Read this article, http://tetrahedral.blogspot.com/2011/12/carl-sagans-new-way-to-think-about.html
Afterward, please write an essay addressing the following questions.
1.Which rule(s) do you live by personally? Give specific examples of how you apply the rules you identified in
your life. Why do you choose these rules over others? Defend your personal position with sound reasoning.
- Red Corp hires you to consult on an ethical issue they are facing. Red Corp recently discovered that its
customer database has been hacked and published online, along with the customer database of its biggest
competitor, Blue Corp. Red Corp had no prior knowledge of or involvement with the hacking until a Red Corp
employee stumbled upon the files published on the internet and brought it to the attention of Red Corp
Red Corp has no idea how the files were hacked and published, or by whom. Obviously, since Blue Corp’s
customer database is also published online, Red Corp doesn’t believe that Blue Corp had anything to do with
the hacking (i.e. it appears Blue Corp was a victim to the same hacking as Red Corp).
Red Corp doesn’t know if Blue Corp knows about the databases online yet. Red Corp believes that if Blue Corp
knew about it, Blue Corp would almost certainly use Red Corp’s customer information against Red Corp (i.e.
try to steal Red Corp’s customers). Red Corp checked its account activity over the last quarter, and there
doesn’t appear to be any unusual changes in business, so it is unlikely that Blue Corp knows about the
databases (yet). Red Corp has begun the legal process of petitioning for its database to be removed from the
internet, but the process is expected to take at least a few weeks because of the information rights issues
What do you advise Red Corp to do? Tell Blue Corp about the databases online, and hope they will agree to a
mutual good faith non-use of competitor information? Use Blue Corp’s database and go after Blue Corp’s
customers, in anticipation that Blue Corp will likely do the same eventually? Ignore it and hope that Blue Corp
doesn’t find it? Something else? On which of the rule(s) discussed in the Sagan essay do you base your
recommendations, and why?
- Suppose that Red Corp decides to use the database, and begins under-bidding Blue Corp and taking its
customers. Witnessing this, Blue Corp investigates and discovers the customer databases (both Blue Corp’s
and Red Corp’s) online. If Blue Corp does nothing, it believes that Red Corp will continue to steal customers.
Blue Corp hires you to consult on a response. What do you advise Blue Corp to do? Retaliate? Ignore the
information and the attack by Red Corp? Something else? On which of the rule(s) discussed in the Sagan
essay do you base your recommendations, and why?
- Did you rely on the same rules in your advice to question #1 and #2?
If you did, can you think of a different set of circumstances in which you would have given different advice (and
relied on different rules)?
The Supreme Court broadened the notion of discrimination “because of sex” under Title VII in Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins by holding that discrimination against women based on failure to conform to female stereotypes violated Title VII. After Price Waterhouse, a Circuit Split emerged. Representing one side of the Circuit Split, the First, Sixth, Ninth, and Eleventh Circuits have improperly used the limited holding in Price Waterhouse to bootstrap protection for transsexual orientation into Title VII . On the other side of the Circuit Split, the Seventh and Tenth Circuits have explicitly held that Title VII does not protect transgender employees from discrimination on the basis of their gender identity. The latter Circuits have properly applied the canons of statutory interpretation narrowly, interpreting the term “sex” to mean “anatomical sex.” These Circuits reasoned that Congress never intended Title VII to protect transgender status. Thus, broadening Title VII to cover gender identity would contradict the plain language of Title VII and be an “impermissible overreach” of the court’s adjudicatory role. This is an issue of first impression in the 13th Circuit and this Court should shadow the stronger reasoning of the Seventh and Tenth Circuits and hold that transgender is not a protected class under Title VII. Therefore, there is no genuine issue of material fact as to whether Plaintiff is a member of a protected class under Title VII and Defendant First National Bank is entitled to judgment as a matter of law under Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c). A. This court should adopt the position of the 7th and 10th Circuits and hold that transgendered individuals are not a protected class under Title VII until further Congressional action is taken. While the Thirteenth Circuit has not specifically ruled on a transgender case, the 7th and 10th Circuits have. In Ulane v. Eastern Airlines, a pilot decided he wanted to have a sex change and Eastern Airlines terminated his employment. The Seventh Circuit held that discrimination based on transgender status does not fall under Title VII protection. Ulane held the term “sex” should be given its “common and traditional interpretation” for purposes of interpreting Title VII. Id. at 1086. Therefore, it is only “unlawful to discriminate against women because they are women and men because they are men.” Id. at 1085. Since Mr. Ulane could only argue that he was discriminated against as a transgender individual, rather than as a biological man or a woman, the Ulane court held Title VII protection was not applicable. Id. at 1086-87. In Etsitty v. Utah Transit Authority, the Tenth Circuit granted summary judgment in a in a case similar on all four corners to Employees claims. Mr. Etsitty brought a claim for transgender discrimination and prohibited sexual stereotyping. Mr. Etsitty was a bus driver for the Utah Transit Authority (“UTA”). Mr. Etsitty began to wear makeup, jewelry, taking hormones and planned a sex change after he saved enough money. He also started using the women’s restrooms along his bus route. Id. Consequently, UTA terminated Mr. Etsitty because of its legitimate concern about liability over his use of th>GET ANSWER