The etymology of adultery

An interesting bit of explanation on the etymological origins of the word, adultery: Adultery, adulteration, and the historical ‘married woman’ limitation.

“Adultery” apparently comes from the same root as “adulterate.” A married woman who has sex with someone other than her husband risks getting pregnant and giving birth to a child who is not her husband’s but might be raised as her husband’s — thus adulterating the husband’s blood line. In the words of Bacon’s Abridgment (1736),

Fornication and all other Lusts are unlawful, because Children are begotten without any Care or Preparation for their Education; and the Crime of Adultery receives this further Aggravation, that it not only intails a spurious Race [here, meaning offspring and their descendants -EV] on the Party, for whom he is under no Obligation to provide, but likewise destroys that Peace and mutual Endearment which ought always to subsist in the Marriage State.

Likewise, State v. Lash (N.J. 1838) cited Bacon’s Abridgment, and elaborated on it thus (paragraph breaks added):

This is the circumstance on which adultery depends at the common law; its tendency to adulterate the issue of an innocent husband, and to turn the inheritance away from his own blood, to that of a stranger. If the woman be single, her incontinence produces none of this evil; her issue takes away no man’s inheritance; it can be heir to nobody, and the burthen of its support, is cast by law upon herself and the partner of her guilt. Even if her paramour be a married man, it is not adultery, for the same reason; the bastard cannot succeed to his inheritance, neither does it adulterate the issue of his wife; it can never succeed to her inheritance in case she leaves any to descend. She may adulterate her husband’s issue; the law cannot defend him against her; his only reliance is on her virtue; but he can never adulterate hers.

This is the reason why a married woman, if her husband become unfaithful, cannot maintain an action of adultery against him or his paramour, in any of the common law Courts; such infidelity does not adulterate her issue, nor his own; it brings no ones inheritance into jeopardy, nor can it possibly produce a spurious heir to disturb the descent of real estates. If she wishes it to be treated as adultery in her husband, she must sue him by a short petition to the Court of Chancery, which, governed by the Ecclesiastical law, allows adultery to consist in the breach of marriage vows; and there she may have a decree of divorce and allowance of alimony.

Now of course the careful reader will have noticed that Bacon’s Abridgment is not limited to the “adulteration of the blood line” argument, but also notes the destruction of marital peace stemming from the breach of the marriage compact — a destruction that can stem from the husband’s affair with an unmarried woman as much as from a wife’s affair.

The law will forbid either party to stray, but the adultery part relates only to bloodlines. Who would have known?

Can Obama really be this stupid, they ask

The only real question is whether Obama is a complete fool, or whether the damage to the US and the West is intended. This is from Egypt, but there are no doubt conversations like this everywhere in the world at the moment, other than in the US. There they elected him twice so what more is there to say?

UPDATE: Yes, it’s a parody, but who could tell in the middle of the night when my defences were down. Watching it again in the cold light of day, I can see that no one would ever say these things. They might think them, but they wouldn’t say them. You do have to bear in mind that the speech really was given by Obama and that part is the actual man saying those exact words.

Is there a coming war with China?

David Archibald has been saying this for as long as I can remember. This is from a year ago, from a year ago:

China has built an offshore oil drilling rig, numbered HD-981, specifically for the purpose invalidating other nations’ claims to seabed they thought was theirs. There is no doubt about the purpose of the rig given that a Chinese state oil company official once called it “our mobile national territory.” Its primary purpose isn’t commercial. If China can drill an oil well on some other country’s seabed, they can then claim that it was China’s territory all along. The rig is having its first outing to that purpose off the coast of Vietnam, accompanied by 86 Chinese vessels including a submarine. Vietnam responded by sending 30 coastguard vessels to interfere with the Chinese drilling rig. Ramming of Vietnamese vessels by the Chinese ones has been reported.

Miscalculation might not lead to war because there is nothing miscalculated about what China is doing. China intends to start a war.

As far as Archibald was concerned, this war was inevitable. Then yesterday, we had this at Drudge from The Telegraph in London, US-China war ‘inevitable’ unless Washington drops demands over South China Sea. This is how the story starts:

China has vowed to step up its presence in the South China Sea in a provocative new military white paper, amid warnings that a US-China war is “inevitable” unless Washington drops its objections to Beijing’s activities.

And we are right in the thick of it. From The AFR again yesterday, China using Brazil resources as lever against Australia:

China will use its growing relationship with Brazil to pressure Australia into running a more independent foreign policy, according to analysts and academics, as Beijing seeks to use its economic muscle for strategic influence.

Chinese Premier Li Keqiang signed $US50 billion ($63.5 billion) worth of deals during a state visit to Brazil last week, including a loan facility to help iron ore miner Vale increase production.

In a sign that Beijing is increasingly looking towards Brazil for food and mineral commodities, China also pledged to lift a ban on Brazilian beef.

“If Australia gets closer to the United States we will see China increase its purchases from Brazil, while reducing its trade with Australia,” said Wu Xinbo, Dean of the Institute of International Studies at Fudan University.

“The alliance between Australia and the US is a major constraint on the relationship between China and Australia.”

And now today, picked up at Drudge: Japan to join U.S., Australia war games amid growing China tensions.

Japan will join a major U.S.-Australian military exercise for the first time in a sign of growing security links between the three countries as tensions fester over China’s island building in the South China Sea.

While only 40 Japanese officers and soldiers will take part in drills involving 30,000 U.S. and Australian troops in early July, experts said the move showed how Washington wanted to foster cooperation among its security allies in Asia.

It’s a very messy world out there. I hope someone is paying attention.

Joining a world where nobody thinks, nobody cares

It’s the stupidity that really gets you in the end. This is the personal story of a young scholar who got fed up with her own side of politics and went looking to make friends among the conservatives at Cambridge. I don’t really want to spoil the surprise by telling you anything other than its title, How I tried to quit the liberal guilt machine and failed. But it is so picture perfect that it is almost a parody, except none of us could imagine a mindset like hers. This is how it starts:

Being a leftie is like being a Catholic, in that it’s a constant stream of neverending guilt. We’re expected to constantly atone for our privilege, which, like original sin, we can never be rid of. And we don’t even get the cool artwork. If you have otherwise normal liberal friends, every few weeks they’ll post something online akin to cult propaganda. It’s a combination of an assertion and a warning that anyone who disbelieves is, in their words, “not a decent human being”. This is fine when you agree with the party line completely, but that kind of conformity of thought is neither healthy nor desirable.

I didn’t used to mind when people bent the facts to promote their liberal opinions — as long as the message prevails!-, but after many years of anecdotal evidence, appeals to emotion, contempt of logic, I realized there was only so much zealotry I could tolerate. They sounded to me like mad evangelists who’d just had the realization that capitalism might be unfair. As an ambitious person, I felt like I was being held personally responsible for the problems of income inequality. And as someone who spent some time living in the USA, I was pretty tired of apologizing for Jeb Bush, the war in Iraq and gun ownership. The final straw was the slew of unfair criticism towards Silicon Valley, and the left’s lack of respect for and understanding of technology.

So I tried to quit the liberal guilt machine. I would make some new friends who would be conservatives. There was a whole world out there, I thought, where nobody thinks, nobody cares, everyone genuinely believes they deserve the good things they have in life. At this point came a problem; I didn’t know anyone conservative.

The rest is at the link.

What’s global warming compared with this?

Let’s face it, if you are on the left, there is probably no level of insanity you are not prepared to believe. If you can believe that socialism will bring fairness and prosperity, that even after eighteen years of no heating that the planet is about to fry, and other such things, then you are open to every social fairy tale someone is prepared to spin. But this one, the most insane of all, is still my favourite, since my wife worked in childcare for most of her life. This is now after 23 years and twenty of those years in prison, Couple convicted of child abuse during satanic childcare hysteria still not exonerated.

In 1991 . . . children at a preschool in Oak Hill, Texas began claiming they were abused and forced to drink blood-laced Kool-aid, watch animal sacrifices and fly to Mexico to be sexually abused by soldiers. Sadly, for proprietors Dan and Fran Keller, the charges against them were not dismissed. The two were found guilty of such lunacy and each sentenced to 48 years in prison.

On Wednesday, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals granted the couple some relief by acknowledging that false testimony was used in obtaining the conviction. The Travis County District Attorney’s office is expected to dismiss the case.

The Kellers spent 23 years in prison before being released in 2013.

But dismissing the case is not exactly the exoneration the Kellers were looking for. Their attorney, Keith Hampton, vowed to keep fighting.

“I can take it to federal court, but there are some procedural complications I’ll have to mull over,” Hampton told KXAN, Austin’s NBC affiliate. “Second option: to bring it back to the Criminal Court of Appeals. Third option: District Attorney can also agree to their innocence, which they haven’t done before.”

No evidence was ever found that the Kellers had done anything they had been accused of doing. The case hinged on the findings of Dr. Michael Mouw, who mistakenly identified a normal bodily condition as evidence of sexual abuse.

The story never makes the kind of news it ought to because it shows a craziness afoot that cannot be contained. The legal system and “the helping professions” are both shown to be not just useless at sorting truth from fiction but frequently dangerous. Having ruined their lives, the the state is now chiselling on the compensation these people are owed that can never be anywhere near enough for what they have been through.

Ann Coulter on the Decline and Fall of the United States

adios america ann coulter

51% of those voting in America today will pretend not to know what she means. It is even possible they may not even actually know. The US is on its final lap and it is hard to see how it can survive as anything much better than a Venezuela, although it has a lot more capital left to run down. A decade from now it will be a wreck. The economic slide is of course more than evident, but the cultural and political decline is even more pronounced but is left unstated. When it becomes impossible to say the truth as you see it because a swarm of locusts will arrive to pick your personal status clean so that you never work again, no one says anything because there is no advantage for any individual to throw their future over the cliff on some suicide mission that can achieve absolutely no good at all.

These are quotes that are to be discussed as part of “What Would You Ask Ann Coulter?” with the questioner as likely to be as obtuse as any other left media presenter anywhere.

Here’s a look-back at some of her more…memorable quotes:

“It would be a much better country if women did not vote” May 2003, The Guardian

“I’m more of a man than any liberal” July 2007, to Bill O’Reilly on John Edwards

“Young people are idiots” March 2014, AnnCoulter.com

“Foreigners shouldn’t be allowed on American television” June 2014, discussing the World Cup

“Today’s immigrants aren’t coming here to breathe free, they’re coming to live for free” May 2015, ‘Adios, America‘

UPDATE: The interview with Ann is at the link.

Please, Joe, stop looking for consumer demand to lead the recovery

Joe was Great! There was not a moment in the whole of Q&A tonight that I thought he was behind, and this is enemy territory. But most importantly, this was even when the one-eyed Labor Party stooge, Tony Jones, tried to sandbag the Treasurer with a NATSEM study that had not been released EXCEPT TO THE ABC!!! And without showing the level of disgust he no doubt felt at such obvious ALP-ABC gotcha attempts to undermine the Treasurer, he simply turned it aside. He embarrassed the ABC for its obvious duplicity.

But I would have left this alone, except that there is one thing I think the Treasurer needs to tighten up on. He is trying to get there, in fact he is almost there, but his Keynesian minders or whoever it is that surrounds him, don’t quite let him see through to the point he is obviously trying to make. But if he gets there, he will be impregnable.

He was asked something like this, which I almost thought of as a friendly question, from Gai I think it was:

Why is household debt good but public debt bad?

Why are you encouraging people to borrow and spend at low interest rates when they may end up in serious trouble when interest rates go up?

Spending is not what you want. Joe, listen to me. Spending is not what you want to encourage. Growth and employment is not a the result of spending. Growth and employment are the result of VALUE ADDING production. That is, the result of production where the value of what is produced will, within a reasonably short period of time, create an income flow even greater in value than the value of the resources used up. That is the meaning of value adding.

Private households do not create value ever. A household uses up value, but it is not from households that economic growth occurs (except for the occasional plumber that gets called in). Growth comes from business. If you confuse personal spending with business spending you will never get these things clear in your head. There is personal consumption, which is the point of economic activity. And there is business activity which is continually trying to add value to the resources they use up. Please, Joe, stop looking for consumer demand to lead the recovery. It cannot be done.

One more reminder in the video below about the difference between those bad Keynesians, who used to be in government, and who thought about spending, versus you supply-siders, bless your hearts, who have replaced them, who are concentrating on value adding production.

Those hazy crazy days of college

Stacey McCain’s boy-girl advice if you are heading off to college in the US. It’s like going into a war zone. No one can be trusted.

Think ahead. Regard all females as potentially hostile and always keep in mind that any girl who tries to flirt with you could be setting you up for a sexual assault complaint. Approach every male-female encounter with extreme caution, and always consider whether you could defend your actions in a court of law.

Only speak when spoken to. Males have no right to initiate communication with females on the modern campus. Your attempt to make friendly small talk with a girl could be construed as harassment, potentially resulting in expulsion.

Avoid elite schools. It seems that false rape accusations mostly occur at expensive private schools. Save your money and go to the nearest community college for two years, then transfer to a state university. Your diploma may not have the prestige of a degree from Oberlin, Georgetown or an Ivy League school, but you are less likely to encounter a raging feminist lunatic at a state school and it’s entirely possible that you could meet a normal woman who doesn’t consider heterosexuality a hate crime.

I am forty years and twelve thousand miles away so how sensible or necessary this is, who around here can tell. But if that’s what things are like, it is unbelievable anyone goes to college any more.

Living with political insanity

The continued fixation on Archbishop Pell by a certain class of media fools would be unacceptable in even the most benign environment. Picked up at Andrew Bolt, here is the quote from Miranda Devine he uses to fully explain there is no there there, but at least it allows these people to indulge in their anti-Christian obsessions:

David Ridsdale told the royal commission last week that he phoned Pell in early 1993 to inform him about the sexual abuse he had suffered at the hands of his uncle, and that Pell said: “I want to know what it will take to keep you quiet.”

Ridsdale says he remembers those exact words and his response: “F… you, George, and everything you stand for.”

This has been reported as fact and underpinned the venom against Pell last week. But the allegation does not even make sense.

At the time of the alleged phone conversation, Gerald Ridsdale had already been charged and had pleaded guilty to 46 charges involving 21 children. There was no reason to keep anything quiet.

Is this truly a story from 1993, from possibly even before Gillard set up the slush fund? But if there is a story that is not discussed day after day, it is the murder of Christians in the Middle East at the hands of Islamic State fanatics. Like this:

The video starts with what it called a history of Christian-Muslim relations, followed by scenes of militants destroying churches, graves and icons. A masked fighter brandishing a pistol delivers a long statement, saying Christians must convert to Islam or pay a special tax prescribed by the Koran.

It shows one group of captives, identified as Ethiopian Christians, purportedly held by an Islamic State affiliate in eastern Libya known as Barqa Province. It also shows another purportedly held by an affiliate in the southern Libyan calling itself the Fazzan Province. The video then switches between footage of the captives in the south being shot dead and the captives in the east being beheaded on a beach. [Bolding added.]

They have the video, but here the oh-so-cautious media says “purportedly” since it is only an allegation and even if they have said themselves that this is what they did, you do not want to go too far in blackening their name. This is a story for which there are probably no end of possible news items each week, of which there are now hardly any shown or even discussed at all.

Our perceptions are in the hands of the media, and therefore as a society we are now fixing on the trivial and ignoring what may yet bring our entire civilisation down.

Economic and social disparities

econmic disparity by religion australia 2011

From The Australian today, Statistics lay bare stark economic and social disparities for Muslims. The stats are from the story which begins:

The dictionary defines assimilation as the ability of groups to succeed and prosper in societies built on different religious and cultural building blocks. The idea is always controversial and raises fundamental questions about how far people with vastly different belief systems and social practices need to “change” to succeed in the society where they have been implanted.

Do they need to change at all? Can nations operate coherently as what former prime minister John Howard described as a “federation of cultures”? Is a single culture even feasible in a global, mobile world where diversity is a hallmark of every society? Where is the magical line where integration reaches a viable point of cohesion?

The assimilation, or social integration, issue has risen most starkly in Australia in recent years through the growth of the nation’s Muslim community against the backdrop of terrorist activity across the world and growing examples of young Australian Muslims being radicalised and joining extreme Islamic groups in the Middle East.

Domestically the struggle of many Muslims to infiltrate Australia’s economic mainstream is evident in poor employment outcomes, a mismatch between their relatively high skill and education rates and jobs secured, high welfare dependency, low home ownership and a high incidence of household poverty.

Most research suggests that some of the employment problems relate to discrimination against people who are visibly Muslim. However, for women in particular, there are also religious-based employment restrictions that vastly limit acceptable job options and leave many permanently disenfranchised from mainstream work.