• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Do businesses have any ethical responsibilities, beyond obeying the law?

Do businesses have any ethical responsibilities, beyond obeying the law?

  • Total voters
    30
repeter said:
Does that include the business as a whole, on a macro scale? I agree with you, on an individual basis, we do need to act ethically, but I'm not sure that would translate to the entire business as well.
Click to expand...


Yup. Somewhere there's a guy or gal with "The Buck Stops Here" on their desk, and that person runs the company, and he should act ethically. Ditto board of directors and stock holders.
 
Goshin said:
Yup. Somewhere there's a guy or gal with "The Buck Stops Here" on their desk, and that person runs the company, and he should act ethically. Ditto board of directors and stock holders.
Click to expand...

I agree, that sorta person should be in every company, but in regards to this thread, are they required to act ethically? Going off your thinking of the individual, the corporation would also have an ethical responsibility to the stockholder to be responsible.
 
Gardener said:
I hear the brownies at the Westboro Babtist bake sales are pretty tasty.
Click to expand...

Shows you know nothing about Christians. Thats like saying all democrats are far left wing whackoes
 
repeter said:
I agree, that sorta person should be in every company, but in regards to this thread, are they required to act ethically? Going off your thinking of the individual, the corporation would also have an ethical responsibility to the stockholder to be responsible.
Click to expand...

Yes, but what is "being responsible"? Is it just delivering the shareholder the maximum return within the confines of the law? Or is it reflecting the shareholders' wishes, as expressed by the people they elected to be on the Board of Directors? I see no reason to believe that all shareholders care about is the maximum profit. If they did, then there wouldn't be any Johnson & Johnsons who go above and beyond the call of duty; the Board of Directors would be immediately replaced with less scrupulous people.

There are certain companies that I won't invest in (aside from index/sector funds that invest in groups of stocks) regardless of how undervalued the stock might be. I tend to agree with Warren Buffett, that you can't get a good deal from bad people.
 
ptif219 said:
The problem is they are more concerned about liberal agendas then selling product. I make a choice to try to buy from companies that are concerned with business not social agendas
Click to expand...

"Very conservative" says it all.
 
ptif219 said:
The problem is they are more concerned about liberal agendas then selling product. I make a choice to try to buy from companies that are concerned with business not social agendas
Click to expand...

It's impossible - you'd be surprised.
 
ptif219 said:
Not impossible but sometimes choosing the lesser of 2 evils. Instad of Pepsico products I use coca cola
Click to expand...
when i drank soda, i went the opposite direction
other things being equal, i chose pepsi before coke because pepsi was more union friendly
 
justabubba said:
when i drank soda, i went the opposite direction
other things being equal, i chose pepsi before coke because pepsi was more union friendly
Click to expand...

damn, my dentist was right. stay away from Mountain Dew!
 
earthworm said:
"Very conservative" says it all.
Click to expand...

That might be why he doesn't need a nanny state to take care of him. I support companies based on

1) the quality for the price of the product they sell

2) I try to buy American when I can-that's why I carry Smith and Wessons rather than Glocks (though I have a few glocks since I compete in a league that requires them)

a) I bought my kid a Henry Rifle for Xmas-one of the reasons was it is made in the USA and its as well made as foreign made equivalents.

3) I don't tend to worry about whether they are union friendly or "green" but I won't avoid a company because it is union friendly as long as the product is good and the price is fair
 
Businesses, as Goshin noted, are composed of individuals. These individuals have a responsibility unto themselves and their families (and to a lesser extent, their immediate community) to remain socially ethical. All individuals and businesses must conform to the law unless a law is clearly unethical (segregation).

These individuals do not have a responsibility to the general public to do what certain segments of the general public believe is ethical.
 
What is ethics and who is to decide?

Me? That works.

You? Won't work for me.
 
justabubba said:
when i drank soda, i went the opposite direction
other things being equal, i chose pepsi before coke because pepsi was more union friendly
Click to expand...


Another reason not to use pepsico.Union money goes to democrats that disagree with my ethics and morales
 
ElijahGalt said:
Businesses, as Goshin noted, are composed of individuals. These individuals have a responsibility unto themselves and their families (and to a lesser extent, their immediate community) to remain socially ethical. All individuals and businesses must conform to the law unless a law is clearly unethical (segregation).

These individuals do not have a responsibility to the general public to do what certain segments of the general public believe is ethical.
Click to expand...

That depends on who buys their product.
 
ptif219 said:
They are big money supporters of gays.

Pepsi Continues To Sponsor Homosexual Agenda: Boycott Continues | LifeSiteNews.com
Click to expand...

ptif219 said:
The problem is they are more concerned about liberal agendas then selling product. I make a choice to try to buy from companies that are concerned with business not social agendas
Click to expand...

ptif219 said:
Not impossible but sometimes choosing the lesser of 2 evils. Instad of Pepsico products I use coca cola
Click to expand...

Coca Cola » Americans for Truth

Coca-Cola and Best Buy have been on HRC’s 100-percent Pro-Homosexual Corporations list for two and four years, respectively. Coke’s competitor PepsiCo has been on the HRC list for four years. McDonald’s scores an 85% on the “gay” group’s survey. Click HERE to learn about the HRC’s criteria for ranking companies.

In 2008, the following 195 ‘Fortune 1,000′ corporations received a perfect 100-percent score from the pro-homosexual lobby group Human Rights Campaign (HRC), in its “2008 Corporate Equality Index.” Click on AFTAH”s story on McDonald’s 85-percent score — to learn about the pro-”gay” criteria for HRC’s “Corporate Equality Index.” The number next to each corporation’s name and headquarters city indicates how many years that company has received a 100% HRC ranking. (First-year 100% corporations are in bold.) Source: HRC’s 2008 Corporate Equality Index.
Click to expand...

Baptist Press - Coca-Cola joins employers giving benefits to homosexual partners - News with a Christian Perspective

WASHINGTON (BP)--The Coca-Cola Co. will extend health-care benefits to the same-sex partners of its employees, giving the homosexual rights movement another June victory to go with the same actions by the big three auto makers earlier in the month.

Coca-Cola's decision -- like those of General Motors Corp., Ford Motor Co. and DaimlerChrysler Corp. -- adds to a growing trend among American businesses of granting to the partners of homosexual workers health benefits previously reserved for the spouses of married employees. The soft-drink giant's policy, which was announced June 22, will take effect Jan. 1. The automakers' revision will be effective Aug. 1.
Click to expand...

.... lol.... your anti-homosexual attitude does not need insults to be ridiculed.
 
Last edited:
So my question is. If people won't drink pepsi because of their homosexual agenda, do they use google?
 
Your Star said:
Dr. Pepper makes this gay happy, you gonna boycott them :lol:
Click to expand...

Damn, you are a commie and a lesbo:mrgreen:

No chance of you sending the RNC any money this election cycle!!:lamo
 
megaprogman said:
So my question is. If people won't drink pepsi because of their homosexual agenda, do they use google?
Click to expand...

I always wondered what that "AGENDA" was. I guess being a conservative they never called me up and asked for a contribution!
 
Kandahar said:
Do you believe that it's possible for a business to behave unethically even while acting within the bounds of the law? Or do you believe that as long as they're following the letter of the law they've fulfilled all of their responsibilities to society?

The reason I ask this is because whenever someone on this forum points out a perceived ethical lapse of a corporation, there is a certain contingent of posters who invariably feel the need to chime in with "They're a private business, they can do what they want." This leads me to believe that some people think that legality and ethics are one and the same, and that businesses are morally justified in screwing over the public as much as possible as long as they obey the law.
Click to expand...

I'm one of those who chime in with the "they can do what they want" clause.

But I don't mean that I think businesses should, in the case of Rand Paul, not serve people based on their race. I think that's terribly wrong. But the law shouldn't get involved either. My point is that even though they may be wrong in their own moral responsibility according to my opinion, what would be more wrong is to tell them what they have to do and take away their freedom. Solving one 'wrong' with a bigger 'wrong' is only worse.

We have fought for our freedoms - Americans have died for them. Let's not give them up so easily. Let the people decide if such a business should stay in business (by refusing their product) - not the legislature.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom