Tuesday, May 18, 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Backlinks to this blog?
Search This Blog
About Me
- Ilíon
- A thousand years ago, our cultural ancestors prayed, "From the fury of the Northmen, Lord, protect us!" . . . Today, we ought to pray, "From the tender mercies and caring solicitude of the Good Intentioned, Lord, protect us!"
Blog List
Links of Interest
- Alan Keyes
- American Thinker
- Archive -- Adler
- Archive -- Chesterton
- Archive -- David Stove
- Atheism is Dead
- B.Prokop (Celestial Pilgrimage)
- B.Prokop (The Observer's Chair)
- Bastiat -- The Law
- Cartago Delenda Est
- Curmudgeonry
- David Limbaugh
- Diana West
- Egnorance
- Fides et Ratio
- Superversive
- Superversive (Essays)
- The Drew Blog
- The Right Word
- View from the Right
Blog Archive
-
▼
2010
(217)
-
▼
May
(21)
- TimeMoney Is MoneyTime
- What's A President To Do?
- People Are Crazy
- In defense of the impious Rand Paul
- A Day With 'My' Public
- Rethinking Robin Hood
- It Wasn't the Technology
- You Won't Want to Believe This
- Tin-horn Tyrant Makes Best Case For 'Gun Control'
- This Is Going Just Too Far!
- Jonah Goldberg on FF and V
- This doesn't come as a surprise
- Vox Day's Problem
- You will not believe this!
- Auster on Brewer
- Anti-Tipping Manifesto
- The Lightworker's Prayer
- I Can't Believe I Missed It!
- Darwinists' Blind Spot
- By Hook or Crook
- Law By Hypertext
-
▼
May
(21)
Labels
- AAR_01 (1)
- abortion (43)
- Adams (Scott) (1)
- Arguments about God (68)
- Arrington (Barry) (3)
- atheism (127)
- Auster (29)
- Babylon Bee (1)
- Bassior (Jordan) (6)
- Benjamin (Carl) (1)
- Benscoter (Doug) (3)
- Biden (9)
- Big Gay (9)
- Big Organ (10)
- blogs (284)
- Boot (Alexander) (1)
- Boreing (Jeremy) (1)
- Bush Derangement Syndrome (1)
- Chesterton (4)
- children (23)
- Chisholm (Shirley) (1)
- Christianity (124)
- Christiansen (Matt) (2)
- Christmas (4)
- Clinton (Hillary) (18)
- compromise (57)
- conservatism (102)
- Coulter (Ann) (4)
- Craig (William Lane) (1)
- creationism (4)
- crime (60)
- criticism (127)
- Crowder (Steven) (1)
- Cruz (Ted) (6)
- culture (280)
- Culture of Death (111)
- cynical marketing (319)
- Daily Wire (1)
- Dalrock (3)
- Dalrymple (6)
- Dawkins (Richard) (11)
- Deborah Gyapong (1)
- Derbyshire (1)
- Easter (9)
- economics (58)
- Egerer (Jeremy) (2)
- Egnor (Michael) (30)
- emergence (25)
- emotion (3)
- environmentalism (22)
- epistemology (69)
- evolutionism (38)
- family (35)
- federalism (111)
- feminism (100)
- Feser (Edward) (13)
- Flannagan (Matt) (1)
- free trade and protectionism (2)
- free will (108)
- Friedman (David) (2)
- Fry (Stephen) (1)
- Gagdad Bob (2)
- Geert Wilders (4)
- Gilson (Tom) (1)
- Glenn Beck (1)
- Goldberg (Jonah) (1)
- Greenfield (Daniel) (2)
- Haley (Nikki) (2)
- Harris (Kamala) (4)
- Harris (Sam) (1)
- Hegseth (Pete) (1)
- history (9)
- Hitchens (Christopher) (4)
- Hossenfelder (Sabine) (1)
- humor (129)
- Hunter (Cornelius) (3)
- Hyacinth Girl (7)
- idolatry (120)
- Iliocentrism (75)
- incrementalism (53)
- Islam (49)
- Jackson (Kevin) (3)
- Jacobson (William) (7)
- Judaism (5)
- judgment (4)
- justice (105)
- KairosFocus (3)
- Kelley (Megyn) (1)
- Kennedy (Ted) (2)
- Keyes (Alan) (2)
- Knowles (Michael) (2)
- Kristor (12)
- KT Cat (19)
- language (42)
- leftism (533)
- Lewis (C.S.) (8)
- liberalism (471)
- libertarianism (92)
- liberty (199)
- Limbaugh (Rush) (3)
- literature (1)
- Lockerbie (2)
- Loftus (John) (1)
- Logan (Anthony Brian) (1)
- logic (23)
- love (10)
- Mace (Nancy) (1)
- MacIntyre (Auron) (1)
- materialism and naturalism (110)
- Matteo (7)
- McCain (John) (1)
- McCain (Robert Stacy) (9)
- McGrew (Lydia) (10)
- McMahan (Austen) (1)
- mercy (11)
- modernism and post-modernism (414)
- Money (John) (1)
- morality (287)
- Morning Joe (1)
- Mother Theresa (2)
- Murray (William J) (2)
- My house (10)
- natural born citizen (14)
- New Atheists (37)
- nihilism (177)
- O'Leary (Denyse) (1)
- Obama (61)
- Obamination (141)
- One True Bureaucracy (19)
- ontology (36)
- overheard (129)
- Owens (Candace) (1)
- Oz Conservative (6)
- paganism (10)
- Palin (3)
- Parks (Bob) (51)
- Peterson (Jordan) (1)
- pious myths (249)
- politics (502)
- Pool (Tim) (3)
- Prager (Dennis) (1)
- Prokop (Bob) (3)
- Providence (1)
- Quartering (2)
- Race Card (8)
- racism (55)
- Rageaholic (1)
- Ray (John Jay) (4)
- Reagan (3)
- reason (157)
- Reed (Fred) (1)
- relativism (79)
- Reppert (Victor) (28)
- respect (35)
- Road to Hell (321)
- Rosen Cohen (Laura) (13)
- Rubin (Dave) (1)
- Rubio(Marco) (1)
- Rule of Law (88)
- Sagan (Carl) (5)
- Sailer (Steve) (1)
- scientism (77)
- secularism (109)
- Sensing (Donald) (1)
- shades of grey (32)
- Shaidle (Kathy) (35)
- Shapiro (Ben) (1)
- Siler (Jason) (1)
- skepticism (11)
- slavery (3)
- socialism (142)
- society (264)
- Sowell (Thomas) (6)
- statism (83)
- Steyn (Mark) (25)
- story idea (2)
- Straughan (Karen) (2)
- Surber (Don) (2)
- terrorism (37)
- The Pope (8)
- The World Was Younger Then (9)
- theism (1)
- theodicy (8)
- Thinking Housewife (2)
- treason (5)
- tribalism (6)
- Trump (15)
- Trump Derangement Syndrome (4)
- Tyson (Neil deGrasse) (1)
- Urban wildlife (9)
- Uygur (Cenk) (1)
- Vallicella (37)
- Vox Day (51)
- Walsh (Matt) (4)
- Warren (David) (7)
- West (Allen) (4)
- West (Diana) (1)
- What's up? (111)
- Williams (Walter) (5)
- Wilson (Douglas) (51)
- Wood (David) (1)
- Wright (John C.) (8)
- Wright (N.T.) (1)
- Yeagley (David) (1)
3 comments:
I found the article interesting. Particularly the complaints on the woman's part that her life had been ruined and she "didn't deserve this". She didn't deserve to have her affair exposed?
Not to defend a company's willful or accidental violation of privacy, of course. But this is one of those rare times where a company does something thoughtless, and yet it seems hard to be too upset with them. Almost like a man having a car accident due to a manufacturer defect, but at the time he happened to be eluding police on a high speed chase after a bank robbery.
I expect that in her little world she didn't deserve to find out that she didn't own her husband, after all.
How much do you want to bet that this woman ... and most women are like this, so you might as not even bet against it ... was one of those who sees privacy in marriage as a one-way street, in which he neither has nor deserves privacy. And, this woman obviously sees the whole marriage itself as a one-way street meant to "validate" her self-importance.
I don’t believe the company did anything wrong, nor that they violated her privacy. Look, it seems to me that her account being “separate” was a billing fiction – if it really had been a separate account, it wouldn’t have folded so easily into the family account when he purchased new services.
What I'm curious about actually isn't related to the company much at all. It's the idea that this woman has standing because 'her life was ruined', but whatever harm came about did so specifically and only because her affair was exposed to her husband.
I mean, what if this was just some friend of the family who told her husband after finding out somehow? Does she think she should be able to sue them as well?
Also - how does the husband feel about all this? Was HIS life harmed by what she did? (I know, the answer is obvious.) Should HE have standing to sue HER? Or, for the more lawyerly people, should he have standing to sue the company? I could just imagine that.
Ah well. Crazier and crazier world.
Post a Comment