In my opinion, Joe Paterno was wrong. Mr. Paterno should have describe the incident further to the police when the University officials failed to take action. It remains unanswered as to why Mr. Paterno remained quiet. If it was to protect the reputation of Penn State, then he was wrong. disposed(p) the stature of Mr. Paterno, he would have enhanced it by going away out in public. Students and parents looked up to JoePa, the grandfatherly figure of Penn State football. Anyone who knows of corrupt of a child is immediately burdened with the moral certificate of indebtedness not only to report it, but to work actively to end it.

Ethical obligations are different than legal or role-based obligations. When we see people who are being threatened, and we have the ability to intervene, we are morally obligated to do so.
A consequentialist would argue that by reporting the incident to the police, Mr. Paterno would have put a stop to Mr. Sandusky activities and would have saved other children from being molested. The Penn State incident occurred in 2002 and Mr. Sandusky was indicted finally in 2011. Post 2002, it was reported that Mr. Sandusky continued his sexual assault. Mr. Paterno is considered morally wrong because of the consequences of his not victorious action in reporting Sandusky to the police.If you want to get a full essay, order it on our website: Orderessay
If you want to get a full essay, wisit our page: write my essay .
No comments:
Post a Comment