Art and Offense

- Your message can be purposely offensive or not. Like a satirical drawing or song that
is supposed to be funny but offend some people. This question pops up often, and with
many answers. Many argue that art cannot be defined. We could go about this in
several ways. Art is often considered the process or product of deliberately arranging
elements in a way that appeals to the senses or emotions. It encompasses a diverse
range of human activities, creations and ways of expression, including music, literature,
film, sculpture and paintings. The meaning of art is explored in a branch of philosophy
known as aesthetics. At least, that’s what Wikipedia claims.
It is important that artists are allowed to use their imaginations freely, but their execution
should be limited. There is no point in making art that bothers people, hurts their
feelings, or frightens them. Artists like these are only out for cheap publicity and have a
corrupt moral code. It's the artists' responsibility to self-censor. Its ideal to have no
limitations on artistic expression. The only exception is if they are offensive (for
example, pornographic works, making fun of someone, harassing someone mentaly,
hurting someone's sentiments and beliefs), then there must be restrictions.

Pornography

- Pornography can cause serious negative consequences to one's physical,

mental, social, and financial well-being. By patronizing pornography will always lead
them to be misunderstood because, for some people, pornographic addictions
are a severe condition of a person and need medical treatment to help them overcome
it
But a study conducted in Denmark shows that men and women generally consider
hardcore pornography a positive influence in their lives. They credit it with improving
their sex lives, their sexual knowledge, their attitudes toward the opposite gender, and
even their general quality of life. Those who use it the most, those who pleasure
themselves the most, and those who consider their source material the most realistic
perceived the greatest positive effects.
Whistle-Blowing and the Duty of Speaking Truth to Power

- When faced with this predicament. But before you do anything, you need to make sure
you know the facts. You might suspect something, but you can’t go around accusing
people of things without evidence. First of all, you need to check that the behavior you
suspect is unethical. It might be against industry practices or perhaps company policy.
Secondly, you need to know that the person is doing it. You should document the
behavior and try to find witnesses to it as well. You will then have evidence you can
bring to the person or authority you want to report it to.

When your boss puts you in a situation that compromises your ethics, none of the
options seem particularly great. Go along with the unethical behavior and you become
complicit. Report it to a higher-up or outside organization and you could face retaliation.
But it’s certainly possible to raise your concerns without harming your job status or
relationships at work. Here’s what you might consider before airing your complaints.

Animal Rights and Welfare

- All living beings on this earth have equal rights, the rights to live and also the rights to
enjoy whatsoever is available on this planet. Animal rights are the rights that animals
should entitle for their existence in moral value and basic fundamental protections just
like we human beings.
For classical utilitarians, social practices can be morally acceptable only when they
bring about more happiness than suffering. This can include practices that do great
harm to others if the result is an even greater benefit to some other group. Gladiatorial
combat is wrong for example because the suffering and misery as well as the harm of
the death caused to the gladiators exceeds the happiness of those who enjoy watching
the fights.
The very same principle applies to the practice of harming nonhuman animals for
human purposes. It could be argued that if harming and killing someone (whether a
nonhuman animal or a human being) significantly increased the total sum of happiness
minus suffering of everyone else, then according to utilitarianism it would be correct to
do so to either humans or nonhumans. In this case the suffering of a gladiator (in
addition to the harm of being killed) would be disproportionally higher than the pleasure
that people watching a gladiator show. The same happens in the case of nonhuman
animals.
Patient

- When people differ over what they believe should be given, or when decisions have to
be made about how benefits and burdens should be distributed among a group of
people, questions of justice or fairness inevitably arise. In fact, most ethicists today hold
the view that there would be no point of talking about justice or fairness if it were not for
the conflicts of interest that are created when goods and services are scarce and people
differ over who should get what. When such conflicts arise in our society, we need
principles of justice that we can all accept as reasonable and fair standards for
determining what people deserve.
In its narrower sense, justice is fairness. It is action that pays due regard to the proper
interests, property, and safety of one's fellows. While justice in the broader sense is
often thought of as transcendental, justice as fairness is more context-bound. Parties
concerned with fairness typically strive to work out something comfortable and adopt
procedures that resemble rules of a game. They work to ensure that people receive
their "fair share" of benefits and burdens and adhere to a system of "fair play."
The principles of justice and fairness can be thought of as rules of "fair play" for issues
of social justice. Whether they turn out to be grounded in universal laws or ones that are
more context-bound, these principles determine the way in which the various types of
justice are carried out. For example, principles of distributive justice determine what
counts as a "fair share" of particular good, while principles of retributive or restorative
justice shape our response to activity that violates a society's rules of "fair play." Social
justice requires both that the rules be fair, and also that people play by the rules.