We’ve heard it before, “The ends justify the means.” That’s used when someone does something wrong, but for what they believe to be the right reason. For example, when someone shoots an intruder to save their child, we can say that the ends justify the means. When a country goes to war to defend themselves or others, the evil of war is justified by the right of self-defense. But what happens when the ends are not so black and white to everyone? Do the ends justify the means when both the ends and means are harmful to others? - Live 4PM ET with Host Paul Engel @CyberEngel @OutLoudNews
LIVE http://rdo.to/TALKLOUD
iHEART RADIO http://bit.ly/2mBrCxE
Who is in charge of your children? That has been a perennial question that has grown in importance over the last few years. When I was a child, it was understood that, with rare exceptions, parents were in charge of a child’s upbringing. This included medical, religious, and educational decisions. However, over the last few decades, the role of the parent in these decisions has been replaced by experts. What happens when the goal of the experts differs from those of the parents? Who decides the future of the rising generations? It was understood that the state acted in loco parentis, in place of the parents, only for the safety of the child. A recent case in U.S. District Court shows that be it health departments, child services, schools, or even the courts. Government not only believes they know better than the parents, they are more than willing to act in loco parentis tyrannis.
https://constitutionstudy.com/?p=8897
With the release of ChatGPT and other artificial intelligence (AI) applications, there has been a lot of speculation and downright assertions about our future. With over 30 years of experience in Information Technology (IT), not more than a passing understanding of AIs, I've come to the conclusion that much of what I've heard is more science fiction than fact. A recent court case decided in the D.C. District Court revolved around one very important question. Do AIs have rights?
In this third installment of the three-part series on the branches of government, we look at the role of the third and weakest branch. At least that is what our Founding Fathers thought of it. What is the role of the federal judiciary? What are the extent of their powers, how do they related to the other two branches of government, and why is a proper understanding of the role of the judiciary critical if the United States is to remain a constitutional republic?
https://constitutionstudy.com/?p=8575
It is said that when Marie Antoinette heard about the plight of the poor, she said “Let them eat cake.” I don’t know if that is true or not, but it does describe how those in government react to the abuses they inflict on the American people.
Want to vote for someone other than the candidates from the two largest political parties? Let them eat cake. Are you a target of a weaponize federal law enforcement? Just go eat cake. Complain about the illegal actions take by those in government? They have a terrible cake for you to eat, and you better enjoy it or else.
Those in government better hope the American people treat their tyrants better than the French treated Ms. Antoinette. - Live 4PM ET with Host Paul Engel @CyberEngel @OutLoudNews
LIVE http://rdo.to/TALKLOUD
iHEART RADIO http://bit.ly/2mBrCxE
I don’t know about you, but I’m sick and tired of all the nonsense around the election. It used to be, the biggest issue was the bombardment of campaign mailers and commercials, now we have to deal with an onslaught of nuisance spam emails, often from campaigns in other states. Then there are the near constant “reports” of malfeasance from both sides, shenanigans by election officials, claims of illegal voting. I don’t know about you, but I’m ready to be done with this election. The only thing that bothers me more is how so many Americans decide who they will vote for. - Live 4PM ET with Host Paul Engel @CyberEngel @OutLoudNews
LIVE http://rdo.to/TALKLOUD
iHEART RADIO http://bit.ly/2mBrCxE
Was the Occupational Safety and Health Administration properly created? Was the grant of authority Congress gave the agency constitutional and valid, or did Congress create an overpowered agency, to micromanage businesses throughout the United States. That is the question in the case Allstates Refractory Contractors, LLC v. Julie A. Su, Acting Secretary of Labor, et.al. Sadly, the Supreme Court decided not to year the case, even if Justice Gorsuch would have and Justice Thomas wrote a dissent.
