PROFESSIONAL ETHICS
Debate TWO – Should companies and corporations be moral?

I’ll be on the affirmative side(pro). I’m going to support “companies should be moral” and my topic sub-topic is LABOR RIGHTS.

Also, I need a 300 words summary of my speech. My summaries must have at least 2 academic resources.

“Your grade will be based upon your performance in the debate itself, the rebuttals,
and upon a written summary that you will be handing in of the arguments that you
set out, and ofthe critical points that you made, in the debate. This written summary
should be 200-300 words in length and must be handed in at the next day following
the debate.
3. Your summary should cover only the points that you yourself made in the debate –
not those that were made by your debate team.”

EXAMPLE OF PREVIOUS DEBATE

Terrorism is Justifiable

Terrorism has been on the rise in different aspects, now taking the form of the utility of modern technology. The Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) defines terrorism as using violence coupled with threats to destroy people’s lives and property to convince the government and the civilian population to conform to certain proposed ideologies. Examples of known terrorist organizations in the world include: The Al-Shabaab along the East African Coast, The Islamic state and the Taliban in the Middle East, not forgetting Alqaeeda and Boko Haram in the West African region (Schmid et al., 2021).

More often than not, the democratic and security circles within different organizations and even countries find themselves deliberating on the concept of terrorism (Walzer,2019). The discussions may either be against the general practices of terrorist activities or in support of terrorism, usually in rare moments. The points on this debate seek to point on the affirmative side of the justification of the ideology of terrorist activities.

If there is a dictatorship in a country and it hurts people, people come to a group and use violence, and if there is a political goal behind it, we can say it is terrorism. The defense to such acts of terrorism is a required form of justice that necessitates a more equitable distribution of unavoidable human rights breaches (Schmid et al., 2021). It is imperative to note that within a no consequentialist approach to the ethics of violence, there is a distinct way of allowing for the use of terrorism in some circumstances.

As much as supporting terrorist activities may be associated with being a villain, sometimes it is reasonable to alleviate people’s oppression. Another viable justification for terrorism is that it worked along the USA’s journey. If terrorist activities may be used for the greater good such as the growth of influential organizations in line with humanity, then there is nothing wrong. All that is required is a little sacrifice.

References

Schmid, A. P., Forest, J. J., & Lowe, T. (2021). Terrorism Studies. Perspectives on Terrorism, 15(3), 142-152.

Walzer, M. (2019). Terrorism: A critique of excuses. In Problems of international justice (pp. 237-247). Routledge.