The intolerable earthquake in Haiti that took thousands of lives brings up an important question: What obligations do we owe to other people? Virtually all of us believe that, when no comparable sacrifice is required, we have a moral duty to help those we encounter in dire need. If one were to let a child drown he would be unanimously regarded as a morally reprehensible individual, yet those who do precisely the same thing when they ignore the plights of those in distant countries are not viewed negatively by many. How can we account for this inconsistency? What are we morally obligated to do to help those in Haiti?

Do animals have morals and ethics? Otherwise, are ethics natural or is it something humans made up?

This question is just a few days out of season, but is it ethical to celebrate christmas (Christmas?) if you are an atheist?

What the hell are morals anyway? Why *can't* I do whatever I want, to whomever I want? So what if I say "Screw the social contract!" I never signed anything. What's so great about morality anyway?

Is it ever rational to be immoral?

Do employers have some kind of ethical obligation to employ their countrymen (as opposed to outsourcing)?

Does it make any sense to say that a person has an "obligation to develop her gifts/talents to the utmost"?

We often admire people who are true to their convictions, even when we believe that those convictions are actually wrong. Is there anything morally valuable or praiseworthy in simply acting in accordance with what you think is right (regardless of whether it is, in fact, right), or does the moral significance of a particular action have to do only with whether it accords with objective moral standards?

I understand that P2P software, such as limewire, is unethical when one downloads or shares files that are copyrighted, because it violates several ethical theories. But my question is when one downloads non-copyrighted material, then this is deemed ethical. But i need help to use an ethical theory such as Kant's deontological theory, utilitarianism, Rawls (Rights) Theory, or Virtue Theory. Can you please use one of these theories to support that downloading non-copyrighted music via P2P IS ethical?

Recently a philosopher replied: "Many slaveholders didn't think that what they were doing was morally wrong, but it was." The implication is that the slaveholders had a merely "subjective", local standard of conduct, but the philosopher has an "objective", universal one that allows her to see the limits of the slaveholder's conscience. How does one achieve this objective standard and how can one test it to see if it isn't only a different form of subjectivism?