Philosophical and Practical Approach for Balancing Issues
Philosophical and Practical Approach for Balancing Issues
CRJ- 220 Ethics and Leadership
Strayer University
Is there a way to balance the protection of individual rights while protecting the public at the same time? There are many arguments to this question due to the grey areas surrounding individual rights and public rights. Many argue that their rights are violated but then complain when the protection of the public is breached. This needs to be a give and take situation and people need to realize that they will have to give up some privacy for the good of all. When people speak of rights do they really understand what they are speaking of? This is a catered society and I feel people think everything should just be given to them. “The Declaration of Independence enshrines three basic rights: the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The right to life protects the individual’s ability to take all those actions necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of his life. The right to liberty protects the individual’s ability to think and to act on his own judgment. The right to pursue happiness protects the individual’s ability to live for his own sake, rather than for the sake of society (Rand, A. n.d).” What if one’s pursuit of happiness violates someone else’s rights? The government philosophy is to protect the good of all you must give up some of your rights and to be frank, it isn’t fair but it is true. Today’s society is much more advanced and different than when the Declaration of Independence was written. With terrorism more prevalent today there does need to be some protection from the government, with that being said it is our duty to give up some rights to SOME of our privacy. If the government wants to monitor phone calls, text messages, etc. it should be no problem. The problem is that it needs to be understood that they are only monitoring for certain things, and if someone is lying, cheating, or committing
CRJ- 220 Ethics and Leadership
Strayer University
Is there a way to balance the protection of individual rights while protecting the public at the same time? There are many arguments to this question due to the grey areas surrounding individual rights and public rights. Many argue that their rights are violated but then complain when the protection of the public is breached. This needs to be a give and take situation and people need to realize that they will have to give up some privacy for the good of all. When people speak of rights do they really understand what they are speaking of? This is a catered society and I feel people think everything should just be given to them. “The Declaration of Independence enshrines three basic rights: the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The right to life protects the individual’s ability to take all those actions necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of his life. The right to liberty protects the individual’s ability to think and to act on his own judgment. The right to pursue happiness protects the individual’s ability to live for his own sake, rather than for the sake of society (Rand, A. n.d).” What if one’s pursuit of happiness violates someone else’s rights? The government philosophy is to protect the good of all you must give up some of your rights and to be frank, it isn’t fair but it is true. Today’s society is much more advanced and different than when the Declaration of Independence was written. With terrorism more prevalent today there does need to be some protection from the government, with that being said it is our duty to give up some rights to SOME of our privacy. If the government wants to monitor phone calls, text messages, etc. it should be no problem. The problem is that it needs to be understood that they are only monitoring for certain things, and if someone is lying, cheating, or committing
References: Childers, D. (2012, January 1). Three Approaches to Making Ethical Decisions Within an Educational Institution - Yahoo! Voices - voices.yahoo.com. Yahoo. Retrieved December 9, 2012, from http://voices.yahoo.com/three-approaches-making-ethical-decisions-within-364320.html?cat=4 Beckner, W. (2004). Ethics for educational leaders. New York: Allyn & Bacon. Etzioni, A. (1997). "Balancing Individual Rights and the Common Good,". The Communitarian Network, 12(1), 66-67. Retrieved December 9, 2012, from http://www.gwu.edu/~ccps/etzioni/A249.html How can rewards and sanctions be used effectively with drug-involved offenders in treatment? | National Institute on Drug Abuse. (2012, January 1). National Institute on Drug Abuse. Retrieved December 9, 2012, from http://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/principles-drug-abuse-treatment-criminal-justice-populations/how-can-rewards-sanctions-be-used-effectively-drug- Rand, A. (n.d.). Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness — Principles of a Free Society. Home — Principles of a Free Society. Retrieved December 9, 2012, from http://principlesofafreesociety.com/life-liberty-pursuit-of-happiness/ Williams, C. R., & Arrigo, B. A. (2012). Means and Ends: The Importance of Consequences. Ethics, crime, and criminal justice (2nd ed., p. 146). Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Pearson. Velasquez, M. (Director) (2009, May 1). framework for thinking ethically. framework for thinking ethically. Lecture conducted from Santa Clara University, Santa Clara.