Group 1-

CASE #1: Wedding Cake

A gay couple from Massachusetts, David Mullin and Charlie Craig, a lesbian couple, Jenita Belliot
and Sarah Matherne were refused by two different bakeshops from two different instances to have
their wedding cake baked. They were denied service because it is against their religious belief as
Catholics to serve gay and lesbian couples in their bakeshop. They say that is like condoning
something that compromised their deeply held convictions.
Question: Were the decisions of the bakeshop owners morally justifiable? Why or
why not? Apply moral/ethical principles that would support your stand.

Group 2-
CASE#2: One Million for a Kidney

Mr. Reyes underwent a yearly medical check - up in a well - known hospital in Makati. He is 50
years old and a businessman. Until recently, his business is in danger of bankruptcy as a result of
the US economic crisis. While he was resting in his hospital suite, he was informed by his doctor
that a visitor wants to talk to him. The visitor related the story of a 25 - year old American scientist
working on genetic engineering. The scientist is about to make an astounding discovery that will
cure many of the diseases that plagued mankind. Unfortunately, the genius has a unique blood and
tissue type and hence cannot just accept any kidney from any donor. The doctors of the scientist
were searching for almost a year for a compatible donor. Fortunately the blood and tissue type of
Mr. Reyes is a perfect match with the American. Mr. Reyes was offered one million pesos for one
of his kidneys.

If Mr. Reyes does not accept the offer, the young scientist will die. And with his death, the
prospects of the cures for the diseases that plague mankind will die with him. If he accepts the
offer, losing one kidney will inevitably shorten his life span. He will not also be able to engage in
strenuous physical activity, like camping, mountain climbing and hunting. But he needs the money
to save his business from bankruptcy.

Question: What will you do if you are in the place of Mr. Reyes? Cite the moral principle
that best supports your solution.
Group 3
CASE #3: Should Western Nations just pay ISIS ransom?
ISIS demanded 100 million euros ($$1132.5 million) in ransom for the release of James Foley, the
American journalist kidnapped and killed by the terrorist group in Syria, according to a spokesman
for GlobalPost, the news website for which Foley freelanced. But the demand does shine a light
on two uncomfortable facts about “Kidnap and Ransom.” The first uncomfortable fact is that if
you pay a ransom a hostage is more likely to be released. The other is that every time a ransom is
paid it increases the chance that the other hostages will be taken to help fill the coffers of a terrorist
group.

According to an investigation by The New York Times, al Qaeda and its affiliates have netted at
least $1125 million in ransoms since 2008. That finding is similar to a 2012 US Treasury estimate
that $1120 million had been paid to terrorist organisations during the previous eight years. Much
of this revenue reportedly comes from France. French media reported that the government had
paid 20 million euros (about $228 million) for the release of four employees of a French nuclear
firm. They were held by an al Qaeda affiliate for three years in northern Niger and were released
last year.

The French government’s purported policy of negotiating with militant groups for the release of
kidnapped citizens does appear to work. Four French journalists — Nicolas Henin, Pierre Torres,
Edouard Elias and Didier Francois, who were kidnapped in Syria last year by ISIS – were released
near the Turkish border in April, blindfolded and with their hands bound. One of these hostages,
Henin, had been held by ISIS alongside Foley. Henin is free, and Foley is dead.

Question: Given this situation, should world leaders pay ransom to protect their people or
should they let their countrymen held by ISIS just die? Cite moral principles to support your
answer.
Group 4
Case # 4: Remote Parking
Several car companies produce models with a remote parking assistance feature that allows a driver
to pull a car close to a parking space, and then get out. After exiting the vehicle, the driver presses
a button on his keychain that tells the car to park it automatically. This feature is very useful for
parking in a narrow space and for parallel parking. The car uses a system of sensors that emit
ultrasonic sounds to detect cars, the curb, and pedestrians. Many versions also include video
cameras to monitor the location of the curb and any painted parking-space lines. A computer in
the car uses this information to automatically pull the car into the space, while avoiding collisions.
Imagine the following scenario: A driver pulls up next to a parking space, checks to make sure the
space is clear, presses the button to start automatic parking, and then walks away. After the driver’s
back is turned, a small child runs into the space and is seriously injured.
Questions: Who is primarily morally responsible for the child’s injury? Why? What moral/ethical
principle would support your answer?

Group 5-
Case # 5: Cheating or Leveling the Playing Field?
During one of their midterm examinations in their Economics class in college, Anna was faced
with an ethical dilemma. She and her friend, Lenny, were studying for the exam when Lenny
explained that she was going to punch the formulas into her calculator. She said that she has
attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and that it was difficult for her to remember
formulas. Anna shrugged off the suggestion in the hope that Lenny would exclude Anna from her
decision.
A few days later, during the examination, Anna looked around and noticed that she was the only
one who had entered the formulas in their calculators. Anna’s first reaction was “damn, maybe I
could have done the same thing.” Then she remembered how the professor had told them that this
was not allowed and that they had all signed onto the college’s “honor code” system, which stated
that “we would not cheat and that we would report those who did it”. It was at that moment that
Anna realized she was faced with a dilemma: to tell or not to tell. She would violate the honor
code if she kept silent; she would violate her friend’s trust if she reported. After all, she thought,
Lenny did have ADHD. Shouldn’t she be given a break? Also, Anna didn’t want to tell so many
students. “I’m not a police officer” she thought.
Questions: What would you have done in this situation and why? Do you agree with Anna’s
thinking and her ethical reasoning that her classmate has ADHD? Explain. What would you have
done differently and why? Justify your answer.

Group 6- Lim and Manalang

In The Face Of Death

In 1942, Adina Blady Szwarjger was a 22-year-old doctor who worked at Warsaw Children’s
hospital. About a year earlier, the Nazis who occupied Poland created what was then known as
Warsaw ghetto. Dr. Szwarjger heard and witnessed the horrors of many people suffering and dying
from starvation, torture and massacre. Even the sick and dying elderly people were not spared.
Every Jew was brought to the cattle trucks to death camps to finally eliminate them. Nazis went to
shut down every hospital and shot every patient in bed. The day came when she heard gunshots a
nd screaming from almost every wing in the hospital. Dr. Szwarjger immediately administered
morphine to the children to spare them --- assuring them that the pain would disappear. By the
time the Nazis entered the ward, the children were all dead.

Questions: Given the situation, was Dr. Szwarjger’s action of giving morphine to the children
to hasten their death and save them from the Nazis morally justified?? Why or why not??
Explain ethical/moral principles that would support your stand.

Group 7- Forgiveness and Repentance

Based on the novel Disgrace by J.M. Coetzee (1999), David Lurie is a South African English
professor who lost everything: his reputation, his job, his piece of mind, his good looks, his dreams
of artistic success, and finally even his ability to protect his own daughter. He is twice-divorced
and dissatisfied with his job as a ‘communications’ lecturer, teaching one class in romantic
literature at a technical university in Cape Town in post-apartheid South Africa. His disgrace
comes when he almost forcibly seduces one of his more vulnerable students, a girl named Melanie
Isaacs. This affair is thereafter revealed to the school and a committee is convened to pass
judgment on his actions. David refuses to apologize in any sincere form and so is forced to resign
from his post. The following are the reasons for not giving them what they want: We went through
repentance business yesterday. I told you what I thought. I wont do it. I appeared before an
officially constituted tribunal, before a branch of the law. Before that secular tribunal I pleaded
guilty, a secular plea. That please should suffice. Repentance is neither here nor there. Repentance
belongs to another universe of discourse…… what are you asking) reminds me too much of Mao’s
China. Recantation, self-criticism, public apology. I’m old fashioned, I would prefer simply to be
put against a wall and shot.

Question: Is repentance a prerequisite for forgiveness? What determines whether

forgiving (or failing to forgive) would enact a virtue or a defect of character? Explain. What
ethical principle(s) would support your stand?

Group 8- ETHICS OF LAUGHTER

In 2008, Danilo (not his real name) a Cebuano male florist in his 30s was teary-eyed when he saw
the video of his surgery circulating the internet. He heard about the so called “canister scandal”
but was so shocked to know that it was him when someone informed him about it. The
unauthorized 2:54-minute video of a noisy operating room shows Vicente Sotto Memorial Medical
Center (VSMMC) doctors and nurses laughing, giggling and cheering after a metal can of Black
Suede body spray was pulled out of his rectum. The can was inserted by a man he had casual sex
with. Danilo said that his rights to privacy and confidentiality were violated; and that he was further
humiliated when the video found its way to the internet. However, Dr. Emmanuel Gines, the
hospital’s committee chairman on media said “The hospital does not take a video of all operations
but only select cases for academic purposes, and hence will conduct investigation regarding the
matter.”
QUESTIONS: Is there such a thing as Ethics of Laughter? Is what is funny an aesthetic or
moral concern? Explain. What ethical principle(s) would support your stand?