RE: diamonds: I'm not saying they shouldn't be on the market, and I'm not saying you shouldn't want them simply because they're being offered. I'm saying that I dislike it because I take moral offense to many of the issues it has, and part of their manipulation relies on keeping people ignorant, which I choose to fight. With both that and the Pepsi issue I think you are trying to simplify my argument to something it is very much not, whereas what I've distilled it down to in my post is already what I would consider the "shorthand" version for discussion. I didn't really present it for discussion, admittedly, but I wasn't trying to; I was just trying to introduce a few topics to get people's gears grinding about their own personal choices.
Same goes for the whole "ethical spending thing; I'm not using it as a fashion term, I'm simply using it as two words that are a part of ethical decisions any person should make in their life. =/ I kind of feel like you're trying to trivialise the issue as a fashion statement, which is insulting, and, to be frank, ignorant. And if that's just me misinterpreting your words, tell me, but that's the vibe I'm getting, just so you know.
Nike: I'm not saying our government should rule the world. I'm saying people should make better ethical choices. This in no way precludes businesses; in fact, most lines of work include a code of ethics. And I know trying to apply philosophical models never works perfectly, but as a sort of debate, I'm wondering--do you not think every human should be treated as a human?
Walmart: seriously, are you trolling? Do you think people complain less because gay men can't marry versus lesbians? Feminism is not about "WOMEN POWER" or some bullshit idea like that; it's about equality, and it's just the fate of history that it's called that. If it were men, I guarantee you there would be people complaining, and I am not afraid to be one of them.
As for your last part, I'm not saying any moral choice is black or white, and that's what makes life tough, that there's so much gray area. It depends on a lot of stuff; is Suzie Smith someone who studied the art of floral arrangement in college and doesn't have another degree? Is Clyde a huge business owner who is taking advantage of corporate structure, or is he just a one-on-one guy who's not afraid to charge less? To what extend are we talking "slightly questionable"? How exactly is he treating this girl and everything?
My point is not to get you to answer all these questions, it is simply to point them out. Each decision should be looked at individually with these questions or else I think we will be running into a lot more ethical problems in the future than we'd like to admit right now. Every situation has its own details, and you just have to look at them. What I'm more curious is learning what things other people are looking at that I might be missing.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2009-04-16 12:50 am (UTC)From:Same goes for the whole "ethical spending thing; I'm not using it as a fashion term, I'm simply using it as two words that are a part of ethical decisions any person should make in their life. =/ I kind of feel like you're trying to trivialise the issue as a fashion statement, which is insulting, and, to be frank, ignorant. And if that's just me misinterpreting your words, tell me, but that's the vibe I'm getting, just so you know.
Nike: I'm not saying our government should rule the world. I'm saying people should make better ethical choices. This in no way precludes businesses; in fact, most lines of work include a code of ethics. And I know trying to apply philosophical models never works perfectly, but as a sort of debate, I'm wondering--do you not think every human should be treated as a human?
Walmart: seriously, are you trolling? Do you think people complain less because gay men can't marry versus lesbians? Feminism is not about "WOMEN POWER" or some bullshit idea like that; it's about equality, and it's just the fate of history that it's called that. If it were men, I guarantee you there would be people complaining, and I am not afraid to be one of them.
As for your last part, I'm not saying any moral choice is black or white, and that's what makes life tough, that there's so much gray area. It depends on a lot of stuff; is Suzie Smith someone who studied the art of floral arrangement in college and doesn't have another degree? Is Clyde a huge business owner who is taking advantage of corporate structure, or is he just a one-on-one guy who's not afraid to charge less? To what extend are we talking "slightly questionable"? How exactly is he treating this girl and everything?
My point is not to get you to answer all these questions, it is simply to point them out. Each decision should be looked at individually with these questions or else I think we will be running into a lot more ethical problems in the future than we'd like to admit right now. Every situation has its own details, and you just have to look at them. What I'm more curious is learning what things other people are looking at that I might be missing.