellectual educational system” and “absolute truth” …” [forth bullet point]

      student radical movement” and “ecology fanatics” [fifth bullet point]

      decadence, moral bankruptcy, and nihilist art” [seventh bullet point]

      Loaded with weasel words and references to Nazism in the same article … it leads to only one conclusion: Godwin’s Fallacy.

      Whose “absolute truth?” Is this the same “absolute truth” as espoused by religious fanatics? By liberals? By conservatives? What does Peikoff mean by “devoid of principles.” What makes his cup half full and mine half empty? What turns conservationists into ecology fanatics? Does Peikoff also pretend to be an art critic? What gives Peikoff a monopoly on truth, knowledge, or principle?

      Where are those “student radicals of the 1960s?” Today, most of them are at or near retirement age; having raised a generation of children; having dutifully paid taxes their entire lives. Where’s the fascism here?

      Damn! How I detest opinionated and judgmental people. What a bore!

      Delete
    2. Damn! How I detest opinionated and judgmental people. What a bore!

      I guess that would be most. Everyone (conservatives, libertarians, Marxists (or communists), liberals etc.) has an opinion and most in one way or another make judgements. This occurs throughout their lives. The smart ones adjust in the face of new and credible information that bringds their paradigm(s) into question. I leave it at that because I make the point for consideration, not to be judgemental.

      I do not pretend to know Piekoff beyond that which he has written and I have read. Does much of what he says have merit? Yes IMO. Does everything stand up under scrutiny? No. In as much as I don't demomize all liberal thought just because it is liberal neither do I demonize all libertarian, objectivist, or conservative thought. I consider it the most prudent course to follow.

      Delete
  6. RN said "Reasonable regulations that truly protect the environment and reasonable regulations that require safeguards for people safety and health are sensible and in the long term rational interests of everybody."

    Yet in today's environment of corruption, we also have regulations to keep businesses down and protect monopolies, trusts, and moneyed interests (consider for one example the many regulations in many states to prevent health insurance providers from selling across state lines). Or the DMCA, so much of which is censorship and control that has nothing to do with even a hint of the public interest whatsoever.

    I also remember the "UPN" TV network. It didn't do well, did it? A local non-UPN station picked up some of the shows and showed them all after midnight on Sunday. The cable company wanted to bring in a full UPN affiliate from far away, but they would have faced a stiff fine from the FCC for doing so. This is just one of many such regulations.... that have everything to do with protecting business interests and nothing to do with safety, health, or the long term rational interests of anyone.

    ReplyDelete
  7. RN: “Suffice it to say I have had personal business experiences with environmental agencies as well as OSHA …

    I have some personal experiences too … a family business, a well-established brand name famous in America during the 1950s and 60s, started by my paternal grandparents and passed down to my uncle and my father (link to products and link to trademarks).

    A bitter rivalry ensued between my father and my uncle. In due course, my father cashed in his winnings, sold his shares to my uncle, and left the family business. Decades later, my uncle sold the patents, trademarks and customer lists for umpteen $$$ millions and retired. That is when the EPA caught up with him. You see, my uncle kept title to the land – including the environment mess he left behind. Process chemicals and buffing compound dumped in the local river, and trichloroethylene poured into the soil of the employee parking lot (later hidden beneath pavement).

    My cousins, heirs to my uncle’s fortune, were stuck with the environmental cleanup: Over $2 million in legal fees and tens of millions in mitigation costs. It cost them a big chunk of their inheritance. Today, all of my cousins except one are Tea Party Republicans - resentful of governmental regulations and the fortunes they lost. They have not come to terms with the fact their father was a polluter, a law breaker, a man without conscience, and a sociopath with no regard for neighbors and community whatsoever!

    My inheritance remains intact. How ironic! I know all about greed, money, unethical and illegal behavior, and sociopathy. This is why I consider myself a liberal and an environmentalist. Let's just say, I have first hand experience!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. As do I working for a company that paid millions in environmental clean up costs for property they purchased that had been polluted by former owners going back to the 1800's. While the company fought it in court they got stuck with the bill because the prior polluters had long since went out of business and in fact were long dead dead. Moral of the story, buyer beware. Get an independent environmental group to do ground water testing etc. before purchasing. We often learn by experience.

      Greed certainly does exist. Not every company is unethical, greedy to the point of irresponsibility, engages in illegal behavior , or sociopathic any more so than every individual engages in these practices.

      That is why I consider myself a moderate, environmentally responsible,and damn glad there are good companies for people to work and earn a living.
      Hoping developing countries like China, India, and et all become smarter, wiser, and more responsible quicker than we did.

      Delete
    2. Mainland China remains hardline socialist... the rulers control the means of production and all that. Where the dictators can and will have you killed for suggesting a smarter, wiser, and responsible way. This puts it way behind India (the world's largest democracy.

      You can also check out this article

      Delete

As this site encourages free speech and expression any and all honest political commentary is acceptable. Comments with cursing or vulgar language will not be posted.

Effective 8/12/13 Anonymous commenting has been disabled. This unfortunate action was made necessary due to the volume of Anonymous comments that are either off topic or serve only to disrupt honest discourse..

I apologizes for any inconvenience this necessary action may cause the honest Anonymous who would comment here, respect proper decorum and leave comments of value. However, The multitude of trollish attack comments from both the left and right has necessitated this action.

Thank you for your understanding... The management.