Legal Positivism and the Attempt to Remake Reality

Leave a comment


Image via Wikipedia




The Failure of the Welfare/Warfare State

Leave a comment

Franklin Roosevelt IMG_4680

Image by OZinOH via Flickr








West Memphis Three Freed–Finally


Description unavailable

Some measure of justice has finally reached Jessie Misskelley, Jr., Damien Echols and Jason Baldwin, the three men who were convicted of the 1993 murders (the “Robin Hood Hills Murders”) of three young boys in West Memphis, Arkansas. During a time in which Southern Baptists, members of the Churches of Christ, Pentecostals, and other Evangelical bodies tilted toward Fundamentalism were in a hysteria about “Satanic cults” and “Satanic ritual abuse,” these men were convicted on a paucity of evidence. Recent DNA evidence showed no link between the West Memphis Three and evidence found at the scene. If the men had not made the Alford Plea, which means that they plead guilty from a legal standpoint but did not admit guilt, they would have almost certainly received a new trial. But given what they had already been through with ignorant Fundamentalist juries and prosecutors taking advantage of the almost pathological fascination some Fundamentalists have with Satanic activity (even though there is no evidence of any widespread Satanic activity and virtually none of ritual abuse), they took the safe route in order to be released and continue trying to clear their names. Mr. Echols practiced Wicca, and although as an orthodox Anglican Catholic I sharply disagree with the tenants of Wicca, it is a pantheistic nature religion that has nothing to do with Satanism. But some Fundamentalists seem to be unable to make these distinctions, as evidenced by their ignorant statements about the “evils’ of the Harry Potter series of books and movies. Such attitudes would be a sideshow if they did not lead to false convictions in actual legal cases such as the Robin Hood Hills murder case. The sad thing is that whoever actually committed the murders will most likely never be identified. This case should be a lesson about the dangers of extremists in any religion, including extremists in Christianity–traditional Christians get enough flack without being associated with ignorant fearmongers. I wish Mr. Echols, Mr. Baldwin, and Mr. Misskelley well and hope they succeed in finally clearing their names.

Lack of Respect and the Coming Chaos

Leave a comment

Lord of the Flies

Image via Wikipedia

Children throw trash on a lawn. Pit bulls, allowed to run loose, scatter the trash. Children walk across other people’s property, opening unlocked gates to fences and not closing them. Dogs run through one of the gates, dig into the recent grave of a beloved cat, and almost get to the body. When locks are put on those gates, children begin to dismantle the fence in the front yard. In exasperation, the sheriff is called.

This happened to a person I have known literally all my life. To some people, such actions may seem minor in a society in which violent crime is rampant. Yet big things can begin in small ways. Behavior that at first seems like childhood pranks can, without parental guidance, blow up into more serious behavior. And adults who do not care whether their dogs run–two of which attacked the owner–are dangerously irresponsible and reveal a lack of respect and caring for their neighbors.

When I was a child, if I ever disrespected someone else’s property, I would have gotten the belt from both my parents. But I never did show such disrespect–because it is how I was brought up. Most children in the United States, except for the children of those we used to call “trashy” people, were taught to respect other people’s property. If they have permission to take a short cut through someone’s yard that is one thing. To believe that they do such “because they want to” reflects the “me me me” attitude of both parents and children in many families. “I want to take a short cut through my neighbor’s property. So I will.” “I want to steal crops from his garden. So I will.” “I want to borrow items without returning them. So I will.” “I want to take an item from his mailbox. So I will.” “I will” is the product of pride, the primal sin–in the Christian tradition, Satan rebelled against God with the attitude, “Not Thy will, but mine, be done.” Human beings are fallen creatures, and human nature has been damaged (though not destroyed) by self-will. It is difficult to keep selfish desires under control–which is why parents used to take a firm hand in disciplining their children. Now such discipline should never become abusive, but it should be consistent and combined with moral teaching. Part of that teaching is that no one is owed anything by other people, that one should respect other people and their property, and that one should push aside one’s immediate desires for the greater good. The notion of being patient and delaying gratification seems to be missing from many people today, both children and adults. That is a path to barbarism, to Thomas HobbesState of Nature, in which life is “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.” This is a Lord of the Flies world in which eventually the civilized and good people, such as Piggy in William Golding‘s novel, are killed, and children hunt with a stick shorted at both ends. Civilization lies on a thread, and what seems to be petty bad behavior can be the knife that cuts through the string of civilization. I can remember in Athens, Georgia, jogging with my Walkman, and children shouted “Look at him, wearing headphones like a girl!” I never would have dreamed saying that to an adult when I was a child. And children who do not respect adults will not respect anyone else.

Prime Minister Cameron of the U.K. recently said the riots were due to a “moral decline.” Despite pseudo-scientists mocking Mr. Cameron, he is correct. The rioters made self-centered, immoral decisions–because they were not brought up to respect other people. I fear for the future of Western Civilization–Western Society may end up in a situation like the chaos of the eight century, with only small groups of monks (or others who want to preserve civilization) keeping the light alive through the darkness of chaos and crime outside. God help us.

Dr. Richard Nilges: A Tireless Advocate of Truth


rest area

Image by Robert S. Donovan via Flickr

Dr. Richard Nilges, neurologist and long-time critic of brain death criteria for human death, died last month after a long, productive life. I never met him in person, but via e-mail and telephone–the first time was in 1996. I was interested in editing a book of essays opposing brain death criteria. Never having edited a book before, I asked both Dr. Paul Byrne, a neonatologist and the dean of opponents of brain death criteria, and Dr. Nilges to help, and both graciously agreed. Dr. Nilges wrote a chapter for the book, which was published in 2000 as Beyond Brain Death: The Case Against Brain-Based Criteria for Human Death (Kluwer [now distributed by Springer-Verlag]). Dr. Nilges’ chapter, “Organ Transplantation, Brain Death, and the Slippery Slope: A Neurosurgeon’s Perspective,” was the most passionate chapter in the book, reflecting a lifetime of difficult battles against the medical establishment. He retired early after serving as an Attending Staff Member in Neurosurgery at Swedish Covenant Hospital, Chicago. His conscience would no longer allow him to declare patients dead using brain=based criteria. For many years after his retirement, Dr. Nilges, writing with Paul Byrne and others (such as Dr. David W. Evans and David Hill in the U.K.), spoke out against brain death criteria when medical and scholarly opponents of brain-based criteria for death were scarce (the late Professor Hans Jonas of the New School for Social Research was an exception). During the 1970s and 1980s, Dr. Nilges’ position was considered to be a fringe position by the medical and medical ethics establishments. But the work of Dr. Nilges and other pioneering opponents of brain death criteria eventually bore fruit. Professor Stuart Youngner began to hack at the medical arguments in favor of brain death criteria, bringing out arguments concerning continuing brain function in patients declared “bran dead” which Byrne and Nilges had noted years before. The real breakthrough came with Dr. Alan Shewmon, a pediatric neurologist at the UCLA School of Medicine, came out in opposition to brain death criteria. Eventually an entire network of physicians, philosophers, sociologists, and other scholars came to oppose brain death criteria; many questioned the morality of the current system of organ transplantation. If brain death is not death, then removing vital organs from the “brain dead” patient involves killing the patient. Not all opponents of brain death criteria oppose organ transplantation–Dr. Truog does not–but even Dr. Truog believes that people contemplating signing a donor card and families considering donation ought to be told that organ transplantation from a beating heart “brain-dead” donor kills the donor.

Now articles opposing brain death criteria have been published in major medical and bioethics journals. Some younger scholars are writing against brain death criteria, such as Professor Scott Henderson in his Death and Donation (Wipf and Stock, 2011). Thus there is a third generation of scholars willing to oppose the medical establisment’s continued support of brain death criteria. This would not have been possible without the pioneering and courageous work of the first generation opponents, including Dr. Richard Nilges. His legacy and influence will live on in the patients he helped over the years and in the scholars he inspired to have the courage to question what they may have previously taken for granted.

Dr. Nilges was a devout Roman Catholic whose faith was central to his life. Requiescat in pace.

Ron Paul and the Media’s Blatant Lack of Integrity



Image via Wikipedia






Borderline Personality Disorder


Borderline Personality Disorder Awareness

Borderline Personality Disorder is a disorder I have been blessed not to have, though I’ve known individuals, some close to me, who were borderline. BPD is essentially a problem of emotional control. Borderline people have wild mood swings, though they are not usually bipolar. They can love you and think you are the most wonderful person in the world one moment, then turn on you, demonize you, and hate you. Those shifts can be unpredictable and can happen quickly, leaving family members hurt and wondering how to react. Borderline individuals tend to put people they know into lose-lose situations. If the borderline person is angry with you, whatever you say will be the wrong thing. You will, as one bestselling book on BPD alludes to, be “walking on eggshells.”

Borderline people can be manipulative, just like narcissists, but unlike sociopaths or psychopaths, they do have a conscience and are capable of love. Often, however, their love is twisted, oriented more to feeding their egos (like narcissists receiving “supply”) than truly focusing on the other person. They are good at making themselves look “too good to be true,” seeming to be interesting in everything you are. Some borderline individuals will lie about their accomplishments in order to impress others; other borderline individuals find it difficult to tell the difference between appearance and reality. The latter group can go into a dissociative state and not remember what they did during that state. If you quote the borderline’s statements to you to his family and friends, often they will stare at you as if you are crazy–because the BPD person told you that something happened that, in truth, did not happen.

BPD individuals, like narcissists, psychopaths, and sociopaths, often have a great deal of charm, which they use to their advantage. But the advantage is only temporary as people pick up on the fact that the BPD person “ain’t quite right” as we say in the South. Instability in jobs and instability in relationships may lead to the BPD going through multiple jobs quickly, moving many times, and going through multiple marriages. All relationships are unstable. The borderline person is afraid to lose anyone in his life, yet does not realize that his behavior drives people away. Sadly, the BPD individual is usually miserable inside and lonely, desperately wanting a friend. Most BPD persons do not recognize that their behaviors drive away other people; others may recognize that fact, but believe that their traits are essential for their emotional survival. That points to the greatest problem borderline individuals have in overcoming their disorder: a failure to take responsibility.

So many mental problems are due, in part, to someone believing they are the slave of fate, that given one’s background, one cannot help the way he is. For that reason, he refuses to take responsibility for his actions and blames others for bad things that happen to him. The most difficult obstacle psychologists and psychiatrists have dealing with borderline people is the borderline’s refusal to take responsibility. The borderline often tries to manipulate the therapist. Sadly, many affairs with therapists occur that way. One psychologist told me that of his fellow therapists who fell into affairs, probably over 95% of the lovers were borderline individuals. Since flirtation gains the borderline attention and helps with low self esteem (which only masquerades as high self esteem), many borderlines are extremely flirtatious. Not all will go to the point of a full-fledged affair, but many do.

BPD usually has its origins in childhood. Oftentimes, childhood sexual abuse by a parent or stepparent is the cause–though this is not the only cause. BPD usually manifests in a person’s teens. Some borderline individuals spontaneously recover in their forties; others never recover. Therapy is notoriously ineffective, although newer cognitive methods work better than previous therapies. It is a joke among psychologists that the way to harm an enemy psychologist is to refer a borderline patient to him. If the psychologist can get the borderline person to admit that he is not the slave of forces beyond his control and that he is able to change, the major step toward recovery has occurred.

Are borderline individuals sick or evil? Some borderline behavior seems to be evil: the lying, the manipulation, the willingness to say or do almost anything to get what one wants, the sudden turns toward absolute hatred. I know of one therapist (not my therapist) and one person who works in the criminal justice system who consider borderline people to be evil. In my opinion, most of them do not begin as evil, though, like any human being, they may become evil due to habituation. They are trying to survive something that hurt them so much as a child that they believe that their behaviors are the only way they can survive in the world. They may believe that if they did not behave the way they do that they would fall apart–indeed, their personalities seem to be fragmented. These sad, frightened people need to be guided toward healing–but they must be willing to get help and be serious about it. To anyone who may have this disorder: I pray for them to get help, to engage in positive behaviors that support solid relationships with others, and to find peace in their lives.

Older Entries