I was reading it, and I came to the link about male polygamy/female monogamy and clicked on it, and my work computer started playing the Judgment Day rhythm at me...at which point, it being my work computer, I hastily linked out.
But yes, it looks interesting. I'll have to go back tonight.
My book du jour is "H.L. Mencken on Religion", edited by S.T. Joshi, full of dissertations on the pernicious effects that the ku klux klergy has on politics, science and society. My favorite quote so far:
"No one now expects the courts, and especially the Federal Courts, to pay any attention to the Bill of Rights. When they mention it at all, it is usually to argue that it doesn't mean what it plainly says. Judicial cabalism has reduced it to merely historical interest, and any defendant who pleads it confesses thereby that he is extremely romantic, perhaps to the verge of the pathological."
...which is as true today as it was in 1925, and it makes me feel oddly optimistic, since we had the Warren court between then and now. These things are cyclical, not a continuum from bad to worse, and the day will come when we have good Presidents and thereby good federal courts once again.
We saw a documentary on Bobby Kennedy last night, and it mentioned how he and his family used to pray that JFK would be the best president ever. It occurred to me that one of the easiest ways to answer that prayer would be to make sure that none of the subsequent ones were quite as good...
Interesting. I recommend, also, an essay with a similar focus (but a different analysis), by David Brin: http://www.davidbrin.com/neoromantics.html (http://www.davidbrin.com/neoromantics.html)
(no subject)
Date: 2004-12-06 04:53 pm (UTC)I was reading it, and I came to the link about male polygamy/female monogamy and clicked on it, and my work computer started playing the Judgment Day rhythm at me...at which point, it being my work computer, I hastily linked out.
But yes, it looks interesting. I'll have to go back tonight.
(no subject)
Date: 2004-12-06 05:13 pm (UTC)"No one now expects the courts, and especially the Federal Courts, to pay any attention to the Bill of Rights. When they mention it at all, it is usually to argue that it doesn't mean what it plainly says. Judicial cabalism has reduced it to merely historical interest, and any defendant who pleads it confesses thereby that he is extremely romantic, perhaps to the verge of the pathological."
...which is as true today as it was in 1925, and it makes me feel oddly optimistic, since we had the Warren court between then and now. These things are cyclical, not a continuum from bad to worse, and the day will come when we have good Presidents and thereby good federal courts once again.
(no subject)
Date: 2004-12-07 01:43 pm (UTC)A wonderful expression. Thanks for sharing.
(no subject)
Date: 2004-12-06 05:57 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2004-12-06 06:43 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2004-12-06 06:57 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2004-12-06 09:19 pm (UTC)