When we think of business ethics, we think of corporations and financial institutions. We perceive them as hopefully having established good business ethics, as seen by their wholesome marketing campaigns backed by mandatory regulations. We search for corporate awards to back good corporate values and equate said values to the potential of monetary gain for stakeholders. As contented consumers, we encourage corporate and financial growth by purchasing products, services and stock options.
We count on legislators and regulators to enact fairness and fine the unlawful. When deviant schemes of the self-interested are exposed and losses come into play, lawmakers pay attention. Laws are enacted and amended for future stakeholder protection. When we think of the institution of marriage, we—unlike corporate and financial institutions—generally think of cultural beliefs instead of financial gains.
Similarly, guidelines and procedures regulate marriage, much like corporate and financial institutions. A marriage license has the same meaning everywhere and—although symbols and rituals can differ—stakeholder protection, accountability and sustainability should be exercised just the same.
How are ethical decisions being made to ensure protection, accountability and sustainability for marriage and its stakeholders? Marriage is at risk and is being compromised. Lawmakers and voters are making decisions, as legislation is considered and votes are cast with personal beliefs of traditional family values and to whom it applies. Two same-sex individuals desiring to marry and who meet the age and genealogical requirements can't wed in most of the United States. For the few states that offer same-sex marriage, there are accompanying limitations that are not imposed upon opposite-sex couples.
If legislation and regulation are to protect all stakeholders, the family unit ( as a stakeholder of marriage ) is at risk. The traditional family is changing. Families are led by same-sex...