Ethics - Summer 2013 (Hawkins)

About this class

Contemporary Moral Issues: The last in the series of three required Humanities courses at Champlain College St-Lambert, Quebec.

Champlain College, Saint-Lambert
by Guillermo Martinez on June 8, 2013
Legalization of Marijuana a)         http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/20/legalizing-marijuana-tax-revenue_n_3102003.html

919 | 1 | 0
Champlain College, Saint-Lambert
by noha on June 8, 2013
Link to article : www.eurasianet.org/node/66952

481 | 0 | 0
Champlain College, Saint-Lambert
by Jasmine M on June 8, 2013
http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/04/world/asia/afghanistan-honor-killing-survivor

826 | 1 | 0
Champlain College, Saint-Lambert
by Issa ph on June 8, 2013
http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/at-the-edge/2013/05/06/cispa-rolls-along I chose this article because even though it will not affect us directly because we are in Canada, the Canadian government might one day follow the step of the U.S government. This article is explain what the CISPA is and how it is going against Americans' privacy rights.  Should we allow the government to enter our privacy in order to have more security?

986 | 2 | 0
Champlain College, Saint-Lambert
by Madangi on June 8, 2013
http://www.therecord.com/sports-story/3243942-ashley-smith-inquest-hears...

497 | 0 | 0
Champlain College, Saint-Lambert
by Camille Burbidg... on June 7, 2013
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/story/2013/04/18/quebec-bill-14-p...

967 | 1 | 0
Champlain College, Saint-Lambert
by Shabana S. on June 7, 2013
http://www.speakingtree.in/spiritual-blogs/seekers/wellness/so-youre-an-environmentalist-why-are-you-still-eating-meat http://www.aufeminin.com/societe/manger-de-la-viande-industrielle-multiplie-par-7-les-risques-de-mort-prematuree-s36911.html

899 | 1 | 0
Champlain College, Saint-Lambert
by kristinarassi on June 7, 2013
Link to article: http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2013/05/17/pol-supreme-court-walmart-baby.html       Supreme Court upholds acquittal of mom in Wal-Mart baby case           

780 | 1 | 0
Champlain College, Saint-Lambert
by Adriano D 1993 on June 7, 2013
Is it right to clone an extinct species?Link to article: http://www.ctvnews.ca/sci-tech/mammoth-fragments-from-siberia-raise-cloning-hopes-1.952460

1,484 | 2 | 0
Champlain College, Saint-Lambert
by Francis Marino on June 6, 2013
http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/Bail+decision+expected+Thursday+Dorval+shooting+case/8472684/story.html

839 | 1 | 0
Champlain College, Saint-Lambert
by Christos2695 on June 6, 2013
http://www.timebase.com.au/topics/2013/04/19/judge-orders-jehovas-witness-teen-undergo-blood-transfusion

1,834 | 2 | 0
Champlain College, Saint-Lambert
by Benjamin Carbone on June 5, 2013
Link for the article: http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/political-news/bid-for-national-euthana...

1,308 | 1 | 0
Champlain College, Saint-Lambert
by Vanessa C on June 4, 2013
http://ca.finance.yahoo.com/blogs/insight/abercrombie-fitch-ceo-mike-jeffries-big-fat-mistake-164104770.html Discrimination is inevitable and will always play a part in our society. However, the blunt words of Abercrombie and Fitch's CEO Mike Jeffries has created a controversial debate over whether creating clothing for a specific kind of person is discriminating or honouring.

1,123 | 1 | 0
Champlain College, Saint-Lambert
by Sandrine C on June 3, 2013
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/apr/22/abort-down-syndrome-...

1,122 | 1 | 0
Student

|
8 years 7 months ago

I find this topic very interesting because I found deplorable that in 2013, some people in industrialized countries are still abusing of child weakness to make them work. It should be punished severely knowing the fact that it is tolerance zero when the child’s liberty is taken away. The biggest majority of the people in industrialized countries are totally aware that child labor is not right: everyone has enough education to know it. It is another story in undeveloped countries where children have to quit school to help the family to survive, but even though, it should just not exist. I find vicious that certain people take advantage of the situation.

Then, to answer to the question for readers, I think that we should not permit child labour at all. It should not exist anywhere. I know that in underdeveloped countries, families have sometimes no choice to ask their children to work to feed the family, but on the long term, should it not be better to let the children go to school to eventually allow them to win a better salary? I think it is a situation to consider before jumping to hasty conclusions. I also think that child labor should now be judged as an international case that should not be taking too easily. It is not normal that a ten years old boy in Canada can go to school while another ten years old boy in Africa is being exploited for labor work. Child labor is not all the case; it can sometimes lead to physical and sexual abuses. Children are weaker and harmless and we have to protect them.

After, to answer to the ethical issue, I think that children slavery or child labour is totally not acceptable in our society. I have said it in the first paragraph and I repeat it: the tolerance should be zero. Everyone knows that that children just like adults have certain rights and liberties that should not be trespassing. Children should be at school and have fun with their friends, not cleaning the house and make every favors of a lazy person that is not able to move is big ass. People who make such abuses should be punished severely and go in prison to have destroy the childhood of a child. There can also be enormous consequences in the child’s life afterwards, both physically and psychologically. We should not take lightly the future consequences and behavior of a person who has lived a traumatic childhood. Prevent his better then cure.

In addition, I not agree the author arguments that child labor may have a place in the world economy, as long as it is not hazardous or dead-end work, and that child labor is not always a matter of child exploitation. I think that the place of child is at school until their majority, or at least do both when being younger, knowing that the work in question does not affect the studies of the child. When you become an adult, you can do whatever you want, but before the adulthood, it is not in the normality of things to work. In fact, it is an issue of low salaries at first that needs to be fixed. If the salaries were good, there were no reasons for children to work. Plus, wherever a child is working, there will have a form of exploitation from the employer. Children have always been cheap labor and easy influenced people and it is not soon that this mentality will changed. So, we have to do something as earliest as possible because there are millions of kids that are exploited on the other side of the planet.
For further reading, I suggest you to focus on the effects of child labor: the physical and psychological consequences. Here is a website that can be interesting for your topic, but it is important to not use it as a reliable source: the article has been written by a teenager. Even though, the lifted points are interesting and pertinent for your topic.

http://www.teenink.com/hot_topics/what_matters/article/525002/The-effect...

8 years 7 months ago

The general idea of having safe injection sites in Canada would be a marvellous and socially beneficial idea. I think of it as a good thing because as each year passes, the number of people who have drug problems increases dramatically. The success of Insite in Vancouver is almost inspirational and therefore, the government should intervene. As Vanessa C said, “levels of crime and pubic injection have been substantially reduced since the opening of its doors.” With that in mind, everyone in society would feel more at ease knowing that these facilities are bringing good into the world.

What really drew my interest in this topic really stems from the fact that our Canadian government, being the Conservative one, restricts and prohibits the construction of these establishments. I find this hard to believe because something simple can be done to reverse illegal drug use and spread of infection in society and the government still says no. With the level of crime rates on the decrease, societies can prosper when the whole world knows of how safe it is because of injection sites such as Insite. Additionally, I would agree 100% with Vanessa C and the article she has blogged about in the sense that injection sites would be beneficial to the Canadian population. Also, the fact that these kinds of facilities not only offer safe injections but also offer, as said by Vanessa C, “Safe injection facilities protect public health and safety by providing sterilized injection material, disposing these materials properly, and provides drug users with options to get help if they wish.” This leads me to question why the Conservative government would not invest in these facilities seeing how much success it had brought to the population of Vancouver. Furthermore, what really drew me to this topic was the fact that I have personally seen a dirty needle on the streets of downtown Montreal and wondered what can possibly be done so nobody would see these things on the streets.

Technically, no, it is not permissible to allow safe injection sites such as Insite to be granted exempting from the law that prohibits the use of illegal drugs because of the fact that people would rebel, want for illegal drug use to become legal, and overcrowd these injection sites with people who would just want to use a specific drug for the fun of it. This statement can be expressed with the use of passage from Vanessa C’s blog post which says, “The Conservative government would argue that…these injection sites make it seem as doing drugs is acceptable.” This can be potentially problematic because all it would doing is making the problem of drug use worse. But on the other hand, the government should at least consider the fact that these injection sites offer and show positive outcomes which are extremely beneficial to society. These injection sites help reduce the public consumption of drugs, offer clean sterilized needles for people to use, counselling, rehabilitation and detoxification programs which would only succumb to healthier beings and a healthier society.

Yes, I personally believe that these injection sites would only be beneficial to Canadian society, as I have already said many times. The fact that this will help people rehabilitate their reliance on drugs and not go to jail, which would only make life worse for individuals, is a very good feeling knowing that cities in Canada will be cleaner and possibly serving as an example for other countries around the world to do the same. All these injection sites would produce a cleaner person, a cleaner environment, a cleaner society, a cleaner country and essentially, a cleaner world.

Here is a further reading for whoever would want to know more about Insite, the supervised injection site based in Vancouver:
http://supervisedinjection.vch.ca/

8 years 7 months ago

I always knew that Texas had strict laws in regards of crime. I know that they have the death penalty but I wasn't aware of other types of laws they had implemented which is why I was so intrigued by this topic. It's quite unique on how laws differ from one state to another. I always thought that being very strict with severe punishments was the way to resolve and decrease crime rates but I was wrong. Based on statistics, the death penalty does not deter crime rate. We would think that people would avoid doing certain things in order to escape death but this isn't the case. This is why my opinion has completely changed about these types of laws since there are no significant differences. This law that states that one has the right to kill another whom is stealing sounds absurb to me. A person who is thief, does not have his/her right social morals and values in the right place but that is not enough of a reason to take their life away. In other words, for someone to deserve to be killed, they need to hurt another person physically. The case would have to be severe and intended causing an incredible amount of pain and trauma to the victim. People make mistakes and I know many people my age who have stolen before which is why I believe that the consequences of stealing should not be taken to that extreme. The case of the man shooting the prostitute and getting no type of punishment shows the corruption in the judicial system. Theft should never be considered as bad murder. Paper bills or tangible objects do not outweigh the life of an individual. 



Even though I disagree completely on his actions and the fact that he took the situation out of proportion, I do not think he should go to jail as for the law clearly states that he is allowed to kill when someone is stealing from his property. In a way, I think that it’s more Texas’ fault for allowing such chaotic misfortunes to occur in the first place. With this law, they give the idea that it is permitted and that it should be done. The man did have a lack of judgement but how can he know it’s wrong when theres a law that claims otherwise? I strongly believe he knew the impact of his actions but for the reason that this law is established, I believe he should not go to jail. 



We definitely need to take into account the law and the reasons why he killed her in order to make a decision on whether or not he should go to jail. However, if I were to ignore these factors and just focus on the crime itself, yes indeed I would believe that the man should go to jail. But this is not the case in our society, we must take every piece of information and contribute it to our final choice. 



I disagree with you when you mention in your argument that he should have went to jail because what he did was not proper. Unfortunately those two things don’t have a direct impact on each other. Who is to say one should go to jail? It’s the judicial system that chooses and not our logical reasoning. What is proper is left for the state of Texas to define and even though our perception of this situation tells us it is not right and he deserves some kind of justice or karma, he still was obeying the law and did the proper action according to the law.



When I was young, I heard a story about a man who stole a snickers bar in Texas who had to serve a 16 year sentence in prison. I was so shocked by that story that it always remained in my head. This is a perfect example on how to judicial system can be unfair and how they do not closely examine the gravity and the consequences of a crime. It shows how one can get punishment for stealing a chocolate bar but another can get away for murder. For further reading on this old story, you can go read the following article: http://www.commondreams.org/headlines/040700-01.htm

8 years 7 months ago

When I saw the word Anthrax and children in the same sentence, it immedietly caught my eye since I had heard about previous anthrax infections and how it participated in the death of thousands of people.

Since every vaccine is a controlled dose of a potentially deadly microbe, I think that if the research concerning the Anthrax vaccine is fairly extensive and it shows that no possible harm can be done then I say yes! If the vaccine actually functions properly then it will be a breakthrough in medical science. I do not think though that injecting the people of the United States is very pertinent since it is mostly people in third world countries that are exposed to it (they do not have the vaccine for their animals and are not informed as to the necessary precautions to adopt while dealing with the carcass of dead animals).

I do think it is a bad idea to test this vaccine on infants. The reason for this is that the US has already attempted this on adults and the results were not concluent. If the tests fail again, they are potentially putting the child's health at risk, introducing their organism to a potentially deadly virus.

You raise the argument about how the US has previously failed when trying the vaccine. Their actually is a current vaccine against anthrax that is fully functional. The only reason they want to test it on children is because the vaccine is only available to adults (the one they currently use for the military) so if there were ever a biological weapon using anthrax, the children would not be immune to it. But the current vaccine can cause really bad side effects, so I agree with you that until it is proven 100% safe to use it should not be attempted on children.

This is an interesting article describing how they proceeded into making the decision, we can see that this ethical debate has been going on for at least 2 years!
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/health/2011/10/27/how-to-test-the-anthrax-va...

this is the follow up of the 2011 situation

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/03/19/us-anthrax-vaccine-children-id...

8 years 7 months ago

I for one am for reasonable and responsible cosmetic surgery. No one in life is perfect, yet we are often faced with images of ideal models and figures in which we would all like to replicate. In my opinion, this pressure to be beautiful and perfect is immense on girls. And being one I understand what it is to feel insecure about different body areas regardless of what others think. Ultimately, this is what interests to me to such as topic. I do agree that cosmetic surgery has its downsides such as the procedure going wrong, health risk and of course addiction, But I do not agree that the government should implement restrictions on people looking into cosmetic surgery but rather the government should tighten the laws on the practices in which these Surgeons exercise. Yes, Lacey Wild does show signs of obsession but her surgeon has agreed to complete the surgery which is utterly wrong considering he and other doctors are fully aware of the consequences involved with such an extreme procedure. In reality, Surgeons play a major role in the decision of what work needs to be done. We mustn’t forget that a doctors practice is still a business that needs to generate revenue and like every entrepreneur they want to bring in the maximum amount of profit, and to do so, they must convince their client to spend more money. How do they do this, by pointing out other defaults that can be fixed along with suggesting higher risk procedure that will cost more money. This to me should be moderated in lieu of targeting victims of plastic surgery. More over I think that women are often sexually exfoliated in the media and what we can understand from that is that sex sells. So in a society where jobs are scarce and the economy is weak people need to generate funds in whatever manner they can and for women is happens to be with their sexuality . I don’t think the story would be as intense had the women not have kids, but I sincerely believe that her kids do not have her best interest at heart either but rather their reputation in mind, which is as selfish as the mother’s actions (I guess it’s true, apples don’t fall far from the tree). Frankly it is inappropriate to sell sex as a income, and her in case it’s not even the health risks involved but rather the negative influence that is placed on the mind of her younger children. It teaches others that in life if all else fail, sell your body, which is definitely not a message we want to send across. Nevertheless, I don’t think its right that we target the mother as being the source of the problem, when clearly she needs some psychological therapy and thousands of other people support her idea and are even donating money for her surgery. Lastly, Lacey Wildd and her daughter where featured on the Dr.Phil show, where her daughter clearly states that yes at times when people are looking she does get embarrassed but that she loves her mother and respects the choices she makes even if that’s not how she would go about it. So is it fair to say that it is a wrong way to make a living like that even though her family does somewhat approve of it? Below is the link of there Dr. Phil interview, unfortunately I could not find one with better quality.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t4SZbWR_sAM

8 years 7 months ago

I for one am for reasonable and responsible cosmetic surgery. No one in life is perfect, yet we are often faced with images of ideal models and figures in which we would all like to replicate. In my opinion, this pressure to be beautiful and perfect is immense on girls. And being one I understand what it is to feel insecure about different body areas regardless of what others think. Ultimately, this is what interests to me to such as topic. I do agree that cosmetic surgery has its downsides such as the procedure going wrong, health risk and of course addiction, But I do not agree that the government should implement restrictions on people looking into cosmetic surgery but rather the government should tighten the laws on the practices in which these Surgeons exercise. Yes, Lacey Wild does show signs of obsession but her surgeon has agreed to complete the surgery which is utterly wrong considering he and other doctors are fully aware of the consequences involved with such an extreme procedure. In reality, Surgeons play a major role in the decision of what work needs to be done. We mustn’t forget that a doctors practice is still a business that needs to generate revenue and like every entrepreneur they want to bring in the maximum amount of profit, and to do so, they must convince their client to spend more money. How do they do this, by pointing out other defaults that can be fixed along with suggesting higher risk procedure that will cost more money. This to me should be moderated in lieu of targeting victims of plastic surgery. More over I think that women are often sexually exfoliated in the media and what we can understand from that is that sex sells. So in a society where jobs are scarce and the economy is weak people need to generate funds in whatever manner they can and for women is happens to be with their sexuality . I don’t think the story would be as intense had the women not have kids, but I sincerely believe that her kids do not have her best interest at heart either but rather their reputation in mind, which is as selfish as the mother’s actions (I guess it’s true, apples don’t fall far from the tree). Frankly it is inappropriate to sell sex as a income, and her in case it’s not even the health risks involved but rather the negative influence that is placed on the mind of her younger children. It teaches others that in life if all else fail, sell your body, which is definitely not a message we want to send across. Nevertheless, I don’t think its right that we target the mother as being the source of the problem, when clearly she needs some psychological therapy and thousands of other people support her idea and are even donating money for her surgery. Lastly, Lacey Wildd and her daughter where featured on the Dr.Phil show, where her daughter clearly states that at that yes at times when people are looking she does get embarrassed but that she loves her mother and respects the choices she makes even if that’s not how she would go about it. So is it fair to say that it is a wrong way to make a living like that even though her family does somewhat approve of it? Below is the link of there Dr. Phil interview, unfortunately I could not find one with better quality.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t4SZbWR_sAM

8 years 7 months ago

I for one am for reasonable and responsible cosmetic surgery. No one in life is perfect, yet we are often faced with images of ideal models and figures in which we would all like to replicate. In my opinion, this pressure to be beautiful and perfect is immense on girls. And being one I understand what it is to feel insecure about different body areas regardless of what others think. Ultimately, this is what interests to me to such as topic. I do agree that cosmetic surgery has its downsides such as the procedure going wrong, health risk and of course addiction, But I do not agree that the government should implement restrictions on people looking into cosmetic surgery but rather the government should tighten the laws on the practices in which these Surgeons exercise. Yes, Lacey Wild does show signs of obsession but her surgeon has agreed to complete the surgery which is utterly wrong considering he and other doctors are fully aware of the consequences involved with such an extreme procedure. In reality, Surgeons play a major role in the decision of what work needs to be done. We mustn’t forget that a doctors practice is still a business that needs to generate revenue and like every entrepreneur they want to bring in the maximum amount of profit, and to do so, they must convince their client to spend more money. How do they do this, by pointing out other defaults that can be fixed along with suggesting higher risk procedure that will cost more money. This to me should be moderated in lieu of targeting victims of plastic surgery. More over I think that women are often sexually exfoliated in the media and what we can understand from that is that sex sells. So in a society where jobs are scarce and the economy is weak people need to generate funds in whatever manner they can and for women is happens to be with their sexuality . I don’t think the story would be as intense had the women not have kids, but I sincerely believe that her kids do not have her best interest at heart either but rather their reputation in mind, which is as selfish as the mother’s actions (I guess it’s true, apples don’t fall far from the tree). Frankly it is inappropriate to sell sex as a income, and her in case it’s not even the health risks involved but rather the negative influence that is placed on the mind of her younger children. It teaches others that in life if all else fail, sell your body, which is definitely not a message we want to send across. Nevertheless, I don’t think its right that we target the mother as being the source of the problem, when clearly she needs some psychological therapy and thousands of other people support her idea and are even donating money for her surgery. Lastly, Lacey Wildd and her daughter where featured on the Dr.Phil show, where her daughter clearly states that at that yes at times when people are looking she does get embarrassed but that she loves her mother and respects the choices she makes even if that’s not how she would go about it. So is it fair to say that it is a wrong way to make a living like that even though her family does somewhat approve of it? Below is the link of there Dr. Phil interview, unfortunately I could not find one with better quality.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t4SZbWR_sAM

8 years 7 months ago

This post is really interesting as it is talking politic and I really love politic. Plus, in the muslim community it has been a really important subject because of the tyrany of Bashar Al-Assad.

We should totally provide this kind of help even if it could turn against us in the future because who knows if the weapons will really go into the Hezbollah's hand or if it goes into their hands who knows for sure that they will use it against western countries.

Yes, the United States of America should be intervening and sending arms into this conflict even if it doesn't touch them directly. Indirectly this war will have a huge effect on the USA and in a bad way if Bashar win and in a good way if the rebels win. If Bashar win it will show the power that the alliance of Iran Russia and Syria is powerful in the other way, if Bashar's regime collapse it will show that Iran and Russia are not so strong and that America doesn't have to be that much afraid by them.

I doubt that Barrack Obama is sending that help only because of the 150 Americans killed by the chemical bombs. This problem have been going on for a while now and he always tried to solved it and to get into it but wasn't able because of Russia 's right of veto. However now that they used chemicals bomb it is a sufficent reason to skip the Russian's veto and to interven.

You might find this link also interesting: http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2013/06/16/harper-g8-syria-russia-com...

Reply to: CISPA Rolls Along
8 years 7 months ago

This article intrigues me because I've always wondered if the conspiracies regarding the "government spying on its citizens" were true, or just speculation. It has occurred to me that the government could very easily be monitoring our behavior on the internet by simply getting into contact with our ISP's (Internet Service Providers) but without a justified reason, they would be violating our privacy rights.

In regards to the question raised, concerning cellphones, I do think that if the government were to conduct regular "cellphone checks" it would be highly problematic and cause a large amount of unnecessary chaos. However, what if the government is already doing such things, without us citizens even realizing it? As I mentioned previously, it would be child's play for the government to obtain information on our daily activities.

However, I would allow the government to access all the personal information of any citizen, if they had proper grounds to do so. For an example, if there was a serial killer at large, and the only way to determine if he/she is the killer is to access all their recent computer/cellphone activity, then I would allow the government to investigate. I do not believe that they should be able to obtain these records unless a similar situation is present. Therefore I cannot entirely agree with your statement, "I don’t believe we should allow the government to tap into our mobile devices to provide us “better” security," because in certain situations, do just "that" may be what might save the lives of innocent people.

I would like to recommend you to a Facebook page that discusses these issue into great detail, and provides informative information regarding unjust actions governments around the world are committing.
https://www.facebook.com/IlluminatiTV

8 years 7 months ago

This topic has a lot of interest to me. The reason is because my parents did not let me drink coffee when I was younger. Now that I'm older, they don't mind. I believe that many parents go a bit too extreme with their child, she can be a part of the category.

I didn't think what the mother was doing was right. While I was watching the video, I was positive and I considered her irresponsible. What kind of mother would make her child drink coffee at such a young age? Although my opinion had changed when the mother had said that the doctor said that her daughter is fine and in good health. If a doctor is saying that her child is fine, who are we to tell the mother to stop giving her daughter coffee?

I don't think the mother should have her child taken away from her. If the baby is in good conditition, no one should have a say to what the mother is doing for her baby.

If the mother is feeding the same amount of sugar to her daughter compared to what she needs, except in coffee, there is no harm. If it helps the child per for better, there shouldn't be a problem with it. I don't think it would affect the child in the future in a negative way.

This website shows that only if a kid consumes too much caffeine, then it is bad, or else it cannot be that bad. http://kidshealth.org/parent/growth/feeding/child_caffeine.html

There no collaborative classes