<p>Berurah, if you were to ask my 79 year old mother this question, she would tell you that without a doubt <em>something</em> has changed in our society/culture. I still hold out for hope–that maybe it is not as rampant as say 30 or 40 years ago and that perhaps it is just that the media can expose the unethical behaviors much quicker that we knew about 30 or 40 years ago. I still want to believe the best in someone, but it is quite challenging in our society today.</p>
<p><a href=“and%20these%20things%20still%20took%20place%20but%20were%20not%20revealed/publicized”>quote</a>
[/quote]
Oh I think there was a lot of that. Just think of the Catholic priests scandal.</p>
<p>There’s a <em>great</em> book on forgiveness and ethics which addresses MANY of your questions and is an intriguing and well written book on so many levels.</p>
<p>It’s called How Can I Forgive You By Janis Abrahms Spring, PhD It addesses the questions from both sides of the fence (this is a book I think the people in your examples would benefit from reading) and other topics such as how to forgive someone who is unremorseful or dead , when is forgiveness cheap, what is wrong with refusing to forgive (is there anything?) , how can the offender earn forgiveness and how do we forgive ourselves for hurting another human being. I highly, highly recommend it.</p>
<p>An interesting book for the forgiveness topic is the second half of The Sunflower by Simon Wiesenthal. The first half of the book is his own experience, and the second half is a collection of essays from a variety of people with their opinions.</p>
<p>Berurah,</p>
<p>this afternoon I found myself pondering very similar issues. A good friend is an ESL teacher in a very low-income town in our state. The schools have next to no budget. The superintendent was just charged with hiring the school maintenence workers to do $500,000 of work on his own house and he paid them with money from the school budget. While this has been in the news, there has been no huge public outcry probably because many of the residents of the town are not educated or involved or too busy to care. </p>
<p>This town and this superintendent don’t have the high profile of MIT and Marilee Jones. But I found myself comparing the nature of their ““crimes”” and the quantifiablility of the damages that their actions have caused.</p>
<p>andi~</p>
<p>Wow…what a terrrible case <em>sigh</em>. And I’m sure you’re right in that those who are rowing the boat are too busy to rock it. Obviously there was a great deal of quantifiable damage in the school district that is on such a tight budget (although come to think of it, most school districts are). </p>
<p>That said, not all damage <em>is</em> quantifiable. Sometimes the damage is more subtle and more on a qualitative scale that is less tangible, and that brings up the question of which, if either, crime is “worse” than the other. </p>
<p>Regardless, the press holds the power in terms of which cases receive the publicity, and most of the ones that do involve titillating aspects such as sex (teachers sleeping with students, the D.C. madam scandal, the Anna Nicole nonsense). That is apparently what is most marketable to the American public.</p>
<p>~berurah</p>
<p>I was taught, growing up in church as a child, that forgiveness of other people was a moral imperative, that all sins were equally bad save blasphemy, and that I shouldn’t judge, lest I be judged.</p>
<p>I still hold to that basic framework, although I’m no longer religious. I think it’s partly because I’m not very good at being judgemental. It’s also partly because I’m comfortable with the idea that people are complex – good people do bad things, and bad people do good things. It disappoints me, but ultimately I can’t shun people who do stupid things but make attempts to rectify them.</p>
<p>I think that part of the problem is our reluctance to be judgemental. We don’t want to draw any lines about behavior, in case we are politically incorrect or unpopular. I believe that there ARE some absolute right and wrong behaviors – NOT everything is okay. It’s wrong to lie, steal, cheat or hurt someone. I believe that good people do good things most of the time – when they do something wrong, they usually feel bad about that (for good reason) and try to make amends. We’ve collectively lost our sense of shame. I think there really ARE some bad people in the world – they make choices that hurt others, and there often is no justification. They’re just bad people. </p>
<p>If everything is acceptable – adultery, abuse, lying, cheating, stealing – then we just have anarchy. As a young adult, I thought more like molliebatmit. As a middle aged mother, I think more like my own mother. She saw things pretty clearly. People of our parents’ generation seemed to have a clearer idea of right and wrong. I think we’ve fallen into some kind of opposite land, where everything is okay depending on the circumstances. I do worry about the future of this country if people don’t develop a stronger moral sense. </p>
<p>I know this probably comes off as intolerant, and in a social setting I wouldn’t say these things out loud. Isn’t that part of the problem?</p>
<p>
I have a very different view on these issues in part because I very firmly believe that everything has a reason or a cause. I do not believe that people are fundamentally bad. If people do bad things, no matter how bad, I can know that there was a reason. This does not mean that people who do bad things should be ignored; in fact, it results that people who do bad things are also capable of doing good things. I cannot think of an individual who is inherently bad, and does bad things for no reason and has only negative intentions.</p>
<p>I think that the issue of ethics and morality comes down to “is someone hurt?” If your actions knowlingly hurt someone, they can, as a human, be forgiven, but not forgotten. They show the person’s character, or lack thereof, and therefore, cannot be separated from the person. A white lie is done with the intent to foreswear harm and pain, therefore, although a lie, and technically unethical, the motive was good. Marilee, OTOH, did this knowingly, knowing she was going to get a job for which she was not qualified, but was willing to take it from someone who did the work to warrant the position. This shows a lack of character, and therefore, cannot be divorced from her. Attempting to and/or having sex knowingly with a minor is NEVER right, and shows not only a lack of character, but illness, which could affect the person’s interaction with the students in his care.
I think that there has been a push in our society to move away from black and white to shades of grey, and an acceptance of the perpetrator as the victim. In an attempt to be accepting of everyone, we have allowed excuses for actions that are morally bankrupt. I remember a time when I was told, “There may be a reason for such actions, but there are NO excuses.” I remember that old Tracy-Hepburn movie that addressed this. She was a lawyer, representing a woman who killed her husband, and he was prosecuting. She staunchly defended the woman, saying that she was abused. (Yes, that argument was around even in black and white movie times) He just as staunchly said that no matter the reason, there were no excuses. In the end, he set her up and acted as if he were going to shoot her. She said, “You have no right!” The moral of the story.
There is a move to "my position is right, and if you are in the way, and I believe you are ethically worng, I have the right to do something about it, such as the antiabortionists, who believe so strongly that taking a fetus’s life is so evil, that they have the right to take the doctor’s (or his employees’) life. Or the conservatives that berate liberals for their pecadillos, but don’t use the same standards for conservatives, and the liverals that hold conservatives to a higher standard than liberals. If something is immoral for a liberal, then it is immoral for a conservative, as well (and vice-versa). We have been excusing behavior of people we want to support, because of other reasons, and overlook things that can be indicative of a greater weakness in that person.
One other thing I have seen more of in school, is the diminishing numbers of kids and parents willing to take responsibility for their actions. If they want to blame someone else, then that easily transfers to others. “Right and wrong” have given way to understanding, and excuses.</p>
<p>Good thread and questions. I find myself less dogmatic as I become “older and wiser”, but feeling more “old fashioned” when some mores change. When I get discouraged I sometimes am relieved to find the younger generation isn’t so different in keeping similar morals and values, despite media representations (we know a lot more now about what has always gone on), regardless of religious affiliations, or lack thereof. </p>
<p>The above doesn’t say much about my personal views- I think I’ll let others express themselves and enjoy the commentary.</p>
<p>
This brings up another question to me:</p>
<p>Is it O.K. to ever do the <em>wrong</em> thing–for the <em>right</em> reason? Some possible examples:
1.) “Snooping” on your child’s online journal if you feel s/he is in danger and then preventing a devastating event from occurring from the “unethical” gaining of this knowledge (perhaps preventing a suicide attempt)</p>
<p>2.) Stealing food to feel a hungry family (think: Jean Valjean in “Les Mis”)</p>
<p>3.) Withholding noncrucal information from someone in an effort not to hurt him</p>
<p>What do you think? In situations like these, does the larger good outweigh the unethical action?</p>
<p>~berurah</p>
<p>There seems to bit of confusion between morality and reasonable boundaries and authority.</p>
<p>For example, the original question: should I tell the girlfriend a white lie and say DS is in the shower? It seems to me saying he’s in the shower, even if he IS in the shower is TMI (too much information). Next do we have to tell her what he is doing in the shower? I think just saying “He is unavailable now, I will give him your message” is enough without conjuring up pictures of soapy boys.</p>
<p>Similarly, withholding noncrucial information is often just part of being polite and discreet. Morality does not demand we tell all, all the time. In fact, telling all can be immoral. Lots of times “telling all” is thinly disguised gossip. </p>
<p>With children, privacy is earned and can be revoked with reasonable suspicion. Parents are responsible for protecting their children and for protecting others from their children. That said, I have a life, and don’t have time to go though my kid’s stuff. But if I suspected they were being abused, were self-destructive or were breaking the law, I would not hesitate to investigate. I feel that this is simply being responsible.</p>
<p>to your ^^ post, sorry, I did too much yardwork yesterday—can’t climb up on my soapbox this morning, so I won’t attempt the 1st post…</p>
<p>1) I have told my kids that anything that I can google is fair game. Neither of my kids have myspace accounts, both have facebook accounts, which I cannot access, altho periodically I ask to see their facebook stuff, and they show me. I have a concern regarding one of D2’s friends wow—never been in a position like this before—we really don’t like this girl, and think she’s not a good influence on D, but we’re treading very lightly. She does post in online blogs (and uses her real name)—I sat down with D2 last weekend and discussed some of what I’d read that concerned me. I’ll continue to do so.</p>
<p>2) No. There are way too many opportunities via legitimate channels (free-lunch programs, food banks, etc). that anyone who uses this excuse is just lazy.</p>
<p>3) It depends on the info, but usually it backfires if it’s a big deal…If it’s something that the other person would be angry to find out that I’d withheld, then I’d talk to him about it. However, there are lots of little things-- D2 told me some stuff that a girl in one of her classes had to say about D1’s bf…not about anything he’d done, but just what she thought of him. D2 was shocked that this stupid girl would say what she did, and she handled it by just getting up and walking away. We agreed that it served no purpose whatsoever in telling D1 about it.</p>
<p>Is it O.K. to ever do the <em>wrong</em> thing–for the <em>right</em> reason? Some possible examples:
1.) “Snooping” on your child’s online journal if you feel s/he is in danger and then preventing a devastating event from occurring from the “unethical” gaining of this knowledge (perhaps preventing a suicide attempt)</p>
<p>To do less would be neglectful and irresponsible
A parents job is to watch out for their child</p>
<p>2.) Stealing food to feel a hungry family (think: Jean Valjean in “Les Mis”)
Obviously a short term solution- I prefer longer term solutions- job- food bank- even dumpsters in emergencies-
Where would you steal from where it wouldn’t cause less harm than the act of stealing?</p>
<p>3.) Withholding noncrucal information from someone in an effort not to hurt him</p>
<p>Declining to be cruel is not unethical.</p>
<p>1.) Are there <em>any</em> sins so great that we simply cannot separate the “sinner” from the “sin”? </p>
<p>Certainly - crimes against humanity itelf, such as the actions of Hitler and the Nazis. </p>
<p>2.) What right, if any, do we have to expect moral/ethical behavior from others when each of us has “sinned” in our own ways? In other words, to the folks on the Marilee thread who call for all of us to look in the mirror and then dare to cast a stone, DO WE have the right to cast that stone?</p>
<p>I think we always have the right to point out when someone is unethical, but that doesn’t mean that the charge of hyprocrisy can’t be thrown back at us. </p>
<p>3.) Is a little white lie such as, “No, Johnny can’t come to the phone right now; he’s in the shower,” (when Johnny really doesn’t want to talk to his gf right then) the equivalent of a bigger, much more damaging lie?</p>
<p>No, I don’t think so. </p>
<p>4.) Has our society become so desensitized to ethically and morally bankrupt behavior that we simply don’t give a flip anymore?</p>
<p>I think some people don’t give a flip anymore, but I also think we all have such different ideas about what constitutes moral and ethical behavior that what is moral to one is immoral to another. For example, I am a supporter of gay marriage. I think it is immoral for a group of people to force others to observe their religious beliefs. People who oppose my viewpoint find gay marriage immoral, or homosexuality in general immoral. </p>
<p>I think there are groups of people who are very much “the end justifies the means” kind of people. One of the topics on here recently was about the business students who were caught cheating on their take-home test. One of the students (or defender of the students) pointed out that business education is largely centered around self-interest and using whatever means is necessary to achieve your self-interest, so the students were actually doing the right thing by collaborating on their take-home tests. </p>
<p>5.) Does it take someone’s being <em>perfect</em> to expect decent behavior out of others, or do we have the right to demand some level of integrity even if we ourselves are imperfect?</p>
<p>I do think all of us, imperfect though we are, have a right to expect integrity from others. But we will sometimes be disappointed when our expectations are not met. </p>
<p>6.) If you knew/respected a person before, but came to find out something stunningly deviant about them, can you still respect him, or does that (or SHOULD that) alter your view of the person as a whole?</p>
<p>It would alter my view of that person. If it was truly stunningly deviant, I would definitely lose respect for them. </p>
<p>7.) What is “forgiveness,” what is its role, and whom does it benefit?</p>
<p>Forgiveness is something that benefits most the forgiver, not the forgivee, in my opinion. It is how someone lets go of anger or sadness that they feel about the actions that someone took against them. </p>
<p>8.) Is it sometimes O.K. to NOT forgive?</p>
<p>Yes. </p>
<p>I have to think more about the remaining questions.</p>
<p>Irishmomof2~</p>
<p>Thanks for the great contributions! ~b.</p>
<p>In answer to # 4.) Has our society become so desensitized to ethically and morally bankrupt behavior that we simply don’t give a flip anymore?</p>
<p>And #10.) What is the effect on our growing children of seeing SO much unethical behavior from people of all means and all walks of life?</p>
<p>The first thing that came to my mind was Bill Clinton’s behavior with the intern. I’ll never forget the reaction from my teen-age Ds and their friends. They really seemed to believe that if it was OK for the president to behave the way he did, then it was OK for them.
As for #11.) How do we teach our children that which some of their “heroes” are not modeling?</p>
<p>Well, in the above instance, it really was very difficult for me. Teenagers tend to model what they see, not what they hear from their parents. We tried to expose our Ds to good people that we respected from a very young age. We tried to limit exposure to TV. Its funny but before I read this thread today, my own mother and I were discussing how much has changed in 30 years.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I think many times that may be because their parents don’t “walk their talk”.</p>
<p>1.) Are there <em>any</em> sins so great that we simply cannot separate the “sinner” from the “sin”?</p>
<p>This one takes more thought that I’m prepared to give right now - but to do so would obviously require that we have complete knowledge of the “sin” and “sinner”. </p>
<p>Perhaps, it not that difficult an issue, because, in reality, we can’t assign consequences to the “sin” - they must be applied to the sinner - and thus they are inseparable. </p>
<p>2.) What right, if any, do we have to expect moral/ethical behavior from others when each of us has “sinned” in our own ways? In other words, to the folks on the Marilee thread who call for all of us to look in the mirror and then dare to cast a stone, DO WE have the right to cast that stone?</p>
<p>We not only have the right, we have the responsibility to criticize immoral/unethical behavior. Perhaps, if more individuals were willing to do so, openly and honestly, we would all become better people. </p>
<p>3.) Is a little white lie such as, “No, Johnny can’t come to the phone right now; he’s in the shower,” (when Johnny really doesn’t want to talk to his gf right then) the equivalent of a bigger, much more damaging lie?</p>
<p>I don’t think it is the moral equivalent. At the same time, I really don’t see the need for such. Why can’t one just reply - “May I take a message for him?” </p>
<p>4.) Has our society become so desensitized to ethically and morally bankrupt behavior that we simply don’t give a flip anymore?</p>
<p>I think we have become desensitized, in that we are not “shocked” as easily, but I don’t believe we “don’t give a flip”. </p>
<p>5.) Does it take someone’s being <em>perfect</em> to expect decent behavior out of others, or do we have the right to demand some level of integrity even if we ourselves are imperfect?</p>
<p>I think this is a variation on #2. We all have the right to demand integrity from everyone and everyone has a right to demand it from us.</p>
<p>6.) If you knew/respected a person before, but came to find out something stunningly deviant about them, can you still respect him, or does that (or SHOULD that) alter your view of the person as a whole?</p>
<p>It would really depend upon the “news” - what, when, where, why, etc. It would also depend upon how the person dealt with their offense. I admit that if the offense was grevious, it would alter my opinion of them. </p>
<p>7.) What is “forgiveness,” what is its role, and whom does it benefit?</p>
<p>In order for forgiveness to be earned or given, the following conditions must be met: </p>
<p>They must admit their “sin”.<br>
They must acknowledge it was “wrong” with no excuses.
They must truly regret their sin. If they were in the same situation today they would hope that they would act differently and not repeat their “sin”.<br>
They must be willing to make restitution - if there be restitution. If not, they must willingly accept a “reasonable” substitute restitution.<br>
They must ask for forgiveness.</p>
<p>If all of the above conditions are met - and they submit to the “punishment/consequence/restitution”. I believe the individual has “earned forgiveness”. I do not believe that equates to “forgetting” their past actions. Thus, they may not be allowed to do/live freely as part of the “consequence” to which they submit - perhaps for the rest of their live.</p>
<p>8.) Is it sometimes O.K. to NOT forgive?</p>
<p>If one is convinced that all of the above conditions have been met, I do think it is wrong to not forgive. However, this is not the same thing as commuting one’s sentence or letting one live freely. There may be lifelong consequences for them as a result of the “sin”. </p>
<p>9.) What, if not the essential character of a person, constitutes that person?</p>
<p>I think the essential character does define the person. </p>
<p>10.) What is the effect on our growing children of seeing SO much unethical behavior from people of all means and all walks of life?</p>
<p>I fear at best we are desensitizing them to wrongdoing. I fear we are possibly teaching them cynicism and distrust in the good of humankind. At worst, by our tolerance of such, we are teaching them to NOT speak out against such. </p>
<p>11.) How do we teach our children that which some of their “heroes” are not modeling?</p>
<p>By modeling such behavior. By pointing out the misbehavior when we see it. And, explaining why such is unacceptable.</p>
<p>Thank you berurah for introducing this contemplative topic!</p>