Posted by Jim Lichtman | Comments

Well you probably realized that sooner or later I had to revisit sex, but it usually comes attached to some scandal. 

Not this time.

There has been a lot of talk lately about what’s been called a “carbon footprint.”  It measures the impact that humans have on the environment – how much waste, greenhouse gases, resources used, and the subsequent notion of “off-setting” the footprints we create by doing something favorable for the planet.

I could never understand someone who advocates for reducing their carbon footprint by planting more trees while they continue to drive a Hummer H-3.  Why not plant the trees and drive a more “eco-friendly” vehicle?  Wouldn’t that demonstrate more personal responsibility?

Of course, this led me to consider our overall responsibility to the planet and the need to perhaps take a closer look at our own habits of consumption.  

What do we need and when are we consuming too much? 

Take water, for instance.  A recent Washington Post story talked about the high cost of bottled water.  This despite the fact that “In blind taste tests, many people who swear they can differentiate between bottled-water brands and tap water fail to spot the differences, and studies have shown that both are fine to drink, and both occasionally can have quality problems.”

This has not stopped the bottled-water industry from churning out new and more creative ways to market what is, at the end of the day... water!

While reading about a new and pricey brand of bottled-water, I kept looking for some ethical impropriety, but guess what?  I couldn’t find one.  What I did discover was how easy it is for many of us to have misplaced priorities.

Bling, H20 is “...bottled at the source in Dandridge, Tennessee... and uses a nine-step purification process that includes ozone, ultraviolet and micro-filtration.”

Wow, nine-steps, it must be good!

Of course the real secret to this newest “elixir” is not so much the water but the packaging and marketing.  Although the above photo does a lot for the campaign, the packaging is extraordinarily extravagant... at least for bottled water. “Bling H20 comes in Limited Edition, corked, 750ml, reusable frosted glass bottles, exquisitely handcrafted with Swarovski Crystals.”

Wow, handcrafted with crystals, it must be good!

Like many of you, I pay for things that I like, need (or think I need), but unless there is a serious spike in price, like there has been for gasoline, I don’t pay much too much attention. 

So, for purposes of reducing my own carbon footprint and taking greater personal responsibility for my choices, I decided to conduct my own study comparing the costs of three popular liquids that I consume: Starbucks Mocha Frappuccino, my own bottled water, Aquafina, and gasoline. 

Here’s what I came up with:

I paid $4.59 for a gallon of gas, and $7.20 for two six-packs of Aquafina water.  A single, Starbucks Mocha Frappuccino, Grande costs $3.85.  (I don’t count the tax on any of these items because that obviously varies from state to state).

So, how do all of these liquids compare to the cost of Bling H20?  The cheapest bottle of Bling costs $20 for a 375 milliliter bottle. 

Wow, 375 milliliters!  Sounds like a lot, ( it's really only a little more than 12 ounces).

For a reality check, I compared the cost of all these liquids if I paid for them by the gallon, something we can all relate to when we fill-up at a gas station. 

From cheapest to most expensive, here's how they shake out:

• Aquafina - $3.20 per gallon 
• Gasoline - $4.59 per gallon
• Starbucks Mocha Frappuccino - a whopping $30.80 per gallon

And if you wanted to buy “Bling H20” by the gallon... get out the credit card because you are going to pay $201.89!

Although most of us are probably not going to buy much “Bling”, (though I’m sure there are some who will feel the need) maybe we need to re-evaluate our priorities when it comes to griping about the cost of gas while we’re chugging down that Mocha Frapp. I know I will.

Don't forget to submit your comments by Saturday regarding "Justice vs. Compassion" posted below.

Posted by Jim Lichtman | Comments

Here’s your dilemma:

You are an ethicist who has been asked by a prison board to offer an opinion concerning the possible release of an inmate.
 
A notorious prisoner – convicted of multiple murders – has served almost 40 years of a life sentence.  Recently, the prisoner has been diagnosed with a terminal illness, and has petitioned the board to be released. 

What do you do?

Although it sounds like an academic exercise, it’s not.  Susan Atkins, one of the Manson family members convicted of participating in the 1969 Tate-LaBianca murders has requested a “...compassionate release from prison on the grounds of terminal illness.”

This is the same Susan Atkins who, “...had bragged about mercilessly stabbing the pregnant Sharon Tate and laughed when details of the murders were presented in court.”

In an articulate and compelling post to the “On Faith” blog in the Washington Post entitled, “Manson, Murder and Mercy,” Associate Professor of Religious Studies Matthew Schmalz offers some interesting commentary.

“In 1974, Atkins claimed that she heard God’s audible voice saying that her sins had been forgiven... and has [since] led an exemplary life in prison.

“It is tempting to dismiss these religious claims as all too convenient,” Schmalz writes.  “Moreover, Atkins has already received considerably more mercy than did her victims.”  However, he adds, “I corresponded with Susan Atkins over a two-year period before her illness.  What struck me always was her quite sophisticated, and self-conscious, articulation of Christian understandings of grace as ‘God’s unmerited love.’”

Within short order, the blog “comments” soared from 52 to more than 350 (at last count).  As you can imagine, due to the particularly heinous nature of her crimes, most of the comments offer little or no leniency. 

Most sounded like this:  “Manson and his killer followers showed no mercy whatsoever to their victims. None should be shown to Susan Atkins who was one of the most vicious murderers in the gang.”

Some cited precedent:  “John Gotti was dying of cancer and we didn’t let him out. Why are we supposed to feel this special sympathy for Atkins?”

Then, there was this comment: “I am surprised to see all of the arguments to withhold mercy from Atkins on the basis that she withheld mercy from her victims... if mercy is only dispensed to the merciful, then it is not mercy.”

So, who’s right?  How should we decide? 

When you have a conflict between two ethical values like justice and compassion, how do you determine a “greater good”?  How can you even consider a “greater good” unless it includes justice?

The most fundamental of moral tenets, the Golden Rule, calls for us to “treat others as you would like to be treated.”  On that basis, the decision is clear.  Miss Atkins should be released.

But who stands for justice? 

The great civil rights leader Martin Luther King, Jr. warned, “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.  Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly.”

Okay, but how might Mother Teresa or the Dalai Lama decide the matter?  Certainly, they would urge compassion.

Yes, but the great Russian writer Alexander Solzhenitsyn – no slouch to first-hand experience with injustice – wrote that, “Justice is conscience, not a personal conscience but the conscience of the whole of humanity. Those who clearly recognize the voice of their own conscience usually recognize also the voice of justice.” 

But Eleanor Roosevelt asked, “When will our consciences grow so tender that we will act to prevent human misery rather than avenge it?”

And...

I could go back and forth endlessly, but that’s why it's called a dilemma.

So, here’s your job.  Imagine that you’re an ethicist who has been asked to deliver a well-considered opinion to the prison board based on your background and beliefs in ethical decision making.  Remember, you are not there to offer a personal opinion, but a professional one. 

Who would you want to speak to?  What questions would you ask?  What would your decision be and why?

Send me your comments by Saturday so I can include them in Monday’s post along with my own thoughts.

For further reference: www.washingtonpost.com, scroll down and find the link to the story, “Manson, Murder and Mercy,” under the tab “On Faith.”

HOME | about-jim | archives | articles | books | excerpt | fame-shame | hero | quotes | stories | suggested-links | Site Map | FAQ