Thursday, May 26, 2005
I'm not sure why I haven't felt motivated to blog for a week.
It's not like I do anything else.
But here's a story that would be hard to pass up.
I live in america's biggest town, indianapolis.
Periodicly the local red state government, fundy republicans,
do something that makes us a laughingstock in the blue states.
Exxon-Coats, an early attempt to ban the internet? Ours.
Dan Quayle. Hudnutt v Booksellers, trying to ban porn, ours.
Today's outrage is about a judge telling parents they can't raise their son in their religion.
Actually it's more muddled than that. The parents are wiccan. The judge's order prohibits exposure to non-mainstream religion. Wicca is about as mainstream as it gets - yule, groundhog's day, mayday, easter, halloween, are in the mainstream of our cultural heritage.
The iclu (recently added to left margin blogroll) is on the case.
And the blogosphere is all over it. Volokh, this guy, and hundreds of comments at eschaton.
Masson's an indiana news blog, has the most in-depth coverage.
More thoughts, a bit later, but still before my first cup of coffee.
Where did this story come from?
None of the bloggers or media say, but I'd guess the ACLU put out a press release.
The ICLU gets between 100 and 1000 requests for help for every case it takes.
Those cases it takes, tend to get publicity.
It's the 99 to 999 cases we never hear about, except via the grapevine of soemone's personal experience, which are the day to day work of the law.
This case is a travesty, yes, but it's not unusual, except that it is getting press, and an appeal by a group with deep pockets. Pagans aren't usually rich. Divorce is hard enough. So if this had happened to most people, they would have just gone along with having their rights violated. There are few, sometimes no, checks and balances to keep the system from failing. So the story in the media, over and over, is that justice will prevail on appeal, or not. But the media's presentation, by ignoring the day to day injustice where no law firm sends out a press release, is a false presentation, a myth of justice that I largely bought into.
Justice occasionally prevails. Whether it's worth my efforts to get up and fight for justice, is debatable. Is it futile, so that every victory just sets up another equal and opposite defeat? I can't tell.
Which is part of why my legal career is mostly on hold right now.
It's not like I do anything else.
But here's a story that would be hard to pass up.
I live in america's biggest town, indianapolis.
Periodicly the local red state government, fundy republicans,
do something that makes us a laughingstock in the blue states.
Exxon-Coats, an early attempt to ban the internet? Ours.
Dan Quayle. Hudnutt v Booksellers, trying to ban porn, ours.
Today's outrage is about a judge telling parents they can't raise their son in their religion.
Actually it's more muddled than that. The parents are wiccan. The judge's order prohibits exposure to non-mainstream religion. Wicca is about as mainstream as it gets - yule, groundhog's day, mayday, easter, halloween, are in the mainstream of our cultural heritage.
The iclu (recently added to left margin blogroll) is on the case.
And the blogosphere is all over it. Volokh, this guy, and hundreds of comments at eschaton.
Masson's an indiana news blog, has the most in-depth coverage.
More thoughts, a bit later, but still before my first cup of coffee.
Where did this story come from?
None of the bloggers or media say, but I'd guess the ACLU put out a press release.
The ICLU gets between 100 and 1000 requests for help for every case it takes.
Those cases it takes, tend to get publicity.
It's the 99 to 999 cases we never hear about, except via the grapevine of soemone's personal experience, which are the day to day work of the law.
This case is a travesty, yes, but it's not unusual, except that it is getting press, and an appeal by a group with deep pockets. Pagans aren't usually rich. Divorce is hard enough. So if this had happened to most people, they would have just gone along with having their rights violated. There are few, sometimes no, checks and balances to keep the system from failing. So the story in the media, over and over, is that justice will prevail on appeal, or not. But the media's presentation, by ignoring the day to day injustice where no law firm sends out a press release, is a false presentation, a myth of justice that I largely bought into.
Justice occasionally prevails. Whether it's worth my efforts to get up and fight for justice, is debatable. Is it futile, so that every victory just sets up another equal and opposite defeat? I can't tell.
Which is part of why my legal career is mostly on hold right now.
Comments:
Post a Comment
