The following chart is posted on Twitter:
This is the link to the information contained in the chart:
https://earth.geology.yale.edu/~ajs/2001/Feb/qn020100182.pdf
I don’t claim to be a scientist or claim to understand the paper that holds the information for the chart, but I still have some faith in Yale.
The current tuition at Yale Law School is $55,000 tuition, $9,400 board, and $7,200 board, for a total of $72,100. So what are you paying for?
Yesterday Campus Reform posted an article about a new program at Yale. The program deals with the legal rights of animals. Now in the interest of clarity, I probably need to say that I am against any sort of cruelty to animals. I think my steak should have a reasonably happy life before it gets to me. However, I also believe that plants and animals were placed on the planet to be consumed by man. There is a reason we have canine teeth. However, I do think the concept of legal rights for animals is a stretch.
The article reports:
Yale University is launching a new program with the goal of addressing America’s “outdated” and “insufficient” animal rights policies.
Doug Kysar, a law professor at the Ivy League school, and law professor and Humane Society chief counsel for animal protection litigation Jonathan Lovvorn are heading up the new Law, Ethics & Animals Program (LEAP) at Yale Law School along with Viveca Morris, an associate research scholar in the law school.
Yale published Kysar’s assertion that society is in the midst of an important time for animals, due to factors such as revelations in animal intelligence that allegedly “overturn past beliefs about human exceptionalism,” according to a news release.
Kysar believes that while human attitudes about animals are changing, “our laws regarding animals are often outdated, insufficient, or nonexistent.”
The article continues:
According to the course description, students will also address the “problems of litigating on behalf of animals,” as well as animals’ classification as property. This will include debating the merits of recognizing “legal rights” for animals.
During the spring 2020 semester, Lovvorn will teach Climate, Animal[s], Food and Environmental Law & Policy Lab (CAFE Lab), which will “develop innovative law and policy initiatives to bring systemic change to the global food industry, which is one of the top contributors to climate change, animal suffering, human exploitation, and environmental degradation worldwide.”
“The damage wrought by industrial agriculture is staggering and rapidly expanding, and beyond the capacity of any one legal discipline to mitigate or reform,” Lovvorn said in the news release. “By engaging leaders from a broad array of disciplines, the CAFE Lab presents a unique opportunity to develop new strategies to understand, respect, and protect those who have been left behind by the current legal system.”
Yale notes that LEAP will conduct unspecified “additional research and policy work,” as well as assist in the distribution of a podcast about animal rights. The program is also expected to collaborate not only with the Yale School of Forestry & Environmental Studies but also with the School of Public Health and the School of Management.
Yale Animal Law Society Co-Chair Manny Rutinel said that he is “genuinely ecstatic” about the program, which he believes will “give the Yale community a unique opportunity to make an impact on issues that affect our environment, the health of our population, and the billions of animals used in industrialized agriculture,” according to the release.
“Human-animal relationships raise profoundly important questions of power, conscience, and the consequences of human actions for all living beings,” the student added. “The topic of animals and the law quickly reaches some of the deepest questions of what it means to be a good human.”
At least the Professor is aware of the problems of litigating on behalf of animals. I wonder if he realizes how ridiculous this could get. As I have stated, I don’t want my food abused before it gets to me. However, could I be sued (on behalf of my cat) if I give my cat a bath? What about if my cat wants to be an outdoor cat and I am keeping him inside for his own safety? What if I put a collar on my cat that has a bell and that bell is annoying to the cat? You can see that this could quickly get totally out of control. An unscrupulous lawyer could theoretically sue me on behalf of my cat and take a portion of the settlement as a fee. What about my friends who have a horse farm with barn cats? Is that cat abuse–the only wages the cats receive are food and a warm place to sleep.
I think I would try to send my child to a different law school.
On Friday, National Review reported that the Center of Public Service and Social Justice at Yale University (a 501(c)(3) nonprofit group) has rejected the membership request of Choose Life at Yale (CLAY) to join the group, the school’s community-service umbrella organization. Joining the Center of Public Service and Social Justice group would give the pro-life group access to Dwight Hall’s funds, meeting rooms, service vehicles, and many other resources.
The article reports:
CLAY had one minute to present its case for membership, followed by no deliberations whatsoever. Immediately after the presentation, one representative from each of the 96 member organizations of Dwight Hall voted. The exact tally is unknown to those outside Dwight Hall, but a majority voted against the pro-life group.
The article explains one reason for the opposition:
On the day before the vote, one of the student leaders of Dwight Hall wrote an op-ed in the Yale Daily News that asked fellow student leaders to reject CLAY’s petition for membership. Andre Manuel argued that the vote was not a matter of free speech but of a difference in opinion over the definition of “social justice.” According to Manuel, a group that denies reproductive rights cannot have a claim to an organization that promotes social justice.
Obviously, this social justice group sees no injustice in killing the unborn.
The article further reports:
But the group’s work is not limited to such activism (pro life activism). In recent years, with the opening of a nearby crisis pregnancy center, CLAY members have devoted themselves to volunteering and serving mothers in their time of material, emotional, and spiritual need.
All of these aspects of CLAY certainly fit within Dwight Hall’s purported mission “to foster civic-minded student leaders and to promote service and activism in New Haven and around the world.” By rejecting the group, Dwight Hall has made clear that its definition of “social justice” — with member organizations ranging from Amnesty International to Students for Justice in Palestine — does not include active service to the community by conservative groups.
This is what our young adults are being taught about social justice at one of the most prestigious schools in the nation. What a disgrace.
I am warning you ahead of time that this article is going in a number of different directions. If you don’t want to bother to read the whole thing, the bottom line is, “Please follow the link to the ‘Fix It’ Series”–Rep. John Campbell’s plan for turning around the economy. Rep. Campbell suggests nine basic steps that would make a great difference.
According to Quoteland.com, Charles Edward Montague, English novelist and essayist (1867-1928), stated: “There is no limit to what a man can do so long as he does not care a straw who gets the credit for it.” That statement has been quoted in various forms by American Presidents, corporate leaders, and various coaches. It still stands as a truthful statement. Washington isn’t broken–it’s just that some of the leadership are not taking full advantage of the talent around them.
John Campbell is a member of the U. S. House of Representatives representing the 48th Congressional District of district in California. He is a Certified Public Accountant (CPA) and small business owner. He serves on the House Committee on Financial Services and served on several Congressional economic working groups in 2008 and 2009. When you consider his business background, it is not surprising that he has put a plan together to turn around America’s struggling economy. You can find that plan at the “Fix It Series.” Please follow the link to see what is possible if the leadership in Washington was more interested in solutions than politics.
Some of the lessons I think our representatives in Washington need to learn are found in a book I recently read. “How Starbucks Saved My Life,” by Michael Gates Gill. This book tells the story of a high ranking corporate type who had grown up in a privileged environment (Yale University, Skull and Bones, easy entry into the corporate world, etc.). The book details the changes in his life that occurred when he suddenly lost his corporate job. One of the major lessons in the book is the value of respecting yourself and the people who work for you and with you. I understand that Washington politicians need to get re-elected, but a little cooperation and respect would go a long way in the current environment.
Harry Truman once stated, “If you want a friend in Washington, get a dog.” This statement tells me that the environment in Washington is challenging at best and has been for a long time. At this point in our history, we need to grow up and start hearing each others ideas so that we can solve the serious problems facing our country.
