 |  |  |
| 0:00 | -1:20:51 |
In today's pod David and Sarah discuss a federal district court injunction against Texas's heartbeat bill, dive into the deep waters of Mississippi's unbearable aquatic greed, and discuss whether ten robberies is one "occasion" for crime or, well, ten. But that's not all! They also engage in a brief but spirited debate about whether the DOJ's letter about threats against school board members. The pod finishes by talking about manners. In an interesting way. We promise.
Show Notes:
The Sarah v David discussion of the DOJ order was just awesome. I felt like I was convinced by whomever was talking --- you were both very persuasive.
Thank you both for revisiting the UCLA argument. We still have some disagreements, but the idea that you two would be so responsive to comments here is really cool.
As for the reason the professor was punished: was it his content or his manner? I think there's a third option. I think he was punished in response to public outcry. Kevin Williamson has written extensively on the way that mobs can pressure institutions into doing their dirty work for them. That is what happened at UCLA.
Sorry, you didn't convince me about the UCLA kerfuffle, despite your gracious efforts. I "heard" the student's original email request as a power move, intended to intimidate the professor into stoking the storm of emotion. The response was in fact instructional in that it pretty calmly pointed out the pernicious nature of the request and the ground level impracticality of ever making such an accommodation.
YMMV. Obviously. But thanks for engaging.