No, I hope no one would, although I'm sure many people do. It's wrong.
When making an ethical decision, morals are at stake. You may want to think it through thoroughly before making any choice that would compromise your morals.
Doesn't unless it prompts action or inaction that goes against same.
Examples with the word "compromise" and other variants: "You've comprised the mission." "Don't compromise the plan." "What we've done was a compromise between the two of us." "We need to learn how to compromise." "He won't compromise his morals." "Despite her hatred of him, she agreed to compromise." "The oversight caused a compromise of the machine."
If we didn't have morals everything would be chaotic.
He examines and realistically evaluates the character, ethics, and morals of his grandchildren.
The opposite of a compromise would be a failure to compromise, possibly a stalemate (remaining in disagreement or unsettled).The opposite of the verb to compromise would be to not compromise, to be stubborn, adamant, or inflexible.
The morals of an organiztional statement would be found in the Code of Ethics
I, user J0shu493, personally would rather live by Rush Limbaugh's morals.
By recognising that people have standards, morals and values and if they stick to them as much as possible then other people respect them for that and regard them as achievers and successful. No it's not about the money. Money does not exist as a measure of success otherwise all people who inherit large wealth would automatically be successful.
That would be the Connecticut Compromise
I think it was the 3/5th compromise
Without compromise the states would not have come into agreement, especially about representation.