Mrs. Q, who is keeping Ethics Alarms current on the oppressive politically correct environment slowly poisoning Portland, Oragon, was moved to issue another report in reponse to the Ethics Alarms post about a virtue-signalling sign popping up live wild-flowers on yards across America here is her Comment of the Day on the post, “Why That “We’re Glad You’re Our Neighbor” Sign Is Unethical (As Well As Obnoxious)”…(I’ll be back at the end.)
signs
Why That “We’re Glad You’re Our Neighbor” Sign Is Unethical (As Well As Obnoxious)
NPR claims that people get teary-eyed viewing this supposedly viral sign in front of houses across the country. I’ve only seen two in my neighborhood, thank goodness, and they irritate me no end. Why? The sign is dishonest, unfair and divisive. It is also political, while pretending not to be.
First, the sign is not what it represents itself as being. It is not written for an actual neighbor. If it were, the sign would be remote and rude. I welcome new neighbors personally, not by putting garish signs on my lawn. The sign is blatant virtue-signalling, telling the neighborhood that this household is in favor of diversity, love, and immigration…as if lots of other people are not. If it is not a public sign designed to rebuke those people, whoever they are, then why the sign? If everyone in the neighborhood welcomes Americans of all colors and origins—and I know of no Klan chapter in Northern Virginia—then the sign is a straw man. I’m sure, however, that Hispanic-Americans or Muslim-Americans who see these signs on lawns might be moved to think: Wait, does this mean that many people in this community DON’T welcome us as neighbors? How are we to recognize them?
That’s not a healthy or welcoming message, but hey, if it makes the homeowner seem enlightened and virtuous, it’s a net win. Continue reading
An Unreadable Traffic Sign Is A Dangerous Traffic Sign Is An Unethical Traffic Sign
Question: What does this speed limit sign tell us about the people who erected it?
Answer: They are reckless. They are negligent. They are lazy. They are careless. They are dim-witted. They are irresponsible. They are incompetent.
As drivers in Oakland County’s White Lake District (outside Detroit) complain that it is literally impossible to figure out what the speed limit is while driving past the sign above, various school officials and others are giving reasons for why the sign is so complicated. There are many schools in the area. An electronic sign is expensive. The devil made them do it.
No.
There is only one reason: they are utter incompetents. If a road sign can’t be read by drivers, than it takes the IQ of a slug to conclude that there is no point in erecting it, and in fact, it is dangerous to put it up. A sign that can’t convey information isn’t a sign, it’s a menace. Or pop art. Or a monument to stupidity, but it isn’t a road sign. That White Lake installed an unreadable road sign that was supposed to protect school children just puts the unethical frosting on the irresponsible cake.
Unbelievable.
Ethics Quiz: Apologies For A Sandusky Joke?
My uneasy relationship with the TSA continues.
Today I was returning home from Atlanta, and its monster of an airport has one the cattle pen systems for going through security–a long, ling, line to all gates that keeps dividing and dividing, ultimately sending you down one of about 20 chutes to be scanned, stripped and yelled at. It is difficult to pick your chute, but in my case, it is crucial: Atlanta doesn’t have the full-body scanning devices in every line, and without it, I get gated, beeped, and sexually molested, thanks to my artificial hip.
It took ducking under a couple of barriers, but I finally got to an x-ray conveyor belt near a scanner, and had removed my laptop (separate bin) belt, jacket and shoes (not allowed in a bin in some cities, allowed in others) and lined them all up with my bag and brief case when an agent (none too politely) told me that they were closing that line, and directed me to another one, two lanes over. I lugged the three bins, bag and brief case over to that line, only to discover that it didn’t have a scanner.
That did it. I erupted at one of the agents, telling her that I did not care to be felt up at 8 in the morning, thanks, and had made a good faith effort to direct myself to a scanner, being foiled by the agent and by the fact that there are no signs warning people like me where a testicle massage is the only option.
“Why aren’t there signs?” I asked.
“I don’t know. There should be,” she said, as she helped me move my stuff to a scanner accessible line. “You should write the TSA and the airport.”
I laughed bitterly. “I’m sure that will do a lot of good. Do you all jsut like feeling up passengers? Is that the reason?”
A woman behind me laughed and said, “It sure seems like it!”
“Well, you know,” I said to her, “I hear Jerry Sandusky is trying to get a job as a screener!”
Her guffaw was interrupted by 7’8″ TSA agent, who said, loudly, “No he’s not, and I’m offended by that statement.”
My response, after a second’s consideration, was this: “I’m sorry I offended you. But I’m not apologizing.”
Your ethics quiz of the day: Should I have apologized? Continue reading



