Tag: legal madness

  • A question of honour

    A sliver of sanity in the US as a judge rules that you can’t simply declare thousands of people to be “dishonourable” and exclude them from the army. The trans soldiers are thus to be reinstated, after months of being illegally discriminated against. But their cards are marked and the government won’t stop there.

    The most galling thing of this episode (so far) is that President Bonespurs himself, who was too scared to join the army, is the one who decides who is “honourable” or not. This order violates the very constitution he swore an oath of honour to protect.

    But what is honour anyway, and why is it so important? Everybody knows what it is, but defining it is more difficult.

    In the Middle Ages, people relied on oaths of fealty to maintain the structure of society. From peasants to the King, everybody promised to serve their Lord and Master. Anybody who broke this oath was dishonourable. They were outcast, shunned by all who knew them.

    Losing your honour was a terrible punishment. Gentlemen would fight duels to the death over “honour”. This was still commonplace at the time the US constitution was written.

    We don’t bother with “honour” much nowadays. We have NDAs and other legal instruments to precisely define people’s behaviour, rather than relying on a vague and outdated concept. Losing your honour today is pretty meaningless and explains why it is no impediment to becoming president.