decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
"that's not the proper role for a lawyer" | 293 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
"that's not the proper role for a lawyer"
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 25 2013 @ 02:46 PM EDT
When Ridenhour wrote to 30 U.S. senators about the My Lai massacre and coverup,
only two could be interested in it. The late Mo Udall was one. He had a law
degree and sounds like someone I'd be proud to have shaken hands with.

Two out of thirty is pretty embarrassing. One sees a similar ratio of senators
nowadays who can be interested in bothering about the administration and NSA
trampling the constitution.

Every representative mistaking pro-US and against-US to be the same as right and
wrong is _not_ able to correct a bad course (since any taken course by
definition has to be good) and thus is doing _nothing_ for his country.

If you have a congress full of followers waiting to look what their fellow
followers will do, crooks will buy themselves just a few leaders and get the
rest as a present.

The lack of effective morals and leadership is what makes lobbying a no-brainer
investment.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

"that's not the proper role for a lawyer"
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, June 26 2013 @ 08:46 AM EDT
In Abe's day, most people in this country actually had a moral base and a
functional conscience. But that changed significantly during the last century,
to the point where SCOTUS kicked God out of the classroom and many public
functions. The country's morals got kicked out right along with Him. The best
that can be said now is that our society is amoral, so Abe's position is no
longer relevant. Many have tried to define ethics as the new basis for behavior,
but without a moral foundation with its absolutes of right and wrong, ethics can
only produce a relativistic, and therefore infinitely variable stance.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )