Because all death and tyranny is equally tragic whether it happens to an american, englishman or martian (well who knows, maybe the martians are gluttons for punishment, lol), and because we had the military might to make a difference and therefore the responsibility to do so.
President Woodrow Wilson justified American military intervention on moral and ethical grounds by framing it as a mission to promote democracy and protect human rights. He believed that the U.S. had a moral obligation to support self-determination and oppose tyranny, particularly in the context of World War I. Wilson argued that by intervening, the U.S. could help create a world safe for democracy, positioning American actions as not just strategic, but also as a moral imperative. This approach was rooted in his vision of a new international order based on democratic principles and collective security.
During World War I, advertising for Liberty Bonds encouraged citizens to support the war effort by purchasing bonds as a patriotic duty. These campaigns emphasized themes of national pride, sacrifice, and unity, portraying bond purchases as a way to directly support soldiers and the government. By promoting the idea that buying bonds was a means of contributing to victory, advertisers aimed to instill a sense of moral obligation and collective responsibility among the public.
Pacifism during World War II held significant moral and ethical implications, as it represented a profound resistance to the violence and destruction of war. Pacifists advocated for nonviolent solutions and sought to promote peace amidst the widespread suffering caused by the conflict. Their stance highlighted the moral dilemmas associated with warfare and inspired various movements for civil rights and social justice post-war. Despite facing persecution, pacifists contributed to ongoing debates about the justification of war and the importance of diplomacy.
The film you're referring to is likely "The Last of the English Roses," which centers around a plot during World War II to assassinate Winston Churchill. The story explores the complexities of war and the motivations behind such drastic actions. It delves into themes of loyalty, betrayal, and the moral dilemmas faced by individuals during tumultuous times.
Total war means the complete mobilization of personnel and resources towards a war effort. There are moral dilemmas encountered when engaging in total warfare. The most important is that civilians become involved in manufacturing goods and weapons. The other main dilemma is that rival armies generally have no regard for non combatant property.
You do not have a legal obligation unless you agreed in writing to be responsible. You may have a moral obligation depending on the circumstances but you need to rely on your own moral compass to give you the answer in that case.You do not have a legal obligation unless you agreed in writing to be responsible. You may have a moral obligation depending on the circumstances but you need to rely on your own moral compass to give you the answer in that case.You do not have a legal obligation unless you agreed in writing to be responsible. You may have a moral obligation depending on the circumstances but you need to rely on your own moral compass to give you the answer in that case.You do not have a legal obligation unless you agreed in writing to be responsible. You may have a moral obligation depending on the circumstances but you need to rely on your own moral compass to give you the answer in that case.
Not necessarily. Morals are, by definition, more subjective than the law. You may have a moral obligation to do something for which there is no legal punishment available at all. Maybe you have a moral obligation to give your children presents as your money may permit, but there is no legal obligation to give them more than the necessaries, even if you are filthy rich. In other cases you may have a moral obligation that merely creates a separate and distinct legal obligation. For example, you may have a moral obligation to perform services on a contract, but you cannot be physically forced to actually perform. The only "legal obligation" would be to pay for damages caused by your failure to perform, if any. Therefore, even if there is a legal obligation stemming from such a moral obligation ("you gave your word"), they are not the same obligation.
what is the meaning of moral
yes and it is a moral obligation
Philanthropy: Noun The desire to promote the welfare of others, expressed esp. by the generous donation of money to good causes. A philanthropic institution; a charity. Moral obligation: an obligation arising out of considerations of right and wrong; "he did it out of a feeling of moral obligation". I guess the only thing to do now is to decide for yourself. Based on your ethics, morals, background, values, and beliefs do you feel philanthropy is a moral obligation? This is a mater of individual perception.
Employers have a moral obligation to keep their employees safe while they are at work. They must also pay employees for the work they provide.
Under a moral obligation to do something; Indebted. Source: Answers.com
civil and moral obligations
A main legal, or moral requirement
To explain when a person has a moral obligation to disobey the law
just exist moral oligation prior right consideretion betwwen an greement's parties.
what are the different kinds of obligation