Archive for 2013

ROSS DOUTHAT ON Marriage, Procreation, and Historical Amnesia. With particular focus on “the way that some of these ripple effects are making it almost impossible for liberals to show magnanimity in victory, and accept the continued existence of people and institutions that still take the older view of what marriage is and means.”

MARK STEYN: The Ascent of Man:

Re that New York Times notice regretting its “mischaracterization” of “the Christian holiday of Easter”, Michael Walsh is right to point out that the “correction” is equally idiotic. As Michael says, what does “resurrection into heaven” even mean? How could any expensively credentialed J-school grad type those words?

Where I think Michael understates the case is when he says that it reveals the Times as know-nothings to 1.2 billion Catholics. Leaving aside the massed ranks of Anglicans, Methodists et al, it exposes the Times to believers and non-believers alike as culturally ignorant.

One suspects that they’d be far more embarrassed to make a similar error with regard to Buddhism. Meanwhile, as Michael Walsh comments: “They say you tend to believe what you read in the newspaper until the story concerns something you actually know about. The Times has just proven to 1.2 billion Catholics around the world that it knows nothing about their religion. Read it on all subjects accordingly.”

UPDATE: Andrew Klavan: The New York Times Resurrects An Old Joke.

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY: India Rejects Novartis Drug Patent.

The company challenged a clause in the Indian patent law that restricts multiple patents for a drug and denies such protection for newer versions of a “known substance” in already patented medicines unless they are significantly more efficacious.

Patents for amended versions of drugs can be granted in the United States.

But in a landmark judgment that is likely to set a legal precedent for future patent claims, India’s Supreme Court said the beta crystalline form of the salt called imatinib mesylate in the drug fails the test of “invention and patentability.”

I would like to see more skepticism along those lines in the U.S., too. As I’ve argued before, in this piece with Rob Merges in the Harvard Journal On Legislation, U.S. intellectual property law today extends well beyond the limits of the Constitution’s patent and copyright power.

UPDATE: Much more from Derek Lowe, including this: “Indian drug patent law has gone from being nonexistent a few years ago, to being one of the strictest around. I hope that it’s applied uniformly. Novartis has lost what was not a very strong case, to be honest, but the courts in India will hear stronger at some point.”

MEGAN MCARDLE: You Should Get Married As Early as Possible, But No Earlier: Susan Patton may have said it inelegantly, but she’s basically right: Princeton students should think about finding a mate. “By which I mean not that you should marry whoever happens to be around when you turn 22, but that you should be willing to recognize, at the age of 22, that you’ve found someone you want to marry. Right now, most Princeton students don’t think that way. They think there’s something weird about committing at 22. And if they try to commit, their friends and parents will warn them off. This seems like a mistake. The age at which the right person comes along depends on luck, not some kind of calendar. You can’t plan for it to happen between 26 and 28, so that you can get married by 30 and have your first kid by 32. . . . It’s hard enough to find the right person. Demanding that you find the right person in the exact five year window that has been socially prescribed for marrying is putting too much pressure on yourself.”

UPDATE: Several readers note the difference between dating at 29 and 31.

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE: Missouri College Drops Student Loans. “A small college in Missouri has come up with a surprisingly simple solution to the student loan crisis: it will no longer accept students who take out loans to pay for tuition. Instead, for the 90 percent of its students who require some form of financial aid, the college offers students a number of on-campus work opportunities. Rather than cash, students earn credits for tuition. . . . This is certainly a radical move, but there are a number of things to praise here. With the student loan crisis escalating, it’s good to see a college considering students’ long-term interests. They’ll have to work hard for their education, but won’t graduate under a crushing debt burden like many of their peers. Plus, they’re not just staffing libraries in a typical work-study program; they’re getting something closer to the real-world work experience that so many college grads lack.”

PUNCHING BACK TWICE AS HARD: WaPo: Firearms advocates target gun-control measures. “Gun-control measures that seemed destined to become law after the school shootings in Newtown, Conn., are in jeopardy amid a fierce lobbying campaign by firearms advocates.” Nice to see people standing up for civil rights, and against hysteria.

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE: Stealth Fees Driving Up The Cost Of College. “A new report by ProPublica shows that several schools around the country say they’re keeping down tuition costs. But at the same time, more and more fees are popping up on bills — and those might not be part of the official price tag that prospective students look at.” Sort of like getting around airline search engines by adding baggage fees while keeping ticket prices down.

WHITE MEN DON’T COUNT: Robert VerBruggen on the demographics of mass shooters. “Certainly, mass shooters differ from other murderers (and from the general population) in various ways. But mass shooters are not as overwhelmingly white as the authors imply, and the conclusions they draw are utterly bizarre. . . . Nowhere do the authors give the only two numbers that matter: the percentage of mass shootings committed by white males, and the percentage of mass shootings we might normally expect to be committed by white males.” Well, that wouldn’t fit the narrative. “I’m not sure this even deserves a response, but take a look at the numbers for murder in general. Blacks are dramatically overrepresented. Has anyone demanded that blacks as a group, not just the individual murderers, be ‘held accountable’? Has anyone said that black organizations that suggest ways of reducing violence should be scrutinized more heavily than non-black groups that similarly offer solutions? Of course not.”

It’s fine to be a racist bigot in America, as long as you’re a bigot in support of Democratic causes. Which, come to think of it, is how things were in Bull Connor’s day, too.