The document discusses various moral and legal rights theories as they relate to issues of discrimination based on sex. It outlines moral rights as distinct from legal rights, and examines several ethical theories that support moral rights. It also discusses key aspects of legal rights, justice theories, Aristotle's theory of justice, and Nozick's entitlement theory of justice. The document provides context and issues for an analysis of whether sex should remain a protected class and the implications of removing legal protections against sexual discrimination.

1. Moral rights as opposed to legal rights are not dependent on a
political system for their legitimacy. This is the category of
rights that all human air--breathers, as opposed to non-human
air-breathers--- should be afforded to them by virtue of their
having intrinsic value and not only instrumental value. These
rights, or entitlements, are supported by various ethical theories
when for instance the Universalism thesis under Utilitarianism
requires that all persons' (women's and men's) interests be
considered in the calculations of Hedonistic options available.
Kantianism insists that all Unverbalizable maxims be respectful
of the rights of all persons to be treated with dignity and
respect--which includes freedom of choice. Virtue ethics, more
modernly, does not distinguish basic "good " character traits of
excellence such as integrity, good judgment, role identity--not
as a woman or a man in any given role but, the ability to fulfill
the duties of that role within a community by a member of
either sex---, holism--the ability to habitually practice the other
virtues in an integrative manner while recognizing the
importance of other persons to the community and vise versa.
The various Justice theories do not relegate justice based on
sex, just on relevant differences based on ability, endeavor,
contribution, etc.
Do current generatons ( including current businesses) owe a
duty to future generations to produce products and conduct
business in an environmentally sustainable manner so that
future generations are assured of inheriting a livable planet( one
on which reasonable persons would want to live); even if it
means that current generations must sacrifice many preferences
in current lifestyles? Why or why not?
First define environmental sustainability (hint: the U.N. has a
good definition). Also, the term "future generations" includes
all of the yet to be borne, not those that are younger than you
but are breathing.

2. Use the following for your analysis:
1. Kohlberg’s Moral Development Model;
2. The Kew Garden Principles; or Dr. Laura’s Three
Prerequisites for Assigning Moral Credit or Culpability;
3. At least two appropriate Ethical Theories
4. Moral Imagination;
5. Moral Courage;
6. Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs Model;
7. A CSR Model; Needs to be a current CSR model not just
the definition
8. The relevant Law or Legal Theory;
9. Any other applicable course concepts from previous or
current assigned reading or research
10. Sample paper is just that a sample it doesn't pertain to this
topic for analysis
11 additional help
RIGHTS THEORIES
MORAL RIGHTS
Moral rights as opposed to legal rights are not dependant on a
political system for their legitimacy. This is the category of
rights that all human air--breathers, as opposed to non-human

3. air-breathers--- should be afforded to them by virtue of their
having intrinsic value and not only instrumental value. These
rights, or entitlements, are supported by various ethical theories
when for instance the Universalism thesis under Utilitarianism
requires that all persons' (women's and men's) interests be
considered in the calculations of Hedonistic options available.
Kantianism insists that all Universalizable maxims be
respectful of the rights of all persons to be treated with dignity
and respect--which includes freedom of choice. Virtue ethics,
more modernly, does not distinguish basic "good " character
traits of excellence such as integrity, good judgment, role
identity--not as a woman or a man in any given role but, the
ability to fulfill the duties of that role within a community by a
member of either sex---, holism--the ability to habitually
practice the other virtues in an integrative manner while
recognizing the importance of other persons to the community
and vise versa. The various Justice theories do not relegate
justice based on sex, just on relevant differences based on
ability, endeavor, contribution, etc.
LEGAL RIGHTS
Legal rights are those set of rights that require recognition and
enforceability by a given political system e.g. the U.S. and each
state government. For instance, U.S. citizens cannot expect to
have their civil rights recognized, except under limited
circumstances e.g. by treaties, when traveling to or residing in
other countries. Legal rights are usually territorially bound. One
must be able to cite a legally recognized right to enforce that
right against others in a court of law. So, as you compose your
analysis, be sure to name the specific law upon which the legal
right under analysis depends. Also, you want to consider that if
we declassify sex as a protected class would it also rescind
other legal protections designed primarily for women such as
protections regarding pregnancy and equal pay, etc.?

4. Are women entitled to be given priority over men just by virtue
of their sex, or must they be "otherwise qualified"? What does
that mean? What is a BFOQ defense to sexual discrimination?
If, we declassified sex as a protected class would women still be
able to demand that they be given equal employment
opportunities or would they be forced to depend upon the
goodwill of their male counterparts in the government and
business communities
JUSTICE THEORIES
Rawls' theory of justice has two main principles and two minor
principles, that condition the second main principle. Like all of
the other theories and legal concepts, these come as a set and
must be all examined for compliance. Lacking one of the
elements, results in either a mitigating factor or an excusing
factor, independent of affirmative defenses such as a BFOQ
defense in employment law.
Would any rational self-interested person wish to live in a
society that does not legally protect its members against sexual
discrimination, if he might be a victim of that lack of legal
protection, even if that lack of protection was offset by a
greater good for the rest of society? Would rescinding these
legal protections make the least advantaged --for argument's
sake, women--better off than they would be with the protections
in place? Would this guaranty women an equal opportunity to
compete for access to all offices and positions in society? Does
this theory advocate absolute equality or equality of
opportunity, and what one makes of that equal opportunity is up
to each individual, which might result in natural inequalities
due to skills, effort or luck, but would still be fair?
ARISTOTLE'S THEORY OF JUSTICE

5. Aristotle posited that persons should be treated alike (equal)
unless there is a relevant difference, in which case it is just to
treat them differently in proportion to that relevant difference.
So, would this support the BFOQ legal defense in employment
law? Is this theory unsupportive of legal protections for
women? Do the current legal protections allow for differences
in treatment, even on the basis of sex, if there is a relevant
difference in education, skills, experience or ability, so long as
anyone is treated differently only in proportion to the relevant
difference in the aforementioned differences (qualifications)?
NOZICK'S ENTITLEMENT THEORY OF JUSTICE
Nozick's theory also has a set of elements that must all be
discussed in your analysis, as one builds upon, and informs the
others.
I list them here differently than the authors of your text because
they might make more sense in this way.
There must first be a just--free of force or fraud--acquisition of
the property right. This does not mean just land or physical
personal property but, includes entitlements, such as equal
opportunities to fulfill any of Maslow's levels of needs. If you
gained your employment through your superior efforts,
experience or even good luck, as long as you did not use force
of wrongfully attained unequal power or fraud - -
misrepresentation of facts about genetic abilities--then the
acquisition is just.
Second, if the first element is met then any subsequent transfer
of that acquisition is just, even if it results in an inequality
within society.
This third element is especially useful in this case analysis
because it obligates one to rectify the situation where the two

6. elements above were not met. What were the legal protections
for members of protected classes intended to accomplish?
RIGHTS THEORIES
MORAL RIGHTS
Moral rights as opposed to legal rights are not dependant on a
political system for their legitimacy. This is the category of
rights that all human air-breathers, as opposed to non-human
air-breathers--- should be afforded to them by virtue of their
having intrinsic value and not only instrumental value. These
rights, or entitlements, are supported by various ethical theories
when for instance the Universalism thesis under Utilitarianism
requires that all persons' (women's and men's) interests be
considered in the calculations of Hedonistic options available.
Kantianism insists that all Universiziable maxims be respectful
of the rights of all persons to be treated with dignity and
respect-which includes freedom of choice. Virtue ethics, more
modernly, does not distinguish basic "good " character traits of
excellence such as integrity, good judgment, role identity-not as
a woman or a man in any given role but, the ability to fulfill the
duties of that role within a community by a member of either
sex---, holism-the ability to habitually practice the other virtues
in an integrative manner while recognizing the importance of
other persons to the community and vise versa. The various
Justice theories do not relegate justice based on sex, just on
relevant differences based on ability, endeavor, contribution,
etc.
LEGAL RIGHTS
Legal rights are those set of rights that require recognition and
enforceability by a given political system e.g. the U.S. and each
state government. For instance, U.S. citizens cannot expect to
have their civil rights recognized, except under limited

7. circumstances e.g. by treaties, when traveling or residing to
other countries. Legal rights are usually territorially bound. One
must be able to cite a legally recognized right in order to
enforce that right against others in a court of law. So, as you
compose your analysis, be sure to name the specific law upon
which the legal right under analysis depends. Also, you want to
consider that if we declassify sex as a protected class would it
also rescind other legal protections designed primarily for
women such as protections regarding pregnancy and equal pay,
etc. ?
Are women entitled to be given priority over men just by virtue
of their sex, or must they be "otherwise qualified"? What does
that mean? What is a BFOQ defense to sexual discrimination?
If we declassified sex as a protected class would women still be
able to demand to be given equal employment opportunities or
would they be forced to depend upon the goodwill of their male
counterparts in the government and business communities
JUSTICE THEORIES
Rawls' theory of justice has two main principles and two minor
principles that condition the second main principle. Like all of
the other theories and legal concepts, these come as a set and
must be all examined for compliance. Lacking one of the
elements, results in either a mitigating factor or an excusing
factor, independent of affirmative defenses such as a BFOQ
defense in employment law?
Would any rational self-interested person wish to live in a
society that does not legally protect its members against sexual
discrimination, if he might be a victim of that lack of legal
protection, even if that lack of protection was offset by a
greater good for the rest of society? Would rescinding these
legal protections make the least advantaged -for argument's

8. sake,women-better off than they would be with the protections
in place? Would this guaranty women an equal opportunity to
compete for access to all offices and positions in society? Does
this theory advocate absolute equality or Equality of
opportunity, and what one makes of that equal opportunity is up
to each individual, which might result in natural inequalities
due to skills, effort or luck, but would still be fair?
ARISTOTLE'S THEORY OF JUSTICE
Aristotle posited that persons should be treated alike (equal)
unless there is a relevant difference, in which case it is just to
treat them differently in proportion to that relevant difference.
So, would this support the BFOQ legal defense in employment
law? Is this theory unsupportive of legal protections for
women? Do the current legal protections allow for differences
in treatment, even on the basis of sex, if there is a relevant
difference in education, skills, experience or ability, so long as
anyone is treated differently only in proportion to the relevant
difference in the aforementioned differences (qualifications)?
NOZICK'S ENTITLEMENT THEORY OF JUSTICE
Nozick's theory also has a set of elements that must all be
discussed in your analysis, as one builds upon, and informs the
others.
I list them here differently that the authors of your text because
they might make more sense in this way.
There must first be a just-free of force or fraud-acquisition of
the property right. This does not mean just land or physical
personal property but, includes entitlements, such as equal
opportunities to fulfill any of Mazlow's levels of needs. If you
gained your employment through your superior efforts,
experience or even good luck, as long as you did not use force

9. of wrongfully attained unequal power or fraud -
misrepresentation of facts about genetic abilities-then the
acquisition is just.
Second, if the first element is met then any subsequent transfer
of that acquisition is just, even if it results in an inequality
within society.
This third element is especially useful in this case analysis
because it obligates one to rectify the situation where the two
elements above were not met. What were the legal protections
for members of protected classes intended to accomplish?
Make all correction in listed in week V Essay. Need to
improve grade from C to A.
Paper is attached . Don't remove numbering unless adding or
deleting Sentence.