Ethics Sage tag:typepad.com,2003:weblog-86681374171043595 2013-06-18T03:00:00-07:00 Sharing my wisdom on accounting and business ethics, workplace and societal ethics. TypePad EthicsSagehttp://feedburner.google.com The “Ethical and Right Way” of Raising Children tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a0133f440106f970b0191034d7f55970c 2013-06-18T03:00:00-07:00 2013-06-18T03:00:00-07:00 The Motivation behind being a ‘Tiger Mom,’ a blog by Cam Tran My ethics students at Cal Poly San Luis Obispo are required to write a blog on a topic of deep interest illustrating their knowledge of ethical reasoning. The following is a blog by Cam Tran, one of the best blogs I received this term. I was first introduced to the article “Why Chinese Mothers are Superior” published in the Wall Street Journal, an excerpt of the Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother by Amy Chua, in my senior year of high school in 2011. While reading this article,... Steven Mintz

The Motivation behind being a ‘Tiger Mom,’ a blog by Cam Tran

My ethics students at Cal Poly San Luis Obispo are required to write a blog on a topic of deep interest illustrating their knowledge of ethical reasoning. The following is a blog by Cam Tran, one of the best blogs I received this term.

I was first introduced to the article “Why Chinese Mothers are Superior” published in the Wall Street Journal, an excerpt of the Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother by Amy Chua, in my senior year of high school in 2011. While reading this article, there was no surprise that I related to it as it reflected much of my Vietnamese background and how my mother has raised me or having known someone who was raised that way. This feeling was mutual with the other students that were raised by Eastern or Asian parents, however, the students that were raised by Western parents were outraged that a parent could be so harsh and cold to their own child, claiming that they were essentially torturing and making the child suffer, as parents are supposed to be loving and support their child.

While the students raised by Asian parents tried to explain that Asian parents are essentially showing their love and support by pushing their children so hard, the other students remained unconvinced and continued to be in shock and disbelief that parents could be so heartless to their children. I was taken aback by all the negative reaction and even slightly offended that others would think that my mother did not love me. Because I have only known this way of my mother raising me, I suppose I had naturally assumed that the Asian culture of raising children or “tiger moms” was well known to most people. But much to my error, not only was there backlash in my situation but across the nation, there was shock and criticism against the author Amy Chua, making me question which is the best and most ethical way to raise a child?

For an ethical perspective of child-rearing in the Asian culture, we can look to the ancient Greeks who believed that the quickest way to the pursuit of happiness is by living a life of virtue. For a tiger mom to be virtuous, she must serve her purpose in life, which is pushing her child to be the best that he or she can be. Essentially, as a tiger mom, she has an obligation to enforce a strong work ethic in her child to help him or her on the path of achievement. Likewise, for the child to be virtuous, he or she must fulfill the obligation by working hard to meet the expectations the parents have set. Conversely, for Western parents to be virtuous, they have the obligation of letting their child pursue passions and follow dreams, and therefore, instilling less of a work ethic.

To an outsider, it might seem that Asian parenting may lack moral motivation as the parents place a slightly higher emphasis of non-ethical values that relate to self-interest, such as wealth and power, over ethical values, such as integrity and honesty. However, Asian parents actually use the ethical values as a vehicle to get to the non-ethical values because they want their child to be happy and not lead a life of suffering. Asian parents’ primary goal is their child’s happiness but they believe that a focus on achievement is the best way to achieve this happiness. It is paramount through a child’s adolescence because when the child grows older he or she is able to be happy by enjoying the wealth and success that comes with said achievement. Asian parents have more of an authoritarian parenting style, instilling self-discipline and work ethics into their child as they do not want them to go through the same hardships as they had to go through.

Chua’s style of raising her children can be seen as a means to an end, not an end in itself because there is more of an emphasis on grades than actually learning the material. But the logic here is that if one fully learns and understands the material, then getting a high grade in the class should come easily. Asian mothers believe that success and achievement reflects good parenting, therefore, if a child did not do well in school then parents were not doing their job effectively.

Asian parents believe the only key to success is hard work and persistence. Even if one has no talent or is not gifted, if hard work and all of one’s effort is put into a task, it could be done and done so successfully. But with hard work comes practice. Research shows that practice is needed to become more proficient at a mental task because it helps it become more automatic so the motor skills in a brain become less active, allowing it to shift to areas with higher level of thinking and reflection. Practicing is crucial for excellence, so Asian parents seem to push their child to practice more and for a longer time, whether with a musical instrument or studying a subject, because they want their child to be his or her best self. Asian parents push their child to practice more on the musical instrument because they know that once the notes are learned, it enables for a more in depth exploring of the emotional content of the piece of music and therefore allow it to be fun and enjoyable to play. This is especially shown when Chua pushes her daughter to correctly play a piano piece “The Little White Donkey.” There was much resistance and strong words exchanged between the two but once her daughter was able to play the piece correctly, both felt accomplished in their task and from this, her daughter learned that if she practiced and put enough dedication into something, she will be able to achieve it.

While Asian parenting can work effectively, as Chua’s eldest daughter is now attending Harvard, some children may rebel to strict discipline and come to resent their parents. Likewise, Western parenting can be very successful because of the freedom the parents allow, which permits the child to learn and grow from mistakes and perhaps instill a work ethic in his or herself. Personally, I’m glad and thankful that my own mother followed a strict discipline while raising me through my adolescent years. Reflecting back, I would not have minded if she was even stricter and pushed me harder because it has really made me who I am today; someone I’m proud to be. While my mother was not the essence of a tiger mom and certainty not as harsh as Chua was with her kids, by any means, she raised me with a firm hand. Even though I strongly disliked it since I did not understand it as a child, I now fully appreciate all that she has done and sacrificed for me and see that everything was out of love wanting the best for me.

Cam Tran blog posted by Steven Mintz, aka Ethics Sage, on June 18, 2013

 http://www.ethicssage.com/2013/06/the-ethical-and-right-way-of-raising-children-.html What's Wrong with Eating Lion Meat? tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a0133f440106f970b0191020557dd970c 2013-06-14T15:00:00-07:00 2013-06-14T14:42:04-07:00 Lion-meat tacos, with a side of controversy This blog was previously posted but I receieved an important comment that I include below from Megan Knauss from Born Free USA. The original blog follows the comment. Comment by Megan Knauss megan@bornfreeusa.org Ethics Sage: First, thank you for the mention! Second, in response to your question, here are three reasons why eating lion meat is wrong: 1) The lion meat industry is virtually unregulated. Consumers therefore have no assurance that their lion tacos and burgers will not pose a risk to their health. 2) The lion population is quickly disappearing. To place... Steven Mintz

Lion-meat tacos, with a side of controversy

This blog was previously posted but I receieved an important comment that I include below from Megan Knauss from Born Free USA. The original blog follows the comment.

Comment by Megan Knauss megan@bornfreeusa.org

Ethics Sage: First, thank you for the mention!  Second, in response to your question, here are three reasons why eating lion meat is wrong:

1) The lion meat industry is virtually unregulated.  Consumers therefore have no assurance that their lion tacos and burgers will not pose a risk to their health. 

2) The lion population is quickly disappearing.  To place lion meat on the menu in US restaurants is to further threaten this iconic, vulnerable species’ future survival.

3) The Humane Methods of Slaughter Act does not apply to lions.  When lions are slaughtered for food, there are no laws in place to ensure that the animals are unconscious or insensible to pain before they are killed.

Thank you for bringing attention to this important issue.  As you point out, lions do indeed have rights- rights that are being trampled on by businesses that have twisted the American “freedom of choice” to justify serving this beautiful species on a platter. 

Original Blog by Ethics Sage

My nephew, I’ll call him Howard, is sometimes skeptical about the veracity of topics I choose for my blogs labeling some “urban legends,” so I dedicate this blog to him. I know he will be skeptical so I’ve included a  Lion_meat_tacophoto of the taco with lion meat sold by a Tampa, Florida restaurant until last week.

Well, all you taco lovers, for $35 dollars you can try lion as in the king of the jungle.

"I thought the lion was good," said patron Lee Weiner. "It didn't taste too gamey to me, similar to steak."

Frankie Consoli commented that the lion meat is a bit tougher than steak. Consoli is a connoisseur of what many of us would think as ethically-challenged food choices.  He’s eaten rattlesnake and antelope before and if he didn’t want lion at Taco Fusion, Consoli could pick from other exotic meats on the menu: bison, shark, ostrich, gator, gazelle, rabbit, duck, camel and kangaroo.

Since Taco Fusion opened in February 2013, the restaurant has built a reputation for their unconventional taco filings. They have previously offered game like beaver and otter, but the controversy didn't start until lion meat made its way onto their menu.

"I really don't like that at all," said McKenzie Bremer who opposed the restaurant's decision and said that a threatened species should not be served at a taco place.

Brad Barnett, the owner of Taco Fusion, defended his actions by saying: "If you don't like it, don't eat it." However, he bowed to the pressure and removed the lion meat as one of a few exotic fillings for their tacos.

Meanwhile, Taco Fusion has even more unusual items coming: iguana, bear and zebra, which, on one level follows a trend in gourmet circles to use ever-more-exotic ingredients. It's not uncommon for the Food Network to broadcast cooking competitions where chefs use sea urchin, squab, quail eggs and bone narrow.

So why not eat lion meat? Why prohibit it when other "tasteless" food choices exist such as Biscuit Kite Spider, Tomato Frog, and Green Slug Caterpillar?

Wild animal advocacy group Born Free USA embarked on an undercover investigation into the lion meat trade in 2011, and as part of their campaign to curb the trade, have petitioned to have African lion listed as "endangered" under the U.S. Endangered Species Act. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service concluded that the petition presented substantial evidence indicating that listing this subspecies may be warranted, but has yet to issue a finding.

Here are my reasons for freeing the Lion as a food choice. Lions are considered “Vulnerable” in the wild, which is a step short of “Endangered,” according to wildlife conservation groups, and so importing or selling lion meat isn’t illegal. However the African lion - one of Africa's most iconic animals - has experienced an alarming population decrease since the 1960's. According to National Geographic, only 32,000 Lions remain out of 100,000 roaming Africa in the 1960s, and the actual number may be much lower.

Animal rights activists oppose lion meat for the same reasons they oppose any other meat: It infringes on the rights of the animals. This is the link to ethics. We accept that human beings have rights – freedom of speech, freedom to worship as we wish, freedom to assemble, and so on. Don’t animals have rights? Wouldn’t one of those rights be to roam the wild without fear of being killed for food?  ...Just food for thought… 

It has taken me a long time to accept that eating Bambi is routine in many parts of the world. However, I draw the line at Simba.

Blog re-posted by Steven Mintz, aka Ethics Sage, on June 14, 2013


 http://www.ethicssage.com/2013/06/whats-wrong-with-eating-lion-meat.html What was the Motivation for Bradley Snowden to Blow the Whistle on the NSA? tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a0133f440106f970b0191034c773f970c 2013-06-14T03:00:00-07:00 2013-06-14T03:00:00-07:00 Looking at the Ethics of Whistleblowing Unless you are an ostrich you know that Edward Snowden, a twenty-nine-year-old former C.I.A. employee and government contractor working for Booz Allen Hamilton until he was fired for his actions on June 11, leaked news of National Security Agency (NSA) programs that collect vast amounts of information about the telephone calls made by millions of Americans, as well as e-mails and other files of foreign targets and their American connections. For this, some are hailing him as a hero and a whistle-blower while others, such as Jeffrey Toobin who writes for the New Yorker,... Steven Mintz

Looking at the Ethics of Whistleblowing

Unless you are an ostrich you know that Edward Snowden, a twenty-nine-year-old former C.I.A. employee and government contractor working for Booz Allen Hamilton until he was fired for his actions on June 11, leaked news of National Security Agency (NSA) programs that collect vast amounts of information about the telephone calls made by millions of Americans, as well as e-mails and other files of foreign targets and their American connections. For this, some are hailing him as a hero and a whistle-blower while others, such as Jeffrey Toobin who writes for the New Yorker, call him “a grandiose narcissist who deserves to be in prison.” In this blog I examine the issue relying on motivation to assess whether Snowden’s actions were ethically motivated.

In an interview with Glenn Greenwald of The Guardian newspaper published in the United Kingdom, Snowden was asked why he became a whistle-blower. His answer was: “The NSA has built an infrastructure that allows it to intercept almost everything. With this capability, the vast majority of human communications are automatically ingested without targeting. If I wanted to see your emails or your wife's phone, all I have to do is use intercepts. I can get your emails, passwords, phone records, credit cards. I don't want to live in a society that does these sort of things … I do not want to live in a world where everything I do and say is recorded. That is not something I am willing to support or live under."

With those words, Snowden set off a firestorm of criticism of Snowden, and Congressional investigations of NSA personnel. Is Snowden a true hero for ‘blowing the whistle’ or a person who seeks fame and may even have a grudge against the NSA or U.S. government?

In ethics, we often judge one’s actions by the motivation for them and the intent of the whistle-blower. I hesitate to draw any definite conclusions at this early stage as the story is still unfolding. However, I do want to share some observations with you about whistleblowing in general and Snowden’s actions.

There is no one set definition of whistle-blowing although most definitions characterize the practice as disclosing to others in an organization (internal whistleblowing) an action that violates organizational norms or the law. External whistleblowing entails going to an organization outside the employer to report wrongdoing.

Near and Miceli take a broad view of whistleblowing in a research paper published in the Academy of Management Review in 1995. They define it as “the disclosure by organization members (former or current) of illegal, immoral, or illegitimate practices under the control of their employers, to persons or organizations that may be able to effect action.” They identify four elements of the whistleblowing process: the whistleblower, the whistleblowing act or complaint, the party to whom the complaint is made, and the organization against which the complaint is lodged. In discussing the act itself, they label it as an act of “dissidence” somewhat analogous to civil disobedience.

The key here is it is an act designed to inform those who may be able to correct the matter. Snowden did not go to the Inspector General of the NSA or Congress with the information. He leaked it to a newspaper and one outside the U.S. at that.

The Government Accountability Project (GAP) seems to take a broad view of the practice of whistleblowing. According to GAP, whistleblowing means calling attention to wrongdoing that is occurring within an organization. GAP lists four ways to blow the whistle:

  • reporting wrongdoing or a violation of the law to the proper authorities such as a supervisor, a hotline or an Inspector General
  • refusing to participate in workplace wrongdoing
  • testifying in a legal proceeding
  • leaking evidence of wrongdoing to the media

It is the leaking of wrongdoing to the media that makes Snowden’s actions that of a whistleblower, if you go along with GAP’s characterization of the practice.

Snowden claims he was not motivated by anything other than to inform the public of what he knew. From the moment he decided to disclose numerous top-secret documents to the public, he was determined not to opt for the protection of anonymity. "I have no intention of hiding who I am because I know I have done nothing wrong," he said. The problem is his actions don’t match his words. Why did he run off to Hong Kong or China or wherever, rather than come home and face the music?

The Snowden matter is a complicated one and undoubtedly more will be known about his true motives and whether any damage has been done to the security of the U.S. down the road. My take on the situation is he was motivated by the fact that someone knew he was thinking about leaking the information and he jumped the gun to portray himself as a true whistleblower and protector of the public interest. In other words, it was a self-serving act by an opportunist motivated by looking better in the public eye than would have been the case if his intended actions were first disclosed by another party.

Blog posted by Steven Mintz, aka Ethics Sage, on June 14, 2013

 

 http://www.ethicssage.com/2013/06/what-was-the-motivation-for-bradley-snowden-to-blow-the-whistle-on-the-nsa.html Is Following the Law the Same as Being Ethical? tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a0133f440106f970b0191033a7c02970c 2013-06-12T03:00:00-07:00 2013-06-12T03:00:00-07:00 IRS Official Invokes Ethical Legalism as a Defense A question I got from my students all the time is if I follow all the laws doesn’t that mean I have acted ethically? I explain there is a difference between following the laws and making ethical decisions because the laws can’t cover every situation we encounter in life. If we limit the guidance for our actions to legalities, we are likely to miss the ethical signs that impropriety awaits us when the rules do not address a particular matter. A perfect case in point is Lois Lerner, the IRS official whose... Steven Mintz

IRS Official Invokes Ethical Legalism as a Defense

A question I got from my students all the time is if I follow all the laws doesn’t that mean I have acted ethically? I explain there is a difference between following the laws and making ethical decisions because the laws can’t cover every situation we encounter in life. If we limit the guidance for our actions to legalities, we are likely to miss the ethical signs that impropriety awaits us when the rules do not address a particular matter.

A perfect case in point is Lois Lerner, the IRS official whose unit is at the center of the investigation into alleged Tea Party targeting and other discriminatory treatment against certain groups and individuals with respect to the application of IRS regulations including nonprofit conservative groups applying for 501 (c) (4) tax exempt status.

Recently, Lerner was placed on administrative leave and Ken Corbin was named acting director of exempt organizations during Lerner's leave. He is currently deputy director of submission processing in the wage and investment division.  The reason for Lerner’s removal can be seen in how she responded to a Congressional investigation.

On April 30, 2013, Lerner and seven IRS colleagues spent six-hours being interviewed, on a bipartisan basis, by House Oversight & Government Reform Committee Subcommittee staff. That interview covered, among other topics, how the IRS determines which groups to review, what actions are taken in connection with the IRS reviews, and how the laws and regulations are used to examine those groups. Lerner failed to disclose the internal controversy over the search terms used by the Cincinnati office to identify 501(c) (4) groups for further review, the actions taken by that office in reviewing the identified groups, the investigation and imminent findings by the Treasury Department Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA); and TIGTA’s conclusion that the IRS had used inappropriate criteria to target Tea Party and other conservative groups. Ms. Lerner also failed to disclose that she was fully aware of these issues as early as June 2011, and, according to TIGTA, had been personally involved in reviewing questionable actions taken by the Cincinnati office.

Given the serious failure by Lerner to disclose to Subcommittee members key information on topics that the Subcommittee was investigating, the House lost confidence in her ability to fulfill her duties as Director of Exempt Organizations at the IRS. No doubt Lerner, who was responsible for overseeing 1.6 million tax-exempt organizations, made decisions and failed in her oversight in a way that erodes public trust and confidence in the IRS and its professional integrity.

In a hearing in May on the matter, Lerner invoked ethical legalism as a defense for her actions. Ethical legalism holds that as long as I follow the rules, I have acted ethically. "I have not done anything wrong. I have not broken any laws," she said. "I have not violated any IRS rules or regulations and I have not provided any false information to this or any other committee."

Other than this self-serving statement, Lerner invoked her Fifth Amendment right to not testify before Congress.

Lerner doesn’t get it that treating one group of people differently than another violates basic fairness standards. Groups that apply for exempt tax status should be treated the same and decisions whether to grant it should be based solely on whether each group meets the federal guidelines to be granted exempt status. To decide otherwise leads to failing the ethics test of treating equals, equally and unequals, unequally, a basic tenet of justice.

Blog posted by Steven Mintz, aka Ethics Sage, on June 12, 2013

 http://www.ethicssage.com/2013/06/is-following-the-law-the-same-as-being-ethical.html Civility and Michelle Obama’s Handling of the Heckler tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a0133f440106f970b01901d11fb4a970b 2013-06-10T03:00:00-07:00 2013-06-10T03:00:00-07:00 Was Michelle’s Response Proper? Was Michelle Obama’s reaction to a heckler last week an example of civility or incivility? Did she go too far in talking down a heckler while she was speaking at a private fundraising event in Northwest Washington? In case you haven’t heard, Michelle was interrupted by Ellen Sturtz, who wanted the First Lady to get the President to sign an executive order banning LGBT discrimination. Sturtz's interruption began halfway through Obama's 20-minute speech. Obama, interrupted, paused, and proceeded to confront Sturtz face-to-face: "One of the things I don't do well is this," replied Michelle to loud... Steven Mintz

Was Michelle’s Response Proper?

Was Michelle Obama’s reaction to a heckler last week an example of civility or incivility? Did she go too far in talking down a heckler while she was speaking at a private fundraising event in Northwest Washington? In case you haven’t heard, Michelle was interrupted by Ellen Sturtz, who wanted the First Lady to get the President to sign an executive order banning LGBT discrimination.

Sturtz's interruption began halfway through Obama's 20-minute speech. Obama, interrupted, paused, and proceeded to confront Sturtz face-to-face: 

"One of the things I don't do well is this," replied Michelle to loud applause. She left the lectern and moved over to the protester, saying they could "listen to me or you can take the mic, but I'm leaving. You all decide. You have one choice." 

The crowd started shouting that they wanted Michelle to stay. 

"You need to go!" said one woman near the protester. 

The protester was then escorted out, shouting "...lesbian looking for federal equality before I die." (First part of the quote was inaudible.)

In an interview with a reporter after the event, Sturtz said she was startled by Obama's response: "Basically, I was asked by the first lady to be quiet, and I can't be quiet any longer," Sturtz said, adding, "she obviously thought she was going to make an example of me or something. I wasn't scared at all."  Sturtz also said: “She came right down in my face...I was taken aback.”

The incident exemplifies the lack of civility in society. Michelle handled it perfectly. Her message was I am speaking; I was invited to speak; others want to hear me; you are interrupting…

We have morphed into a society where individuals like Sturtz fail to consider how their actions affect others. The people in attendance did not want to hear her rants. They came to hear Michelle Obama. Regardless of the validity of one’s cause, there is a time and place for everything, and Michelle’s fundraising event was not the time to bring up one’s own agenda. Just think, if everyone acted that way in any and every fundraiser and political gathering, then we would be spending our time shouting down each other and that’s not a very civil way to behave.

Quite frankly, I think Barack Obama can learn a lesson from his wife. Her reaction to the heckling shows she is not afraid to exhibit strong character traits in public and walk the talk of leadership. The President often reverts to his ‘I have to satisfy everybody’ mode and fears he might upset one political group or another if he acts in a way that supports thoughtful actions and civility by a responsible citizenry. He has been heckled by some who show no respect for the office of presidency or for those who come to hear what Obama has to say. He needs to send a strong message, as did Michelle, that that kind of behavior should not be tolerated in a civil society.

Blog posted by Steven Mintz, aka Ethics Sage, on June 10, 2013

 http://www.ethicssage.com/2013/06/civility-and-michelle-obamas-handling-of-the-heckler.html Should Illegal Immigrants be Given Driver’s Licenses? tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a0133f440106f970b0192aac3ba1f970d 2013-06-05T07:50:03-07:00 2013-06-05T07:50:03-07:00 Rewarding Bad Behavior Numerous states are considering issuing driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants while one state, New Mexico, is struggling to prevent out-of-staters from fraudulently obtaining them. Until recently, undocumented immigrants were able to obtain driver's licenses or permits only from three states: New Mexico, Washington and Utah. But that number is expected to grow. A utilitarian analysis of this issue would examine the harms and benefits of granting driver’s licenses to illegals. Those who favor granting driver’s licenses to illegals claim licenses will make streets safer, since the immigrants must take a driving test. Some police agencies say the... Steven Mintz
Rewarding Bad Behavior

Numerous states are considering issuing driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants while one state, New Mexico, is struggling to prevent out-of-staters from fraudulently obtaining them.

Until recently, undocumented immigrants were able to obtain driver's licenses or permits only from three states: New Mexico, Washington and Utah. But that number is expected to grow.

A utilitarian analysis of this issue would examine the harms and benefits of granting driver’s licenses to illegals. Those who favor granting driver’s licenses to illegals claim licenses will make streets safer, since the immigrants must take a driving test. Some police agencies say the licenses allow them to keep better track of this population. Immigrant advocates say the licenses give this group needed mobility.

First, there is no evidence to suggest that our streets will be safer by granting the licenses to illegals. Since it has only occurred in three states, the data is just not there to support this assertion. In fact, some might claim the streets will be less safe because illegals drive poorly [another unsubstantiated claim] and will add congestion to the already congested roadways, especially out here in California. Thus, by allowing illegals the privilege of driving with a license, current drivers may be inconvenienced.

It is a privilege to be given a driver’s license not a “right.” There is nothing in the Constitution that supports allowing anyone to drive without meeting certain standards. One reasonable standard is for the driver to be a legal resident if for no other reason than they have earned the privilege by going through the steps to become a legal citizen.

The police claim a benefit is being able to better track the illegal immigrant population. The scary thing about this is the admission illegals are not very well tracked. Who are they? What is their business in the U.S.? Where are they employed? It seems to me a robust E-verify system would accomplish the same end without rewarding illegal behavior.

Finally, immigrant groups claim the licenses give the group needed mobility. "Individuals have to get to jobs and schools," said Melissa Keaney, an attorney with the National Immigration Law Center, a Los Angeles-based advocacy group.

Once again this is rewarding bad behavior by granting a privilege that has not been earned the way legal citizens have earned it and further clog up our roadways.

The granting of driver’s licenses to illegals is likely to increase in the future. The governor of Illinois signed into law in January a bill that grants licenses to those who lack a Social Security number, while the governors of Maryland and Oregon approved such bills last month. Similar bills sit on the desks of the governors of Colorado, Vermont and Nevada, while a number of other legislatures are considering the move.

There are other potential harms of granting the licenses to illegals in addition to those already addressed.  New Mexico investigators recently busted a Mexican immigrant who tried to obtain a license with the help of a criminal ring. The ring, officials said, used fake New Mexico addresses to create fraudulent documents for out-of-state immigrants, charging $2,500 per license.

State police in April arrested the Mexican immigrant, who lived in Georgia. Authorities canceled 40 licenses the ring had helped secure for 40 other immigrants from Latin America.

In another case, two Central American immigrants were arrested in April for applying for licenses using fake residential leases provided by another criminal group. The immigrants, who had paid $1,500 each for help in securing the licenses, found out about the group's services through an ad in a New York newspaper, according to state investigators.

Demesia Padilla, the cabinet secretary at New Mexico's Taxation and Revenue Department, which oversees the state's Motor Vehicle Division, says it is costly and time-consuming to perform background checks to ensure applicants live in the state, and complains that the department lacks the resources to do the job.

Some New Mexico lawmakers have launched repeated efforts to repeal the license law, with the support of Republican Gov. Susana Martinez. But so far, they have failed.

Padilla said her agency had to open a fourth office in Albuquerque last year to deal with immigrant licenses. Earlier this year, the agency couldn't investigate a potentially fraudulent ring because it already was busy with two others, she said. "We're doing this full time," she said. "There's not ever a slowdown."

In conclusion, this blog is not about whether illegals are sent home because they came here illegally and broke the law. That is a matter for another blog. I am against granting them legal driving privileges because of the potential harms to society not the least of which is fraud in applying for and obtaining the licenses.

One suggestion is to link granting driver’s licenses to a commitment to become a U.S. citizen and follow-up on such requirements. The problem there is it would require an efficient government process of granting the licenses and follow-up to determine if illegals are meeting the requirements to become a legal citizen. Expecting our government to do anything in an efficient manner is a pipe dream that has been disproven over and over again, and that is why we are in the mess we are with illegals.

Blog posted by Steven Mintz, aka Ethics Sage, on June 5, 2013

http://www.ethicssage.com/2013/06/should-illegal-immigrants-be-given-drivers-licenses.html Abuse of Disabled Passes at Disney tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a0133f440106f970b0192aab7b187970d 2013-06-04T06:13:48-07:00 2013-06-04T06:13:48-07:00 The ‘Magical Kingdom’ not Magical for those on Long Lines It's made headlines recently. We all know how frustrating it is, waiting in those long lines at Disney. But now some families are cheating the system. They're hiring disabled tour guides so they can cut right to the front. Two investigative reporters -- Jeff Rossen and Josh Davis -- went undercover and caught it all on tape. Disneyland is "the happiest place on earth" -- except if you're waiting in those long lines, you and your kids, waiting hours in the heat. So how did one family get to skip... Steven Mintz
The ‘Magical Kingdom’ not Magical for those on Long Lines

It's made headlines recently. We all know how frustrating it is, waiting in those long lines at Disney. But now some families are cheating the system. They're hiring disabled tour guides so they can cut right to the front. Two investigative reporters -- Jeff Rossen and Josh Davis -- went undercover and caught it all on tape.

Disneyland is "the happiest place on earth" -- except if you're waiting in those long lines, you and your kids, waiting hours in the heat. So how did one family get to skip past everyone? They did it ride after ride after ride, escorted to the front every time.

The reporters point out that the outrageous business few even know about: families bypassing the lines by hiring disabled tour guides with special passes. At most theme parks like Disney, they allow the disabled to get speedy access to rides. But now healthy families are abusing the system, paying disabled guides to get them in with up to five guests.

On ads the reporters found on Craigslist, tour guides brag about their disabled passes: "Let's cut the Disney lines together," "access to ... special entrances." So they had their producer and his family go undercover with home video cameras, hiring two of those disabled guides to show them around Disneyland.

One guide told them she got her pass after a car accident. "I'm here to make sure everyone has fun at Disneyland and we get on as many rides as possible. I have a special card that's going to help us beat the lines. She charged $50 an hour for her services.

A second disabled guide charged $200 and got them right through another side door at Star Tours, an attraction inspired by "Star Wars."

The list goes on including Splash Mountain, Pirates of the Caribbean, and Alice in Wonderland.

The reporters asked their guide about the fact they were profiting from what they were doing. The responses speaks volumes about the greed that has infected our society and a lack of personal responsibility, apathy toward the consequences of one’s actions, and total insensitivity to right and wrong. It has become endemic in our entitlement society today.

Here is the exchange with one guide:

"You're profiting from this," the reporters said.

"Well, Disneyland's profiting a lot from all the people that enter," she said.

"Will you continue to do this?"

"Yes, I will," she said. "We live in a capitalist country, and I don't feel like it's morally wrong."

The reporters interviewed the second guide whether he felt guilty about what he was doing. His response was scarier than the first guide from a moral point of view.

"Do you think you're abusing the system, the reporters asked?"

"No," he said.

"Why not?"

"I gave him a wonderful tour."

"With your disabled pass, where you went through side entrances and exits," the reporters pointed out. "And they're not disabled at all. They're complete strangers. And you charged them for it."

"And?" the guide said.

"Do you ever feel any pangs of guilt when you're cutting past all of those people who are waiting in line with people who are paying you, who aren't disabled at all?" they asked.

"It's a moral question."

"And that's the question, you don't feel morally --"

"I couldn't care less," the guide said.

"About those people waiting in line," we said.

"No."

Disney issued a statement: "We find it deplorable ... We have initiated a review of this abuse and will take appropriate steps to deter this type of unacceptable activity."

The reporters stated Disney is cracking down, sending out warning letters to anyone advertising these services online. And if they catch any of these "disabled tour guides" in the act, their disabled passes will be revoked, and they won't be allowed back into the park.

The essence of the ethical issues can be found in virtue theory. Virtues are the characteristics of excellence that lead a person to follow a moral path in life. Virtues such as honesty, trustworthiness, responsibility, and accountability speak to the personal characteristics that a virtuous person should have. Characteristics such as wealth, power, and fame are selfish virtues that sometimes lead to a lack of sensitivity about how one’s actions based on such behavioral traits might affect others.

I am not at all surprised by the fact some people choose to abuse the disabled pass policy of Disney for personal gain. There are all too many people in society who look for the easy way to make money rather than through hard work and dedication to the job at hand, two qualities that built this nation.

During the past twenty years or so we have raised a generation that is tone deaf to ethical issues. Their attitude is my ethics are my ethics and no one can tell me otherwise. They even think you impinge on their rights if you try to enforce a set of standards on them that they don’t buy into.

From corruption in business, corruption in government, cheating in sports, misuse of power and authority (i.e., the IRS), to cyber-bullying, cyber-hacking, identity theft, increasing violence in our schools, to a general lack of civility in society, we have morphed into a country built on the pursuit of self-interest without regard to the consequences of our actions on others. I fear that our moral blindness as a nation will soon lead to a marked and sustained decline in our economic power as a country because evil will outweigh good; greed will outweigh benevolence; and disdain will outweigh respect for others. It is a slippery slope and the slide has begun in earnest.

Blog posted by Steven Mintz, aka Ethics Sage, on June 4, 2013   

 http://www.ethicssage.com/2013/06/abuse-of-disabled-passes-at-disney.html Lateral Thinking and the Logic of Spock: Random Thoughts from the Blogisphere tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a0133f440106f970b01901caf558c970b 2013-05-31T03:00:00-07:00 2013-05-31T03:00:00-07:00 On Wednesday I posted some questions to consider as an experiment in lateral thinking that relies on creativity in the thought process. I promised to post the answers today, so here they are. man 1. ------------ = man overboard board stand 2. ------------ = I understand i 3. /r/e/a/d/i/n/g/ = reading between the lines 0 4. ------------ = two degrees below zero M.D. Ph.D. 5. knee = neon light light 6. ground -------------------- = six feet underground feet feet feet feet feet feet 7. he's X himself = he’s by himself 8. ecnalg = backward glance 9. death ....... life... Steven Mintz

On Wednesday I posted some questions to consider as an experiment in lateral thinking that relies on creativity in the thought process. I promised to post the answers today, so here they are.

       man 
1. ------------ = man overboard
      board 

      stand 
2. ------------ = I understand
          i 

3. /r/e/a/d/i/n/g/  = reading between the lines

          0 
4. ------------ = two degrees below zero
       M.D. 
       Ph.D. 

5.     knee = neon light
        light 

6.     ground 
--------------------             = six feet underground
feet feet feet feet feet feet 

7.     he's X himself = he’s by himself

8.     ecnalg = backward glance

9.     death ....... life = life after death

10.   THINK = think big!!

Bonus Question

abababababababababababababababababababab... = long time no ‘C’

The purpose of this exercise was to show how sometimes we act before we think. Reason and thought are two critical elements of ethical behavior.This got me thinking about the quintessential logical thinker of all the millennia and galaxies far and near. Yes, you "Trekkies." I'm talking about the beloved Spock from Star Trek. Given the popularity of Star Trek into Darkness, I want to share one of my favorite scenes from the original show that illustrates how Spock explains logic to an other-being.