It is one thing for a comedian like Wanda Sykes to publicly wish that Rush Limbaugh’s kidneys fail (that one thing, by the way, is gratuitous nastiness without humor), and quite another for a candidate for Congress, Democrat Keith Halloran of New Hampshire, to send out a tweet to his Twitter followers expressing regret that Sarah Palin and Levi Johnston were not on board the doomed plane that crashed, killing former Alaska Senator Ted Stevens. Continue reading
U.S. Society
The Human Ethics Train Wreck, Levi Johnston
Some people think that Sen. John McCain will go down in infamy for turning a little-known Alaska governor, Sarah Palin, into a wild-card political power. His surprise choice of Palin to join him on the 2008 GOP ticket also set into motion a chaotic series of events that have turned an ordinary, not too bright young man into a celebrity monster, allowing him to display his own serious character deficits while simultaneously enticing others into further degrading their own.
To paraphrase the great Basil Faulty: Thank you, ohhh thank you, so bloody much, Sen. McCain, for giving us Levi Johnston! Continue reading
Oracle’s CEO Reminds Us Why We Can’t Trust Big Business
Lawrence J. Ellison, the chief executive of Oracle, ridiculed Hewlett-Packard’s directors for forcing the resignation of the H.P. chief executive, Mark V. Hurd.
We all owe a debt of gratitude to Ellison, for his attempt to defend a fellow CEO and friend is an abject lesson in why large corporations have to be watched carefully. Too many of them are run by those like Mr. Hurd, who believe that making his company lots of money entitle him to break rules and cut corners in ways that their companies tells their subordinates are violation of company policy and business ethics. And far too many board members of big corporations are like Mr. Ellison, not only excusing this attitude, but endorsing it. Continue reading
Ethics Dunces: Steven Slater Defenders
You probably have heard about Steven Slater, the Jet Blue flight attendant who snapped like dry twig when a female passenger refused to sit as instructed after a landing at New York’s JFK Airport, pulled out her luggage from the overhead compartment, bonking him on the head, then refused to apologize and cursed at him. Slater, emulating a scene from a Chris Farley movie that never got made, took to the public address system to curse out all the passengers, grabbed a beer, launched the emergency chute, slid down it, and fled the plane and the airport.
He was later arrested at home. Sources told NBC that he was “having a bad day.”
No kidding. Continue reading
Perry v. Schwarzenegger: Choosing Ethics Over Morality
Predictably, Judge Walker’s decision in Perry v. Schwarzenegger striking down California’s voter approved Proposition 8 has infuriated foes of gay marriage, who have condemned his opinion as judicial activism, a rejection of democratic process, and an agenda-driven farce. Walker himself is being attacked for having a conflict of interest, because he is widely believed to be gay himself. (The belief that a gay judge cannot rule objectively on the issue of gay marriage while a straight judge can is itself an expression of bias.) This is not surprising. What is surprising, at least to me, is that the only substantial argument critics of the opinion can articulate is based on the exact proposition Walker rejected in his opinion: that laws should be able to prohibit conduct based on morality and tradition alone, without quantifiable and verifiable reasons relating to the best interests of society. By insisting that a California law that would withhold a fundamental right—marriage—from a class of Americans must justify itself with reason rather than tradition, Judge Walker ruled that it is ethics, not morality, that should govern American law and justice. Continue reading
Unethical Pundit of the Week: The Daily Beast’s Dana Goldstein
I try not to consider political punditry unethical, except when the opinion rendered is unusually dishonest, misleading, uncivil, or unfair. Unfortunately, the current ideological blood sport fostered and nurtured by such outlets as Fox New, MSNBC, the Daily Kos and Breitbart, and carried on by such commentators as Ann Coulter and Frank Rich, make it increasing difficult to follow my own guideline. Occasionally there pieces so outrageously unfair that they make me angry, and those are ethically perilous: emotion is not conducive to balanced analysis. Usually I pass. The recent screed of Dana Goldstein on The Daily Beast, however, has to be condemned.
I just hope I can get through the process of explaining what without becoming furious.
It is entitled “Is Jan Brewer Anti-Immigrant Because She Didn’t Go to College?,” earning an ethics red flag right off the bat for intentionally equating Arizona’s anti-illegal immigration law with being “anti-immigrant,” which it is not. Continue reading
Unethical or Dumb? Three Scenarios From The News
Many actions that appear to be unethical at first glance are really just thoughtless, careless decisions by people who should know better. It is only when knowing better is an obligation of their jobs or positions that a foolish mistake becomes unethical, or when it involves willful disregard for basic ethical principles.
Here are three scenarios from the news. Your choices: Dumb, Unethical, or Dumb and Unethical. Continue reading
Ethics Quote of the Month: Judge Vaughn Walker
His opinion declaring the voter-approved ban on same-sex marriages in California unconstitutional is here.
The opinion really begins on page 110. Opponents of the opinion are calling it “judicial activism,” “overturning the will of the people,” and “ruling by fiat.” Don’t buy it. The judge logically, fairly and appropriately explains why withholding the basic right of marriage from same-sex couples is a violation of essential values and American principles of ethics and law. Forget about the pundits and the spin: read what Judge Walker wrote.
Andy’s Unethical Health Care Propaganda
I understand the government’s problem when it passes legislation in a fog of lies, misinformation, spin and deceit so think on both sides that nobody even pretends to know what the consequences will be. And it certainly is embarrassing when claim after claim about the legislation made by the House Speaker and President himself is shown to be untrue or mistaken after the fact: “Oops! The law won’t really be budget-neutral!” “Sorry! Many of you won’t be able to keep your health care plans after all!” “Darn! There really isn’t anything in here that will keep costs from rising!”
Gee, maybe they should have read the thing before voting for it.
Be that as it may, it does not justify the Obama Administration paying $700,000 in taxpayer funds to run TV ads showing avuncular old Andy Griffith, of Mayberry fame (Pssst! Andy used to specialize in playing con-men and scam artists before he and Don Knotts teamed up), telling seniors how peachy the new system will be. Continue reading