Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

Fw: totally inappropriate... (Damn right)

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

----------


Whether someone is doing a good or bad job with something, wrong is still
wrong.

John Jones

 
----------

So I guess that means that once a person steps out of line, in almost any
way, they should be relieved?  Like it or not there are varying degrees of
"wrongs" and transgressions.  Furthermore, I feel that some connection must
be made between the transgression and the duties of the person in question.
 If not, then any instance of doing wrong would result in dismissal.  The
attitude of "wrong is wrong" seems very simplistic.

It has been said on this thread that Clinton "lied" to his closest family
and is therefore a cad.  My question is, how do we know that Hillary was
"lied" to?  Or does it matter to the "morally upright"?  Perhaps having an
open marriage would be just as wrong to them as having an affair (if he
did, that is).  Furthermore, I would be very interested in hearing from
anyone who can state that they have never lied to a family member, or that
they do not have even one dirty little secret that they are unwilling to
tell anyone.

Dragging Churchill back into this, I guess using the "wrong is wrong"
litmus test, his anti semetism would have immediately disqualified him from
his job of helping to bring about the allied victory, since one of the
consquences of the victory was the end of the "Final Solution".  Perhaps if
he were dismissed for his bigotry, another more morally and ethically
qualified person would have taken his place and done as good or better a
job than he did.  But the fact is, he wasn't dismissed, and he did a good
job.  I guess morals don't always impede one's performance in a position,
even if the morals (or lack of) relate pretty directly to the goals of the
office or project.

T. Eric Gillham