In other words, social justice is linked to the common good and exercise of authority.
between themselves and their peers is not only problematic in that it silences the less privileged, but in that it deprives the forum the opportunity of self-correction and multidimensionality. When one recognizes the necessity of recognizing the differences between groups (and their conception of the good), the absence of a concrete conception of the common good becomes, effectively, an advantage, as it allows the deliberative forum to be more accepting of a wider range of ideas (without pre-emptively rejecting them as unreasonable because they do not appeal to the traditional conception of the common good), which will provide the less privileged a better chance at being heard and responded to.
On March 23, 2010 President Obama signed the Affordable Care Act (ACA); this date is when the growing debate began. The Affordable Care Act is also commonly known as Obamacare. A large issue between the opposing sides is the future of small business under this bill. “Many small businesses are going to be absolutely crushed by the provisions in Obamacare that require them to provide expensive health insurance coverage for their employees.” (Snyder, Michael) “3.2 million small businesses — employing 19.3 million workers nationwide — were eligible last year for tax credits worth $15.4 billion or $800 per employee.” (LOLGOP) These separate articles counteract each other, one claiming that small
The next theme contingent throughout the step is the benefits of community. This is similar to the inclusiveness that comes from solidarity, but through community we can prevent oppression from happening
The concept of Social Sustainability encompasses such topics as: social equity, livability, health equity, community development, social capital, social support, human rights, labor rights, social responsibility, social justice, cultural competence, community resilience, diplomacy, cooperation and human adaptation(Ghahramanpouri, Lamit& Sedaghatnia, 2013). Social sustainability occurs when the formal and informal processes; systems; structures; and relationships actively support the capacity of current and future generations to create healthy and livable communities. Socially sustainable communities are equitable, diverse, connected and democratic and provide a good quality of life(Spangenberg, & Omann, 2006).
The lottery in this country is a big past time for Americans. It gives hope to the hopeless and disappointment to a multitude of participants. A quick view of statistical information regarding the lottery shows that out of all people who take part in this country wide phenomenon, each individual person has a 1 in 175,223,510 chance of hitting the jackpot (AmericanStatisticalAssociation.org). The author of “Against The Odds and Against the Common Good”, argues that the state lotteries are “urging people to gamble”. Gloria Jimenez, of whom is the author of “Against The Odds and Against the Common Good”, creates assumptions that support her stance on her argument. Jimenez also uses the viewpoint from people who disagree with her logic, by stating various counter statements that contradict her stance. To fully understand Jimenez, we have to view the different factors of her stance on why states should not be urging people to gamble, assumptions that she makes to support her stance and countering views of people who don’t necessarily agree with her argument.
The video “In Search of Common Ground: Remaking Public Policy on Human Life Issues” presents a multitude of ethical decisions faced by our society. The video describes issues surrounding capital punishment, abortion, genetic testing and assisted suicide. As described by Joseph Cardinal Bernadin, he states “each human life has a sacredness”. This is very similar to the social work value of respecting human dignity. As social workers, we believe that each individual person is to be treated with respect, dignity and self worth.
He mentions that in a healthy state it will be easy to aim for the common good. The common good of society will seem like common sense. In a healthy society the general will also come much closer to a unanimous decision. In an unhealthy society, how would you discern what the general will is? When society is faced with two combating ideas, how are they to reason which one is better for the sovereign? And after they vote how can they be sure that what the majority voted for was the actual general will. In votes where the answer is not completely clear, or there vote is extremely close, I don’t know if its safe to say that the majority vote is consistent with the general will. In life it seems as though many things can easily be confused or manipulated for a certain cause. For example, say the people must decide between kiwi and watermelon to be endorsed as the state fruit and watermelon is slightly closer to the common good of the sovereign and is liked by more people. Yet, because of some enthusiastic supporters on the side of the kiwi people are being swayed to vote in favor of the kiwi despite their previous knowledge of the many benefits that the watermelon provided that the kiwi did not. In the end even those that were supporters of the watermelon in the beginning switched their vote in order to try and stay in line with what at the time may have been portrayed as the popular vote. Even when the person’s
I agree almost completely with these changes. Many students have to spend a large amount of time working to save up for college and help their families. They don’t have nearly as much time to go out and do the extracurricular activities they would love to do. Also including public service that contributes to the common good is a wonderful idea. Students throughout the United States, including myself, would love to participate in events like science fairs, AP chemistry classes, and advanced after school study groups doing extra learning about science and math. However, I am from a very small town and many of these opportunities are not offered at my high school. Including community service that contributes to the common good wouldn’t help a
progression of a society. People should be given the freedom to make their own choices and follow them through without any reluctance or fear that they will be penalized. Of course, the freedom of thought and expression also comes with a condition, which is, that those thoughts and expressions should not become a nuisance for others. In other words, those thoughts and expressions should not have adverse affect for others.
Striving to be more than just a spectator in the human experience, I seek opportunities to practice collaboration and consensus building, while advancing a more equitable and democratic society. The human community needs to foster dynamic partnerships and explore emerging opportunities that can assist in advancing a civil society that supports our global environment.
Some alternative ideas could have been peaceful coexistence, commitment to racial harmony, intermarriage,or compromise. Based on past history I think the best alternative could have been a compromise. This based on the Great Compromise that was created when deciding on the how the Legislature was going to be run. The idea would have been two alternatives could have been that both come to compromise how the land was going to be divide and some rules to follow. This would have allowed the Americans Indians to have stayed in some of their lands , while Americans gaining some land too. As history has written this wasn't going to occur because Americans didn't think much of the American Indian. In my opinion, a compromise would have led to a less