Running head: WOMEN’S EQUALITY 1 Women’s Equality Sher-Kona Malcom Soc:120 Introduction to Ethics and Social Responsibility Instructor: Owen Alexander Miller August 6, 2017 WOMEN’S EQUALITY 2 Introduction Ethical issues come up when people react to different situations which are presented on the basis of moral grounds. One issue which is generally seen around the world is women’s equality - where women find it difficult to express themselves because the society deems them inferior to men in all aspects. The unequal rights of women in the society show that the full potential, economically or socially, is not met because the majority of the population is denied opportunities to fulfill them. Equality will ensure that women are presented with similar job opportunities and equally competitive salaries as the men. It will also empower them to receive an education that will make them competitive and improve their status in the society. Women’s equality is an ethical issue which affects the whole society socially and economically (Winston & Edelbach, 2014). Women’s equality is a dilemma since different people and societies deal differently because of assumptions, and culture which is explained through deontology and utilitarianism ethical theories as well as relativism perspective. Breaches of Ethical Behavior in Women’s Equality Instances, where women’s equality should be addressed, are such as the inaccessibility to basic education, unequal economic and political opportunities, affect the whole society. Women suffer when societies prohibit them from performing certain duties and if they do, the men are rewarded more than them. It is unfair to refuse to hand roles to women because the society does not allow. For instance, the field of politics and top positions in companies are deemed for men whereas there are capable women who can deliver quality services in the same positions, if not better. Denying women, the right to certain privileges when they are pregnant, also affects the WOMEN’S EQUALITY 3 economic potential of the society. Other cultures undervalue women and provide ground for sexselective abortion. There have been major improvements on the issue but the status of women’s equality has not yet been achieved. It is the duty of the whole society to focus on achieving equality for women now so that the same issue should not be passed over to the future generations. Ethical Theories and Perspectives on Women’s Equality The two theories which could help in the understanding of ethical behavior when dealing with equality are utilitarianism and deontology. According to utilitarianism, happiness or the goodness of a variable should be maximized for all. While focusing on the choice made for the good of all, there are instances where the less unfortunate benefit and the ones with more have some of their benefits taken away. In the case of utilitarianism and women’s equality, the society suffers because the full potential is not met when the women do not have the capability and the rights to perform certain roles in a society. For the benefit of the whole society, both women and men should be awarded the same opportunities (Klein et al., 2014). The happiness will be maximized because the women will no longer depend on men for prosperity and the society will grow economically and socially. Maximization of happiness in the society will have a positive economic impact on the men and then everyone will benefit. It is therefore ethical to have equality for women as shown by utilitarianism. Deontology theory states that rightness or wrongness is determined by the nature of the action such that if the result is good then the action is deemed good. The whole point focuses on the duty which is supposed to be carried and is given priority over a choice. When the society refuses to offer equal opportunities to the women and the men, it fails to perform its duty and the action is therefore unethical. When the woman who works the same as the man is given less pay WOMEN’S EQUALITY 4 that is unfair treatment. It is wrong to treat women as inferior beings. When women cannot access certain offices because of their gender the action remains to be unethical because the society has the duty to offer equal opportunities. The theory shows that equality is to be practiced by all and respect should be given to everyone equally. Ethical relativism states that an action is deemed morally right or wrong depending on the norms and the culture from where it is practiced (White, 2017). Relativism assures that morality cannot cut across borders because of difference in cultures. Therefore, a society which looks down on women cannot be said to be morally wrong because it is a norm and they practice it. This perspective shows why equality cannot be accepted globally. It shows that cultures may suppress women’s equality rights because they would take that the western culture is forced on them. While it is their right to uphold their culture, and deem women inferior to men, they should consider the effects it has on their society. The societies which suppress their women and refuse to take a step to equality are playing a huge role in the slow advancement socially, economically, and politically. Organizations in these societies should play the role of educating the people and showing them the benefits of equality for women. Conclusion Various issues within the society can be assessed using ethical theories and perspectives which help us understand why certain issues are treated differently. Women’s equality is an ethical issue through which deontology and utilitarianism theories, as well as relativism perspective, have shown why it is morally right to achieve equality although it is far from being attained globally. The equality of women is a concern for everyone and should be awarded the highest priority. Understanding the ethical theories and perspectives would help societies deal WOMEN’S EQUALITY with the issue positively. It would change the world as we know it and create a better place for the future generations. 5 WOMEN’S EQUALITY 6 References Klein, S. S., Richardson, B., Grayson, D. A., Fox, L. H., Kramarae, C., Pollard, D. S., & Dwyer, C. A. (Eds.). (2014). Handbook for achieving gender equity through education. Routledge. White, T. I. (2017). Right and wrong: A practical introduction to ethics. Chichester, UK; Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. Winston, M. E., & Edelbach, R. (2014). Society, ethics, and technology. Boston, MA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning. Grading Rubric for Final Paper Total Possible Score: 25.00 Includes an Introduction and Thesis Statement Total: 3.00 Distinguished - Includes a comprehensive introduction and a clear thesis statement that effectively reflects the argument of the paper and links the chosen ethical theories and perspective to the chosen social issue. Proficient - Includes an introduction and a thesis statement that reflects the argument of the paper and links the chosen ethical theories and perspective to the chosen social issue. The introduction or thesis statement is slightly underdeveloped. Basic - Includes a partial introduction and a limited thesis statement that reflects the argument of the paper and links the chosen ethical theories and perspective to the chosen social issue. The introduction and/or thesis statement are underdeveloped. Below Expectations - Attempts to include an introduction and a thesis statement; however, the thesis does not reflect the argument of the paper and does not link the chosen ethical theories and perspective to the chosen social issue. The introduction and thesis statement are significantly underdeveloped. Non-Performance - The introduction and thesis statement are either nonexistent or lack the components described in the assignment instructions. Explains How the Ethical Theories and Perspective Would Address the Chosen Social Issue Total: 8.00 Distinguished - Thoroughly explains how the ethical theories and perspective would address the chosen social issue and fully considers all questions. Effectively applies course concepts and vocabulary to support the explanation. Proficient - Explains how the ethical theories and perspective would address the chosen social issue and addresses all questions. Applies course concepts and vocabulary to support the explanation, but minor details are missing. Basic - Partially explains how the ethical theories and perspective would address the chosen social issue and somewhat addresses all questions. Applies course concepts and vocabulary to support the explanation, and relevant details are missing. Below Expectations - Attempts to explain how the ethical theories and perspective would address the chosen social issue; however, does not address all questions and course concepts and vocabulary are not applied to support the explanation. Significant details are missing. Non-Performance - The explanation of how the ethical theories and perspective would address the social issue is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions. Organization Total: 5.00 Distinguished - All arguments are strongly supported with specific and relevant details and/or examples and overall the paper is logically organized. Proficient - Arguments are supported with specific details and/or examples and the paper is logically organized. Minor details are slightly irrelevant or missing. Basic - Some arguments are supported with details and/or examples, and the paper is limited in organization. Some details are irrelevant and/or missing. Below Expectations - Arguments are not supported with details and/or examples, and the paper severely lacks organization. Many details are irrelevant and missing. Non-Performance - The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions. Incorporates Draft Feedback in the Development of the Final Paper Total: 4.00 Distinguished - Effectively uses the draft feedback in the development of the Final Paper. Proficient - Adequately uses the draft feedback in the development of the Final Paper. Basic - Uses some draft feedback in the development of the Final Paper. Below Expectations - Uses minimal draft feedback in the development of the Final Paper. Non-Performance - The incorporation of draft feedback in the development of the Final Paper is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions. Applied Ethics: Application of Ethical Perspectives/Concepts Total: 1.00 Distinguished - Independently applies ethical viewpoints to an ethical question correctly and considers the full ramifications of the application. Proficient - Independently applies ethical viewpoints to an ethical question correctly, but does not consider the specific ramifications of the application. Basic - Applies ethical viewpoints to an ethical question with support, but is unable to apply ethical perspectives/concepts independently. Below Expectations - Inaccurately constructs ethical viewpoints to an ethical question. Non-Performance - The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions. Applied Ethics: Understanding Different Ethical Perspectives/Concepts Total: 1.00 Distinguished - States and describes the theory and accurately explains the details of the theory used. Proficient - States and describes the theory and explain the details of the theory, but with some inaccuracies. Basic - States and describes the major theory used. Below Expectations - Only states the major theory used. Non-Performance - The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions. Critical Thinking: Evidence Total: 1.50 Distinguished - Employs persuasive and applicable information from credible sources to develop an ample analysis or synthesis of the topic. Viewpoints of experts are scrutinized thoroughly. Proficient - Employs applicable information from credible sources to develop an analysis of the topic. Basic - Identifies applicable information from credible sources, but may neglect the application of such information toward the analysis of the topic. Below Expectations - Presents information from external sources, but such information may lack credibility and/or relevance. Neglects to apply such information toward the analysis of the topic. Non-Performance - The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions. Written Communication: APA Formatting Total: 0.50 Distinguished - Accurately uses APA formatting consistently throughout the paper, title page, and reference page. Proficient - Exhibits APA formatting throughout the paper. However, layout contains a few minor errors. Basic - Exhibits limited knowledge of APA formatting throughout the paper. However, layout does not meet all APA requirements. Below Expectations - Fails to exhibit basic knowledge of APA formatting. There are frequent errors, making the layout difficult to distinguish as APA. Non-Performance - The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions. Written Communication: Page Requirement Total: 0.50 Distinguished - The length of the paper is equivalent to the required number of correctly formatted pages. Proficient - The length of the paper is nearly equivalent to the required number of correctly formatted pages. Basic - The length of the paper is equivalent to at least three quarters of the required number of correctly formatted pages. Below Expectations - The length of the paper is equivalent to at least one half of the required number of correctly formatted pages. Non-Performance - The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions. Written Communication: Resource Requirement Total: 0.50 Distinguished - Uses more than the required number of scholarly sources, providing compelling evidence to support ideas. All sources on the reference page are used and cited correctly within the body of the assignment. Proficient - Uses the required number of scholarly sources to support ideas. All sources on the reference page are used and cited correctly within the body of the assignment. Basic - Uses less than the required number of sources to support ideas. Some sources may not be scholarly. Most sources on the reference page are used within the body of the assignment. Citations may not be formatted correctly. Below Expectations - Uses an inadequate number of sources that provide little or no support for ideas. Sources used may not be scholarly. Most sources on the reference page are not used within the body of the assignment. Citations are not formatted correctly. Non-Performance - The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions. Running head: ETHICAL CONTRIBUTIONS (Including a Running head and page numbers help to keep your assignment organized.) Are Contributions to Political Campaigns Ethical? Joanna Student SOC120: Introduction to Ethics & Social Responsibility (Course Section) Week 5 Final Paper Dr. Ashford Instructor July, 1, 20XX 1 ETHICAL CONTRIBUTIONS 2 Ethical Contributions to Political Campaigns A question that comes up frequently in political discussions is whether organizations like corporations have too much influence over the political landscape today. Corporations have many resources through which to effect political change, including lobbyists, quid pro quo back door arrangements and campaign contributions. Because these funds can have a large influence on who wins elections and the legislation that politicians support, it is important for an educated citizenry to be aware of these contributions, and to consider their ethical implications. I will argue that from the utilitarian perspective, indirect contributions to political campaigns by organizations like corporations and unions can be ethical and should be allowed so long as there are sufficient regulations in place to prevent undue harm that might result from giving large organizations too much influence over the political process. I will contrast this view with that of ethical egoism, which would argue that such contributions are ethical inasmuch as they allow corporations to pursue their own long term interests. According to the Federal Elections Commission (2004), "The Federal Election Campaign Act (the Act) places monetary limits on contributions to support candidates for federal office and prohibits contributions from certain sources." However, corporations are allowed to create separate bank accounts and then make donations from these accounts to political campaigns as long as they are not connected directly to the operation of the business. Regarding this type of donation, the FEC (2004) stated that, "Contributions may…be made from separate segregated funds (also called political action committees or PACs) established by corporations, labor organizations, national banks, and incorporated membership organizations.” In other words, corporations can set up PACs that in turn give large amounts of money to support candidates. Because these funds can have a large influence on who wins elections and the legislation that ETHICAL CONTRIBUTIONS 3 they support, it is important for an educated citizenry to be aware of the potential ethical impacts of these contributions. The sections that follow address how two of the most important moral theories would address this issue. Utilitarianism Utilitarianism is the moral theory that actions are right or wrong in proportion to the degree to which they promote the happiness of all concerned (Mill, 2015). Accordingly, whether or not corporate campaign contributions are ethical will depend on the overall consequences of such contributions. If a corporation’s making a contribution results in better overall consequences than not making it, or than making a different contribution, then the contribution would be considered ethical. On the other hand, if the contribution results in more harm than good, then the contribution would be unethical. For instance, a contribution to a candidate could be unethical if it results in benefits to the corporation itself, but does so at the expense of many others in the society. The primary question of this paper is not whether particular cases of such contributions are wrong, but whether corporate contributions to political campaigns are wrong in general; that is, does permitting them have greater overall consequences than banning them would have? I will argue that with careful oversight, the benefits of such contributions can outweigh their potential harms, so allowing them is ethical from a utilitarian point of view. There are various reasons that representatives of a corporation may want to make donations to a political campaign. Corporations may be trying to advance their particular organizational objectives or they may stand to garner an economic benefit. While a corporation will always be concerned with its own future profits, this does not necessarily conflict with the interests of society as a whole. In many cases, attempting to have a political influence that benefits the corporation can also benefit society as a whole. For example, a contribution that ETHICAL CONTRIBUTIONS 4 helps a corporation to succeed in the market place can result in the continued employment of thousands of people, as well as the provision of important goods and services at lower prices. Another example of the positive use of political contributions comes not from corporations but from unions. According to the Center for Responsive Politics (2016), the largest all-time contributors to campaigns has been labor unions such as the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) which ranked number one with $228,096,452 in donations since 1989. They were far ahead of the next two contributors which were the National Education Association with $96,619,681 in donations and the American Federation of State/County/Municipal Employees Union with $96,445,616 in total contributions. The millions of dollars from these political contributions have served to promote the goals of their union, which in turn promote the well-being of the many members of the American work force that they represent. In the case of the unions, the PACs representing them contribute to political campaigns in an effort to maximize the benefits to their union members. The SEIU represents members from many different industries with varying and diverse concerns and needs. According to Center for Responsive Politics (2016) the SEIU's top issues for lobbying are Health Issues, Labor/AntiTrust and Workplace, Immigration, Federal Budget and Appropriations, and Economics and Economic Development. Considering the fact that the unions are frequently made up of service industry employees like healthcare workers, janitors, security guards, public service employees, home care workers, building service workers, probation and parole officers, the SEIU political lobbying can benefit not just members of the union but also millions of other workers engaged in similar professions. Legislation passed to support the interests of SEIU members can thus be beneficial to the American workforce in general and thus to society as a whole. It would seem ETHICAL CONTRIBUTIONS 5 that in cases like these political contributions from organizations can have great overall benefits and thus be ethical from a utilitarian perspective. Even though such contributions can be ethical in particular cases, however, this does not necessarily mean that it would be ethical to legally permit all such contributions. It’s also possible for political contributions by organizations to be harmful to society. Corporations have sometimes used their considerable influence to create legislation that is harmful to workers, human rights, and the environment (Burley and Hoedeman, 2011). While there are certainly negative consequences that can result from allowing corporate contributions, rather than banning them outright, we can put in place regulations designed to limit the amount of harm that might result from them. For instance, we could require transparency that would enable the public to know which corporations are closely connected to which PACs, and thus whether a politician is (indirectly) receiving large contributions from a particular corporation. This could, in turn, shed light on whether certain laws and policies are being passed primarily for the benefit of those corporations, rather than for the public good. With such regulations in place, allowing corporations and unions to contribute to political campaigns it is more likely to do more good than harm and thus be ethical from a utilitarian point of view. Ethical Egoism Ethical egoism is the moral theory that one should do whatever is in one’s own interests (Mosser, 2013). This does not mean that one should do whatever one feels like in the moment, but that one should work hard to promote one’s greatest long term success. When corporations donate to political campaigns they generally will do so with the goal of promoting their own financial interests, and thus are acting ethically according to the egoist theory. Some may feel ETHICAL CONTRIBUTIONS 6 that this kind of self-interested influence is unethical. One can imagine a business supporting legislation that promotes its own interests to the detriment of society as a whole. For example, corporations have often used their considerable influence to create legislation favorable to their own interests but not to the interests of employees, human rights, or the environment (Burley and Hoedeman, 2011). Because a lot of harm can come to society from such influence, some may feel that this degree of power in the hands of self-interested corporations should not be allowed. Such concerns, however, assume that the metric by which we measure the ethicality of an action is based on its overall social consequences, which reflects a utilitarian perspective. According to ethical egoism, one is not responsible to society as a whole, but to one’s own long term success. According to this theory, a corporation’s only responsibility would be to its own long term interests. Such a view is reflected in the work of the economist Milton Friedman, who argues that increasing its own profits is the sole ethical responsibility of a business (Friedman, 1970). One can even argue that the corporate pursuit of self-interest is actually beneficial to society as a whole. If corporations did not seek to promote their own financial success, then over time they would collapse, and all of their employees would be out of work. Capitalism itself works by assuming that companies and individuals will seek to increase their own financial success. This results in competition, which in turn ensures that product quality, supply levels, and prices find an optimal balance between the interests of corporations and consumers (Smith, 2007). Without this egoistic perspective, it can be argued, our economy would collapse. With it, our economy grows and prospers. One can think of the balance of interests involved in corporate contributions with the analogy of a courtroom. In a trial, it is the duty of the prosecution and defense attorneys to ETHICAL CONTRIBUTIONS 7 defend opposite sides of a case as well as possible. It is through this balance that we achieve an approximation of fairness in the courtroom. So it is with corporate political contributions. There are political contributions made on all sides of political issues. There are PACs representing environmental, regulatory, workforce, human rights, corporate, and other interests. With the contributions of all of these parties, various interests groups are able to have their voices heard in the American political process so that a proper balance can be struck. Conclusion Donations from organizations to political campaigns can drive legislation and thus have a major influence on public policy in this country. While this influence can have positive and negative impacts, this paper argues that such contributions should be allowed as they satisfy the ethical egoist goal of allowing corporations to promote their own interests, and, at least when regulated, can satisfy the utilitarian goal of a promoting a happier society as well. One significant difference between the two approaches is that the utilitarian view would insist on certain regulations designed to limit the harmful results that could result from organizations donating in ways that promote their own interests. However, the ethical egoist would disagree, and maintain that the freedom of organizations to promote their interests has the highest priority; thus, the egoist would likely oppose most kinds of regulations on political contributions by organizations. Both theories appear to agree, however, that, at least when carefully regulated, corporations should be allowed to make political contributions that further their long term interests. ETHICAL CONTRIBUTIONS 8 References Burley, H., & Hoedeman, O. (2011). The best influence money can buy – the 10 worst corporate lobbyists. New Internationalist Magazine. Retrieved July 11, 2016 from https://newint.org/features/2011/01/01/10-worst-corporate-lobbyists/. Center for Responsive Politics (2016). Service employees international union. Retrieved July 1, 2016 from: http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summary.php?id=d000000077&cycle=2010. Daigle, C. (2006). Nietzsche: Virtue Ethics… Virtue Politics? Journal of Nietzsche Studies 32, 121. Federal Election Commission (FEC). (2004, February). Contributions (Updated February 2016). Retrieved May 8, 2016, from: http://www.fec.gov/pages/brochures/contrib.shtml#Corporations_Labor_Banks. Friedman, M. (1970, September 13). The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. The New York Times Magazine. Retrieved July 11, 2016 from http://umich.edu/~thecore/doc/Friedman.pdf. Kelsen, H. (1948). Absolutism and relativism in philosophy and politics. The American Political Science Review 42(5), 906-914. Retrieved May 22, 2016, from http://www.jstor.org/stable/1950135. Mill, J. S. (2008). Utilitarianism. In J. Bennett (Ed. & Rev.) Early Modern Philosophy. Retrieved July 11, 2016 from http://www.earlymoderntexts.com/assets/pdfs/mill1863.pdf Mosser, K. (2013). Ethics and social responsibility 2e. Bridgepoint Education, Inc. ETHICAL CONTRIBUTIONS Smith, A. (2007). An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. Retrieved July 11, 2016 from http://www.ibiblio.org/ml/libri/s/SmithA_WealthNations_p.pdf. Teachout, T. (2001). Prime-time patriotism. Commentary 112(4), 51. Retrieved from: https://www.commentarymagazine.com/issues/. 9 
Purchase answer to see full attachment