The hot topic of euthanasia has swept the ethics world time and time again. There have been many changes by its viewers and lawmakers are finding ways to ease the weight that this decision has carried for so many years.
In Vermont, the death by dignity law gives patients “… several safeguards (which) are built into the law, including a requirement for two medical opinions, the option of a psychiatric examination and a 17-day waiting period before a life-ending prescription can be filled” ( http://mobi.iafrica.com/world-news/2013/05/14/vermont-approves-euthanasia/).Vermont is the 17th state to approve euthanasia methods by law. 17 out of 50 states are now on board with what I believe is the right thing to do. Again the concept of right and truth takes form of a 1-ton weight on my chest but my upbringing and talks with family in the medical field make this an easy weight to bring above my head.
During a deep yet short conversation with my parents (one being a nurse and the other a pharmaceutical sales person), they gave me the ok and set the expectation to pull the plug on them in the case of vegetable state. I pried deeper than this and asked them if the technology to give them life was weeks away would they want me to wait for it and let them test it on them. They told me that even for them to suffer a week is long enough for them to want the plugged pulled. But since then laws like the one in Vermont don’t make it an easy action as to just unplugging a machine. There are lethal dosages and brand name killing prescription. As the law rears it’s ugly head in ethics, the life issues we face become even more convoluted.
In my eyes it takes away the fight for life. That struggle we face as humans makes our lives different. To die or not die is as much a decision and a murky topic as a career in prostitution or getting an abortion. But fortunately God works in mysterious ways and through other people. My ethical holes are filled in by my religion and my trust in my family so my blind judgment to be pro euthanasia was never a hard choice. This does conflict with my views on abortion and as I delve deeper into other family/religious based characteristics hold there are plenty of contradictions. This particular topic is an easy answer for me, I’ll ask my loved ones a few thorough questions and at the end of the day if I have custody I will do what they ask. Because it’s their choice.
The real issue that’s starting to build for me now is if I’m ok with euthanasia, then how am I not ok with abortion? It’s really caused some personal debates on my line of thinking in regards to others lives. I’ve come to the conclusion (still pending for 80 more years) that I am not yet educated enough to share my beliefs in persuasive and hole proof manner. These blog topics, especially this one, has brought great frustration but even more curiosity to how I should really be thinking. A question for the viewers, does euthanasia as a law enforced practice make it anymore ok in your book of judgment and if so, how does this compare to your beliefs in other ethical issues?
Juan Roberto Mendez is a part of a rare group in America. He is one of the 99 people that was wrongfully convicted and escaped the death penalty. His story was inspiring because the amount of time he spent in jail he used to fight for himself and his innocence. Unfortunately not many innocent jail birds get the chance to fly free. But the question is how can we save these innocent lives without punishing the truly guilty ones. How do we define guilt and even more define the degree of punishment associated with a level of guilt?
I believe the system we have in place works. We keep the bad people off the street for the most part but I think it could be refined. It would take technology beyond what we have now and money that we don’t have access to get the truth out of each cell mate and find out if they were true innocent or not. that means we’d have to change the court systems and almost throw democracy out the Window. Because so many things need to change, I think we are good where we are at. Its not perfect but people like Juan can fight for his innocence and the rest die a tragic death.
it’s a big time dilemma to have to choose between who will be alive and who will be out in the streets. Now the topic of even having the death penalty in force has to be brought up. if we got rid of it and jail mates live their life in jail instead of dying to the death penalty, we use up more resources than we want to. would we save more money turning this country into a big brother type of government or do or in paying for food, shelter, and clothing for inmates?
Here are some facts to set things off:
In a Asia, Africa, and Latin American countries well over 500 million are living in absolute poverty. Drowning.
Every year 15 million children die of hunger. Drowning.
1 of 12 people worldwide is malnourished, including 160 million children under the age of 5. Drowning.
Every 3.6 seconds someone dies of hunger. Drowning.
All of these people are drowning and we are far enough from them to run over and save them. The question is should we save these people, if there are capable people closer to them than we are? Why doesn’t the best swimmer go save them? Or the person with a boat? Are the people who are already disabled morally wrong for standing by and watching them drown?
Peter singer takes Famine, Affluence, and Morality and gives an excellent direction on the right thing to do. I absolutely agree that if there is a child drowing in a shallow pond we ought to save that child in exchange for muddied clothes. This world has millions of drowing kids but we spend so much time pointing fingers at who should be helping them instead of actually going. By the time we’ve made the biggest boat and the bred the fastest swimmers, all those drowing children are 20 feet deep. Thats the nature of our society. I feel in the deep recesses of our minds we believe if it’s not immediately affecting us then the degree of morality to do something is lessened. For example, a kid get bullied. You or your best friend are not getting bullied so for you to walk by and not notice is not completely morally wrong because you and your best friend felt like it was wrong. Its a division between action and thought and this division is prominent in all “drown” cases.
Peter indirectly states that drowning is as bad as dying from starvation. Factually, you die faster from drowning (Personally, I’d rather drown than die from starvation). He says philosophically everything in his literary piece is meaningless if it is not acted upon but it has to start somewhere. Although we (as a society) have implemented foundation after foundation to save these millions of “drowning” people, it is never enough. Forum boards yell, “don’t make so many babies; get help from your own government; learn to fish; make a change for yourself; help yourselves.” These forum board discussers have never drowned or came close to it. The reality is government surpress, food is scarce, and life is unfair. I’m not sure where you all stand but I’m on board with Singers point of view. If we can save a life then it is morally right to do so if the cost is not our own life. My question is where can society start.
If we shut down all the buffets in America, how many starving kids will survive? No, Vegas won’t allow that. I guess we can wait for the cure all pill to be discovered but then at that point what will we do about overpopulation?
Sex appeal is the secret ingredient that makes nut meg seem like a unnecessary ingredient. Although sex has been given the evil eye for being an advocate to the medias justified portrayal of sexual violence, sex still is an action and feeling that must be maintained by the viewers.
I believe that sex should be used openly and freely for advertisement. Although sex does point us in the correct shipping direction most people are capable enough to understand what an item does. Sex on TV especially in commercial, gives business marketing competition and identity in the market. There are some things I’ve seen like the green Mnm, in the above commercial portrays a conservative level of sexy Ness. But the message is still fun and focuses on the product.
With this said I think that sex is ok to have and that the educated should share the knowledge to make more sound decisions.
If we had all given into the violence shown on TV and banned the commercials that violated conservstives then we wouldn’t be able to distinguish.
Good times and conversation in class
Porn is the corn roasted butter dipped mayonaise smothered chili powder covered and lemon juice spritzed fair food of the media industry.Its deliciously undigestible and at the same time its a savory snack. And every fair has corn on every bend and corner, just like there is porn on every corner video/liquor store and online. What can sex sell better than sex? well… sex and more sex. The article comes to a split path at the end and this is what it says
The first view -“A woman’s body, a woman’s right” – Pro Sex Feminists
The second view – breach of “women’s class interests “which both conservatives and anti-porn feminists
I’d like to say that I lean more on the 1st view but for this blog I wanted to engage porn in a different light. I whole heartedly believe that these women and men are to do what they very well wish as long as crime is not committed. Its their career path and they’re way of life. If a pharmicist decides that he had made a mistake in the profession he chose then he has to live with that and suffer the consequences. I feel the same for porn artist, there is no immediate shapes to teach us how to be bandaged. The side effect of the porn industry is what really brings my second view out. Take a look at some of the news postings:
50-year-old man who pleaded guilty to possession of child pornography may have assaulted more than 50 children while working at a rehabilitation center in California
young men who become addicted to porn, “neglect their schoolwork, spend huge amounts of money they don’t have, become isolated from others, and often suffer depression.”
Women should have a choice but understand the consequence it may bring other people.
From child abuse to obsession, from bdsm to reality. Porn has this evil dragon laying on its back and its been awaken by thoughtless ness and love. What kind of events have you experienced that could have been a by product of porn? How did this experience make you feel towards porn and women?
Porn is a measure of freedom for the activists but for the conservatives it should be a better regulate way to represent an as close to %0.00 population. All in all i believe there should be balance but the problem is that humans take what’s an hon
As an Org. Management/HR emphasis student at ULV, I’ve discussed on multiple occassions the fairness of Affirmative Action. First I want to go over language and communication. It is imperative that during a hiring process that HR communicates in a way where language is not totally revised or falls into an area that is all politically correct. This leads into misunderstanding and that breeds lawsuits. From that alone it is easy to understand the sensitivity of each applying individual but there has to be balance. Affirmative action is just as difficult as defining truth. It has the blueprints of an ethical program but it is front loaded with smooth talkers, deep thinkers, and system foilers. Like the literature mentioned, reverse discrimination was as much an issue as discrimination itself. Although Brian Weber brought it to federal attention, he lost his argument. But what kind of side effects happened to the company he used to work for. In my previous HR forums we discussed the ripples that a single drop of discrimination can cause a company. From money, time, profitablity, and law suits, tangible things and intangible factors, a company can hurt from the inside out. That is why affirmative action is such a hot topic in the business world and that is the reason I want to bring it to light in our blog.
Here is my solution and i’m curious to find out what you have to think about it. Through technology we should hold interviews like they hold unanimous testimonial videos. You’ve seen those with the voice audio changer, the black silhouette, and the dim lighting. What are companies really discriminating anyway? Race and gender right?
this is not a cure all solution but I feel like it would help undo affirmative action and give the power back to fairness. Plus I’ve always been a firm believer of hardwork and accolades. if you’ve earned it, worked for it, and strived for it, then you are the better candidate.
Fordharrison is company that is doing things for the business world. Although they seem to cater to bigger companies, their services seem to be legitmate. They act as a 3rd party that focuses on Affirmative Action Plan Development. Basically they perform audits, analysis, testing, and training to make sure companies are legally operative in the hiring process and are not caught in the balance between injustice and self-profits. Bringing in an outside party was a hot topic to bring balance to affirmative action and Fordharrison has seem to be successful in the business world. (lets hope that they are practicing fair processes in their own buildings).
Think about your current company, why did you get hired? did you know someone? or do you think you were a piece of the affirmative action puzzle?