Suppose you recently started working at a medical facility and you had just gotten your best-friend-from-college a job there.
As a new employee, her job is to move people from the lobby to the proper treatment room. Specifically, moving people who recently came to the United States and English was not their first language.
Your friend calls you at the end of your shift because she had been summarily fired.
She was moving a young, Asian couple from the lobby to ultrasound and she deduced that the woman intended to abort the fetus if it was a girl. Instead of moving them to ultrasound she dropped them off at Ethics Counseling.
Your friend urges you to publicly protest because your friend just knew that the woman was being coerced by the man into making that decision. Her body, her choice. Right?
What do you do?
Registered agents with a large, Asian country start offering women in the United States $2000 if they abort girl fetuses.
They stand outside clinics in inner-city areas and if the candidates meet certain criteria then they are offered $2000 cash to abort the fetus.
After watching for a while, Social Justice Activists realize that the agents are making those decisions based on race and dependency on public welfare.
Is there anything wrong with this? After all, it is the woman's body and her choice. Bully for her if she can make a few bucks on the side.
The United States government decides to selectively fund abortion clinics in inner-cities.
After studying the statistics, Social Justice Activists realize that certain racial groups are aborting their babies at 3 times the rate of other racial groups primarily due to the location of the clinics.
Is this a problem?
My pizza is ready to eat so I can't make a full answer, but I will say "nice trick questions....."ReplyDelete
I was going to be snarky and say something about trick questionsReplyDelete
But that dang blasted Matthew W. already went there.
So I'm pretty sure that the proper answer is, choose life. Yes, choose life. I don't even want to debate it. LIFE!!!!
Ooh, a “what’s the difference between morality and ethics, the contradictions arising from these, and the conflicts with employment roles, restrictions and law” question. With subjective vs. objective, assumptions based on outcomes rather than opportunity, race/creed/culture, personal choice/manipulation/, sexual dynamics assumed and real, profiteering/bribery/corruption ‘and’ nationalism/foreign interference/aggression, with possible/probable bias in interpretations thrown into the mix for good measure.ReplyDelete
You’re going to need a bigger blog (or less trick questions).
Quick and dirty, knowing no real facts (and pretending to fall for it)?
1) No way to judge since only fact available is ‘friend’s’ opinion.
2) Ditto, with SJA’s opinions.
3) Ditto, SJA’s opinion/interpretation.
Nope, we need hard facts. Best to shut down the clinics and put the staff in ‘protective custody’ (solitary, in a facility in Death Valley in case of attack, bread and water diet in case of poisoning attempt, no A/C in case of poison gas, regular ‘massages’ with PR-24 to ensure maintenance of fitness, etc.) whilst gathering the data - it should only take a … decade or two.
Scenario 1. When you are an employee you are a paid agent of said employer. You follow their policies and do your job as instructed. If you wish to proselytize and pontificate on a subject near and dear to you it should be done on your own time. Good and proper job termination.ReplyDelete
In Scenario 1, she could have handled the matter differently; for example, by reporting to someone in authority while the patient was in ultrasound. Scenario 2 somehow doesn't make sense to me. Seems the foreign power would want America to produce as many welfare recipients as possible to weaken our country. For Scenario 3, since SJWs have no coherent moral code at all, I don't think they would see any problem.ReplyDelete
Many foreign countries hold a great deal of US debt. They have a vested interest in that debt not being impaired. In a sense, when you buy bonds you have a partial, owner's stake in the "company".Delete
When you buy bonds, you have a property interest in a company but not an ownership interest in it; that what shares give.Delete
On the subject of foreign debt ownership, the last numbers I saw were all foreign ownership was less than 20%. Many people confuse foreign currency holdings with foreign debt holdings.
Most US Treasuries are held by US companies to satisfy legal requirements to have a certain portion of accounts in "safe" assets.
"Many foreign countries hold a great deal of US debt. They have a vested interest in that debt not being impaired"Delete
Unless they are perfectly satisfied with bankrupting the bond seller.......
I think that the Chinese government would consider it a very good trade if its portfolio of US Treasury debt went to zero in exchange for destroying our society. We are its only rival with the military power and willingness to keep its desire for global domination in check.Delete
Contrarian ViewAugust 1, 2022 at 6:10 AMDelete
Don't forget, China still has outstanding debt of 1 trillion dollars from pre war bonds.
Situation 1 - You do nothing, your friend knew what her job was and chose to take a path that was not her job. And what she thought she knew may or may not have been true. It's her problem, not yours.ReplyDelete
Situation 2 - while I think that abortion is wrong, both of the parties are acting within their rights - the agents would benefit from a hickory shampoo and a ride on a boxcar on the next train out of town, but the women are making their own choices, regardless of the enticement of money.
Situation 3 - The problem is in the first sentence - the US Government should not and cannot fund abortion. Period. Selectively or not.
The inclusion of SJA's is a red herring - their opinions only matter when their opinions turn into action. Thoughts may be right or wrong but we shouldn't judge anyone on their thoughts - actions are where the rubber meets the road in society. At the end of the day - we all answer to God, and our actions will be judged according to our individual choices. I think that far too much attention is being paid to what others think and say - and that road leads to nowhere in the end - but does create a lot of Sturm und Drang. Far better to ignore the manufactured drama - much of it would disappear. Take action in response to action.
Dang, that was a really good pizza.ReplyDelete
# 3: Replace "Social Justice Loser" with "Conservative".......
It's already happening.
Matthew W runs to the front again. Most PP clinics are in poor sections of town. Minorities are targeted and are compliant. Margret Sanger's organization is working as designed. God ended "civilizations" for this.ReplyDelete
#2 Now I am completely unaware if foreign actors are paying Asian women to abort girl babies, but, that is a trend even in America with Asians. Again, replace "Social Justice A**wipe" with "Conservative" and it's already occurring here. Should the social justice buffoons be concerned with sexism in the womb?ReplyDelete
Interesting questions, and not going to debate that on here.ReplyDelete
Situation 1. Maybe your friend is an idiot, beyond the situation. Jake is working for me before he goes to the Marines this fall. "Can I assume you are doing this task, so I can go back to a 2nd tier task?" No, you can not. (Jake starts running off to the 2nd task). Where you going? "I thought you were doing this". No, I answered your question in the negative. Did YOU not listen to your question?ReplyDelete
I'm standing there doing my task, and move out of Jakes path for the tractor. He assumes I'M thinking he's not finished with his task. I had pointed out one pass, which he did. He then proceeded to make 3 passes at nothing. Like my big fat greek wedding: Hurt my sister, I'll kill you. Just kidding. No, Seriously, I'll cut your balls off. Just kidding. Ask her what happened to the last guy. Just kidding.
God help us all if they don't make a man out of him before giving him a gun.
Situation 2. Isn't China short of breeding stock, relaxing their 1 child policy? It would be a big costly gamble, but it might just work against one's foe.
Isn't situation 3 real, without the question "Is this a problem?"