Two articles in Thursday’s New York Times touched upon important ethical issues.
The first “Obama Issues Rare Apology Over Bombing of Doctors Without Borders Hospital in Afghanistan” reports:
“Direct presidential apologies to victims of American actions abroad are rare, but not unheard-of. In 2012, Mr. Obama wrote a letter of apology to President Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan after several copies of the Quran were burned by American military personnel, leading to violent protests across that country. In 2004, President George W. Bush apologized for the treatment of Iraqi prisoners at the Abu Ghraib military prison, telling world leaders that he was ‘sorry for the humiliation.’ ”
The second “Judge Rejects Request by Paul Smith’s College to Change Its Name” tangentially raised the issue of what constitutes true philanthropy.
It reports: “ ‘The petition not only fails the truth test, the philanthropists fail the good-will test,’ a 1980 alumna, Sheila Strachan, said in an Aug. 12 email to the attorney general’s office.”…” ‘
“While many attribute such requirements to ego, ‘I think that’s too simplistic,’ said Charlie Brown, who has raised money for Johns Hopkins and Stanford’s medical school. ‘There’s a natural human desire to leave behind some trace that we’ve had an existence here and that it mattered,’ he continued.’”
Practicing Catholics confess transgressions to their priests. Jews devote a full eight days starting with Rosh Hashana and ending with Yom Kippur reflecting on their miss treatments of others and seeking them out to apologize.
We believe the President sets a good example for all of us when he is ready to acknowledge errors. We have long waited for and hoped that LNP would someday help clear the rancid air that surrounds the creation of the Lancaster Convention Center by publicly acknowledging that they had not conducted themselves properly.
Jewish tradition teaches that the second highest form of charity is to give without the donor knowing the identify of the recipient and the beneficiary not knowing the source of the donation. (The highest form is to enable someone to become self sufficient.)
Concerning the downside of using gifts to perpetuate one’s name, there are some who seek biggest naming opportunities for the lowest possible donation in an attempt to gain public favor not justified by their business conduct.
But there is something to be said for affixing one’s name to a truly generous donation as a positive example for others.
An example of that was the way Jews raised money from wealthy donors in support of Israel during its early years. Dinners would be held to which it was an honor to be invited. But at the end each person was asked to stand up and say how much the person’s annual pledge would be. A fine meal, a couple of glasses of good wine and huge peer pressure served to maximize donations!
