Is Christine O'Donnell secretly for gay marriage?
Yesterday, Republican politician, conservative advocate and definitely not-a-witch Christine O'Donnell "walked out" on an interview with CNN's Piers Morgan. She was there to promote her new book, Troublemaker, when she took umbrage with a rather routine question about gay marriage, cut the interview short and accused Morgan of being "rude." It's an accusation that holds no water. But Morgan did find a soft spot.
The interview is pretty standard stuff. Morgan lets O'Donnell set the tone for most of the running time and he even tells a story about a previous meeting between the two at which he taught her to make a "proper English breakfast tea." It's all quite cozy. Most of the interview is simply letting O'Donnell talk about her book and her views on various issues. It's in the second half where things go off the rails.
Morgan starts off with video of O’Donnell’s stated views on masturbation, which she doesn't want to talk about, but it gives her an opening and she rather deftly plugs her book and even gets in a playful dig at Morgan being a "pro-Masturbation talk-show host."
Morgan then asks, "What is your view of gay marriage, for example?"
And it's off to the races from there. Morgan wonders why she won't give a firm answer on gay marriage and O'Donnell keeps saying it’s in the book, and even though she wants to talk about the book, she won’t talk about that part of the book. Then, seemingly prompted by her off-camera handlers (one of whom stepped in front of the camera to block its view, becoming an on-camera handler), she ends the interview. But she doesn’t walk off the set – she sits in her chair confused and giggling, presumably waiting for someone to tell her where to go.
What the hell just happened? Did Piers Morgan discover O’Donnell’s kryptonite?
What’s really surprising is the topic, gay marriage. Keep in mind, O’Donnell has opined on just about every issue you can imagine over the last two decades. She has gone on the record about masturbation, abstinence, coed education, freak dancing, women in the military, infidelity, and just about every other topic you can think of. She’s even said crazy stuff about gay people before. But gay marriage?
That’s the thing she doesn’t want to talk about.
Is it because she’s secretly for same sex marriage?
Curiously, O’Donnell has dodged gay issues before. Last year, when asked about Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell by a young gay Republican, O’Donnell indicated that she hadn’t thought much about it and that some of her campaign workers were gay.
She neglected to mention that her own sister is gay.
If O’Donnell is for gay marriage, Morgan’s refusal to move on from the question puts her in a tough position. She could say she’s against it but this would be a lie and O’Donnell has gone on the record about her distaste for lying, even telling Bill Maher back in 1997 that she would not lie to protect Jews from the Nazis because “You never have to practice deception. God always provides a way out.”
If she admits that she is for gay marriage, she loses book sales to her intended audience, the Tea Party. Tea Partiers view gay marriage slightly less fondly than gun taxes.
By saying nothing, O'Donnell doesn't lie and she doesn't hurt her book sales. It's a win-win for her. Her kryptonite turns out to be the truth.
Morgan later went on Anderson Cooper’s show and reflected on the incident. “I found it odd that she would use that particular moment to leave because I think on reflection, when she looks back at this, it looks like she has something to hide. In other words, her view may be so extreme or contentious that it would cause her political damage.”
Maybe he’s right. Just not the way one would think.
Photo: Ludovic Bertron/Creative Commons
Other Recent Posts:
Dominique Crenn, the only female chef in America with three Michelin stars, joins Big Think Live this Thursday at 1pm ET.
Scientists discover the inner workings of an effect that will lead to a new generation of devices.
- Researchers discover a method of extracting previously unavailable information from superconductors.
- The study builds on a 19th-century discovery by physicist Edward Hall.
- The research promises to lead to a new generation of semiconductor materials and devices.
Credit: Gunawan/Nature magazine
Students who think the world is just cheat less, but they need to experience justice to feel that way.
- Students in German and Turkish universities who believed the world is just cheated less than their pessimistic peers.
- The tendency to think the world is just is related to the occurence of experiences of justice.
- The findings may prove useful in helping students adjust to college life.
The world is just? That’s news to a lot of people.<p>The study is the most recent addition to a long line of work focusing on the belief in justice, our behavior, and our reactions to evidence that might suggest injustice occasionally occurs. This study focuses on a personal belief in a just world, (PBJW) rather than a general belief in a just world (GBJW). The difference between them must be highlighted.</p><p>GBJW is the stance that justice prevails all over the world and that people tend to get what they deserve. PBJW is more focused on the individual's social environment and their belief that they tend to be treated justly. While several studies show PBJW correlates with a higher sense of well-being and a variety of other positive effects, a high GBJW is associated with less life satisfaction, negative behavior, and callousness towards the suffering of <a href="https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007%2F978-1-4939-3216-0" target="_blank">others</a>. This study controlled for GBJW, and focused on PBJW as much as possible. </p><p>To assure that culture was not a factor, the study included students at universities in both Germany and Turkey. </p><p>The researchers gave students at the four participating universities a series of questionnaires that asked if they ever cheated in class, if they perceived the world to be just, if they though that justice always prevailed everywhere, their tendencies towards socially appropriate behavior, their life satisfaction, and if they felt like they were treated justly by their teachers and fellow students. </p><p>The answers were statistically analyzed for relationships. While some of the connections seem trivially true, others were surprising. <strong></strong></p><p>PBJW turned out to only be an indirect predictor of if a student was likely to cheat. Both a belief in a just world and a lower likelihood of cheating were mediated by the justice experiences of the students, with more of these positive experiences lowering the rate of cheating and improving their belief in justice. This was also associated with higher levels of life satisfaction. </p><p>These effects existed across all demographics in both countries. </p>
What does this mean? Is a belief in justice a self-fulfilling prophecy?<iframe width="730" height="430" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/6oMv-azHNCA" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe><p>In a way, it seems to be. People who have reason to think the world is just to them tend to interpret events in a way to sustain that belief and behave in a just manner. In a larger sense, the take away from this study is that experiences of justice, both from peers and instructors, is vital to student's wellbeing and understanding that the rules that exist about cheating are part of a larger, legitimate, system. </p><p>The researchers, citing previous studies on the perception of justice, note that "justice experiences (1) signal that university students are esteemed members of their social group, which in turn conveys feelings of belonging and social inclusion and (2) motivate them to accept and observe university rules and norms. These cognitive processes may thus strengthen their well-being and decrease the likelihood that they cheat."</p><p>The authors also suggest that if you want people (not only students) to act justly; consider treating them with "civility, respect, and dignity."</p><p>Sometimes, all it can take to help somebody act virtuously is to treat them well. Likewise, people treated harshly can rarely find reason to play by rules that don't protect them. The findings of this study will certainly add to the literature on how we perceive justice in the world around us, but might also help us remember that there are real consequences to our actions which can be much larger than we imagine. <strong></strong></p>
This could change how researchers approach vaccine development.
- The reason children suffer less from the novel coronavirus has remained mysterious.
- Researchers identified a cytokine, IL-17A, which appears to protect children from the ravages of COVID-19.
- This cytokine response could change how researchers approach vaccine development.
A member of staff wearing personal protective equipment (PPE) takes a child's temperature at the Harris Academy's Shortland's school on June 04, 2020 in London, England.
Photo by Dan Kitwood/Getty Images<p>Experts don't want to place kids at the back of the line, regardless of how strong their immune systems appear. At least one company, Moderna, <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/coronavirus-vaccine-for-kids-moderna-plans-pediatric-trial-2020-9" target="_blank">hopes to begin testing</a> vaccines in pediatric volunteers by year's end.</p><p>Innate immune response is especially high during childhood (compared to adaptive immunity). This makes evolutionary sense: nature wants an animal to survive until its ready to procreate. Turns out the children in the study possessed high levels of cytokines that boost their immune response. The biggest impact is made by IL-17A, which appears to protect the youngest cohort from the ravages of the coronavirus. </p><p>While both age groups produced antibodies to fight off the infamous spike protein, adults that produce neutralizing antibodies actually suffer a <em>worse</em> fate. Herold says this "over-vigorous adaptive immune response" might promote inflammation, triggering acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). </p><p>This matters for vaccine development. As Herold says, </p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">"Our adult COVID-19 patients who fared poorly had high levels of neutralizing antibodies, suggesting that convalescent plasma—which is rich in neutralizing antibodies—may not help adults who have already developed signs of ARDS. By contrast, therapies that boost innate immune responses early in the course of the disease may be especially beneficial."</p><p>Herold says current vaccine trials are focused on boosting neutralizing-antibody levels. With this new information, researchers may want to work on vaccines that boost the innate immune response instead. </p><p>With <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/science/coronavirus-vaccine-tracker.html" target="_blank">at least 55 vaccine trials</a> underway, every piece of data matters. </p><p>--</p><p><em>Stay in touch with Derek on <a href="http://www.twitter.com/derekberes" target="_blank">Twitter</a>, <a href="https://www.facebook.com/DerekBeresdotcom" target="_blank">Facebook</a> and <a href="https://derekberes.substack.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Substack</a>. His next book is</em> "<em>Hero's Dose: The Case For Psychedelics in Ritual and Therapy."</em></p>
Researchers from the University of Toronto published a new map of cancer cells' genetic defenses against treatment.