David Edmonds’ Posts

Happiness and the Dragon King

by Practical Ethics
November 24, 2009

By: David Edmonds
As so often, I’m with
King Wangchuck. The former King of
Bhutan, the fourth ‘Dragon King’, coined the term, Gross National Happiness
(GNH).   Governments, he thought, should
aim to boost the nation’s well-being, rather than target Gross National Product
(GNP).   He used the phrase after his
coronation, an event which, unfortunately, his citizens couldn’t follow on the
box – because, until a decade ago, Bhutan didn’t have TV.   The erstwhile King appears a happy man
himself – which may, or may not, be connected to his being married to four
queens.

The least bad mass murderer

by Practical Ethics
October 27, 2009

By: David Edmonds

One man murdered 270 people, but his release from prison caused only moderate outrage. Another murdered 13 people and it is unlikely he will ever be released because the public would not stand for it. Why the difference?

I am puzzled by a comparison of intuitions about Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi and the Yorkshire Ripper, Peter Sutcliffe. Put aside doubts about al-Megrahi ‘s guilt; let us assume his conviction was sound, and that he did plant the bomb on Pan Am Flight 103. Did he not cause more harm than Peter Sutcliffe?

Genocide: just a word?

by Practical Ethics
September 1, 2009

By: David Edmonds

In April 1915 there were hundreds of thousands of Armenians in Eastern Turkey: a year later they were gone.

One historian told me that this fact was the relevant one. And whether or not we call what occurred a ‘genocide’ is a matter of semantics – of secondary significance.

The family of virtually every Armenian was affected by the events of 1915/16. Estimates about the numbers vary. The Armenians say 1.5 million died. Turkey says this figure is greatly exaggerated.

R. v Dudley & Stephens

by Practical Ethics
August 4, 2009

By David Edmonds

We at the Uehiro Centre keep a careful watch on the latest developments and pride ourselves on being bang up to date with the news. So I’m pleased to be able to bring you the story of an episode that occurred on the night of July 25th.

Well, July 25th 1884. 125 years ago.

Who defines a Jew?

by Practical Ethics
July 7, 2009

by David Edmonds

Here are some of the relevant facts about a landmark legal ruling last week – involving a dispute that illustrates an irresolvable tension within multi-culturalism.

JFS is a Jewish ‘faith school’ in North London. It achieves impressive academic results. Faith schools’ are perfectly legal – indeed, they seem to have been encouraged by this government. If oversubscribed, as the JFS usually is, faith schools are allowed to favour members of their faith. There are many Christian and Islamic faith schools.

The legal case involved a boy, ‘M’. JFS refused M a place because his mother, who was not born Jewish, converted to Judaism in a Progressive synagogue. This conversion process is not recognized by the Office of the Chief Rabbi (OCR). The family of the boy regularly attended Progressive synagogue.

The Court of Appeal has just ruled that the JFS’s admissions policy contravened the Race Relations Act because of the requirement that for a pupil to qualify for admission “his mother must be Jewish, whether by descent or by conversion’. This, the court said, was a “test of ethnicity”.

Here are a few minor comments about this case.

Decisions, decisions.

by Practical Ethics
June 9, 2009

I’ve just returned from Malta where I came across a story that I had missed at the time. A decade ago a Catholic woman from the Maltese island of Gozo gave birth to conjoined twins. Doctors said the twins would both die unless they were operated on; but if this operation went ahead only one of the babies would survive.

Yad Vashem and the Pope

by Practical Ethics
May 12, 2009

Today I just want to put a question.

Pope Benedict is in Israel. When a visiting VIP is in Israel – and they don’t get more VI than the Pope – he or she is invariably taken to the Holocaust museum, Yad Vashem. Walking around Yad Vashem is an overwhelming experience. As a museum it’s more raw, less professional, more gut-wrenching, than the vast and stunning Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington.

Tennis and Sex

by David Edmonds
January 27, 2009

Once a week I thrash around haplessly on the tennis court. This week, I’m also a tennis spectator. While the global economy implodes, at least one event appears to be untouched – the 2009 Australian Tennis Open. Andrew Murray’s defeat yesterday means he can’t now net the eye-watering AUD$2 million first prize for the men’s single title. The women’s champion will earn….well, exactly the same, AUD $2million.

After a long running campaign by various groups, all the Grand Slams tennis tournaments now offer equal prize money to both sexes: Wimbledon fell into line in 2007. The argument was that just as no distinction should be made between women and men in the office, so there should be no distinction drawn on the court.