S/O KY Clerk & Marriage licenses

[kroe1]

So, besides the obvious of killing, is there anything one could ask you to do in your job that you absolutely would not do because of your moral code? And would you be willing to go to jail for it or even lose the job if you were the primary breadwinner in a depressed economy?

 

Obviously, conundrums like this must go through the minds of everyone at some point.

 

For example, I wonder what went through the mind of the computer person who set up Hillary's email. Or what about the workers in China who made Chinese drywall. I saw a case of a medical student who refused to scrub up for tubal ligations.

 

What are some things worth losing a job or going to jail for?

[Rosie_0801]

Nothing while I have a minor child.

[kiana]

Hm, it's pretty hard to think of something in my line of work that I would absolutely refuse to do even if it meant getting fired immediately that isn't preposterously unlikely. 

 

There are things that would have me doing it anyway to continue getting paid but getting my CV out immediately, like getting ordered to pass a specific student regardless of the student's academic performance. But that's really an ethical belief more than a religious belief. 

[Tap]

I am not against it, but I know there are pharmacy employees who refuse to sell high dose BCPs and products that they consider abotificants. 

 

We had a pharmacy clerk (cashier) who worked with us at one point who asked other employees to ring up the morning after pill to patients, due to his religious beliefs.  Once we educated him on what the medication was, he had no problem with it thereafter. His church pushed an agenda on him without teaching him the biology of the medications.  He took the opportunity to educate himself and made up his own mind.  As a clerk, he would never be in a position to be in the pharmacy alone, so it wouldn't have prevented a person from buying it, he just didn't want to ring the person out.  I want to clarify, that I didn't think he was wrong in anyway for his beliefs....it was just one of the few times I have actually seen someone refuse.  

[justasque]

There are lots of things that cross my mind (implementing the death penalty, for example - providing the drugs, building the equipment, etc.), but as Rosie said, if I was sole support of my family and other jobs were hard to come by, I'd think long and hard about how to proceed.  We most of us are very privileged to have this as a theoretical exercise.  

[Audrey]

There is nothing in the realm of my jobs that would come to that.  There are many things at which I draw the line, but my jobs aren't in any way related to those things, so it's a non-issue to me.  Maybe it is serendipitous of my employment, or maybe it was subconsciously chosen.  I don't know.

[creekland]

Hmm, I was military, so for a bit, killing would have happened if it had needed to.  Pending job, that's not necessarily an exception.  I'd kill now to protect my students if I could, but hopefully it will never come to that.

 

In my job now?  (Teaching)  I would not mess up any official testing scores or fudge anyone's grade.  I would not give a student a good recommendation if I didn't feel they deserved one.  I would never make a class so easy that anyone would pass (doing nothing) if it were a college bound student.  Stuff like that.

 

In a hypothetical job, I could never be part of an abortion.  It hits too close to home.  I would have been an abortion had they been legal back in my day.  My crime was coming too close to my sister (we're one year and two days apart).  I've found that in spite of some difficult times in life, I rather enjoy living and was glad my mom had to have me (since she didn't want the back alley route).  The two of us even have a terrific relationship now, so I think she's glad too.

 

Normal BC doesn't bother me (used some myself back in the day).

 

Lying for people could bother me if it got deep.  Keeping illegal records would be very unlikely.

 

Can't think of much else.  Maybe as I read I'll agree with some others post.

[Butter]

I stay home with my kids, but pre-kids I was a nurse.  There is nothing I would not do and no one I wouldn't treat.  I would not take a job where I would need to do something I'd have a problem with (like, say, I wouldn't go to work at an abortion clinic since I emotionally couldn't handle regularly assisting at elective abortions).

[creekland]

There is nothing I would not do and no one I wouldn't treat. 

 

If someone were in physical trouble, there is no one I wouldn't try to help.

[LucyStoner]

I've rejected donations on behalf of a few orgs that came with unacceptable strings. Had I worked for an organization willing to take at least some of that money, I would have quit. I've fired a client due to serious ethical and legal violations he was making regularly. It was a lot of money for me to lose (at the time it was my largest client), but I can't tie my integrity to people like that.

[kewb]

I can't imagine I would be willing to do something illegal like cooking the books.

 

This is one of those impossible to say unless I am in the situation type of things. I am pretty sure I know what I would do but maybe I would react differently if I was in the situation.

[Rivka]

Oh yes. There were psychologists advising the military and the CIA about how to torture prisoners most effectively. I would be fired or jailed first. Or I would quit and be a whistleblower.

[T'smom]

I can't think of any going to jail scenarios, but I can think of lots of losing your job scenarios.

 

My dh is an athletic trainer and when he was working at a college, he was certainly pressured to clear athletes to go back on the field before they should. The coaches weren't his supervisor though, so maybe that wouldn't count? Where he works now, he used to have a boss that would try to get him to lie in a way to make things not look as bad as they were or do things he wasn't qualified to do. Fortunately, that boss didn't last long.

 

I used to be a teacher, I suppose if a school had one of those big cheating rings and I had to either fix my student's test scores or get fired, I would quit.

 

I can think of lots of situations where a worker could be asked, pressured, or threatened into covering things up, not reporting things, or faking records. I've never been in one of those situations, thank goodness!

[Stacia]

Oh yes. There were psychologists advising the military and the CIA about how to torture prisoners most effectively. I would be fired or jailed first. Or I would quit and be a whistleblower.

Have you read Guantanamo Diary yet? I recommend it.

 

As far as jobs/being willing to be jailed...

 

Journalist/going to jail to protect a source.

[Guest]

My husband is an engineer and there are many things his license binds him to, ethically, that lots of other engineers ignore. He refuses to violate his oath or conscience by ignoring these things, and has gotten quite a reputation because of it. But because he views professional integrity and public safety as his chief vocational duties he can't overlook things, from grandfathering in inept engineers and stamping plans without proper review to houses being erected with clear and obvious structural deficiencies the inspectors don't catch in time.

 

As for me, if I do end up working in accounting I can think of some things o would refuse to do and could be pressured to try and fudge. We shall see.

[athomeontheprairie]

I work for a libraryin a small community.

 

We've had to let go of staff and board members who were unwilling to check out certain books because it is against what the vast majority of people in the community(white, Christian, republican) believe (fifty shades, the Koran, etc.)

Now when we hire people we make absolutely sure they understand they are legally obligated to check out any print material regardless of content to any age patron. and if a person asks for an objectional book, that we don't have, the answer is always "we will get it for you"

 

We have fired people because of censorship.

[Butter]

I work for a libraryin a small community.

 

We've had to let go of staff and board members who were unwilling to check out certain books because it is against what the vast majority of people in the community(white, Christian, republican) believe (fifty shades, the Koran, etc.)

Now when we hire people we make absolutely sure they understand they are legally obligated to check out any print material regardless of content to any age patron. and if a person asks for an objectional book, that we don't have, the answer is always "we will get it for you"

 

We have fired people because of censorship.

 

Wait.  You mean employees have told people "No, you can't check that out" when they come to the desk with a book contained in the library or in the system you can get books from?  Seriously?!?!  Wow.

[athomeontheprairie]

Wait. You mean employees have told people "No, you can't check that out" when they come to the desk with a book contained in the library or in the system you can get books from? Seriously?!?! Wow.

That's what I mean.

We are also small, which means our collection is limited. BUT we have an AMAZING inter library loan system. There are probably only 2 requests we get a year that go unfilled (because an item is so obscure).

If a patron wants a book we don't have, help had said things like "I'm sorry, we can't get the Koran here." "No, we don't allow books like fifty shades in this library" "that book Ida offensive, we can't get it (go the f* to sleep)"

 

Censorship drives me batty. AND yes of a 15 yo wants one of those books, we are LEGALLY required to check them out. If parents want to censor that's fine (And I think in some contexts, appropriate. Example I don't want my 7 YO reading the above picture book) but the library can't and shouldn't.

[ajfries]

Actually, this is really applicable to our family right now. We're buying a small rural grocery store & won't be selling cigarettes (though the current owners do). I don't imagine it will be well received & I think we're going to lose some business over it but I just can't bring myself to provide tobacco products.

[creekland]

Actually, this is really applicable to our family right now. We're buying a small rural grocery store & won't be selling cigarettes (though the current owners do). I don't imagine it will be well received & I think we're going to lose some business over it but I just can't bring myself to provide tobacco products.

 

Not carrying cigarettes when you are the owner is just plain fine (and admirable) IMO.

 

When I worked as a cashier a few moons back I sold them to customers without problems though.  I may not think their using them is wise, but it is their choice.  It was my store owner's choice to carry them.

[athomeontheprairie]

Actually, this is really applicable to our family right now. We're buying a small rural grocery store & won't be selling cigarettes (though the current owners do). I don't imagine it will be well received & I think we're going to lose some business over it but I just can't bring myself to provide tobacco products.

Our local store doesn't carry them. Or alcohol. The owner doesn't like them and thinks they can be destructive to families. It's okay. There are gas stations and liquor stores nearby that carry those items.

 

The people that like to complain (like my grandma-il) will find SOMETHING to complain about. If it isn't that, it will be something else.

 

Sent from my LG-AS990 using Tapatalk

[zoobie]

DH has left two jobs because of ethical concerns while being sole breadwinner. His boss in the first may still be in prison for the dirty stuff he was doing as DA. So yes. Similarly, I can't imagine being in dire enough straits to become a drug dealer or prostitute or anything that would be breaking laws.

[3 ladybugs]

My question is, how many of us would work for Monsanto, or another Ag science outfit. DH is in a field where he could, but he wouldn't because he doesn't like GMOs. I joked that the imperial death march plays every time you walk in the front door of Monsanto. 😄😄😄

 

Personally, I am a housewife, and before that I was a nanny. I wouldn't put a child in danger. The world is a backwards place right now so it wouldn't surprise me if I had to today.

[Mimm]

I don't work, but hypothetically, there are any number of ethical or moral issues I would refuse to do. If I was being asked to do something I felt actually harmed people then yes, I'd refuse to do it. I would try to find a way to keep my job and get around it by having someone else do it or something, but in the end, if there was no available compromise, I would quit. I wouldn't allow myself to be thrown in jail with minor children in the house.

 

I would rather my husband lose his job that violate his morals. My husband is level headed and reasonable and not hateful. If he had a moral problem with something to the point of quitting his job, then it would be something pretty serious.

 

ETA: I would sell tobacco products. Allowing people the freedom to harm themselves is something I could do. That's between him (her) and his (her) body, none of my business.

[Guest]

The thread title reads "Search Of KY" ...clerk and marriage...like KY jelly... to me. Thought I should share this deep thought with you lucky folks.

 

I will read the OP now.

[Daria]

I'm a special ed teacher.  It is very common for special ed teachers to be pressured into doing things that are unethical.  I've certainly been in situations where I put my job on the line by not toeing the line in a meeting, or speaking my truth to a parent.  I would do it again if I was in that position, but my current school is radically different in that respect.

[albeto.]

As for me, if I do end up working in accounting I can think of some things o would refuse to do and could be pressured to try and fudge. We shall see.

 

Do I misunderstand you, or are you talking about hiding what you'd be hypothetically doing (or not doing, as it were)? If I had hired a person to do work for me, I'd expect honesty. If an employee working for me had an ethical problem with something, I would hope we could work something out. A deceitful employee would be fired right away. But maybe you're thinking of something else? I'm curious what situations you're thinking of, if you care to share.

[Guest]

My question is, how many of us would work for Monsanto, or another Ag science outfit. DH is in a field where he could, but he wouldn't because he doesn't like GMOs. I joked that the imperial death march plays every time you walk in the front door of Monsanto. 😄😄😄

 

 

 

This was the example that immediately popped into my mind. Under no circumstances short of starving children would I work for them, grow their seeds, or knowingly pass on their products. GMOs are the tip of the iceberg irt to how much I loathe that company.

[poppy]

In my field, HR, there really isn't anything I'd absolutely refuse to do. I'd complain about some things up the channel, but there is not life or death situation in my hands.

 

My husband designs airbag parts, and I do believe we would quit- go on unemployment - struggle - if he felt the company was deliberately passing through unsafe designs or shoddy parts. Like any manufacturing job, there have been screw ups, there have been compromises, and the employees complain about the vast reams of paperwork and regulations and so on..... but that is not the same as compromising safety for profit.

[albeto.]

I'm a special ed teacher.  It is very common for special ed teachers to be pressured into doing things that are unethical.  I've certainly been in situations where I put my job on the line by not toeing the line in a meeting, or speaking my truth to a parent.  I would do it again if I was in that position, but my current school is radically different in that respect.

 

Thank you. 

 

Seriously. 

[Rosie_0801]

Personally, I am a housewife, and before that I was a nanny. I wouldn't put a child in danger. The world is a backwards place right now so it wouldn't surprise me if I had to today.

 

If you have any ideas on how to fix the family court system, please write to, well, the whole world.

 

 

*Not being snarky.

[Tanaqui]

Anything legal, you mean? Because let's take it as given that I'm not doing something illegal unless I think it IS an ethically correct thing to do.

 

There are any number of legal things I assert now I would not do. However, I'm not in that position. I'm sure it gets murkier for people who are actually on the spot.

 

I do have to say this: If your employer asks or encourages you to do something illegal, unethical, or just plain dodgy as heck; get it in writing. Because when it all comes tumbling down - and it will - they'll never say "Oh, yes, I told her to just throw that toxic waste down the toilet" or "Yes, I gave the order to throw away lunches rather than letting kindergarteners eat if they owed more than $1 to the cafeteria" or "Yeah, it's a fair cop, it's my fault we never rented to blacks, I didn't let those go through". Nah, there's a reason they're the boss and you're the peon, and that's because anybody who doesn't care about making their employees do awful things isn't going to care about throwing said employees under the bus. They've got no loyalty to you, and they've already proven they have no morals, so, again: GET IT IN WRITING FIRST.

[bolt.]

As a college prof, I would not tell outright lies while teaching. As in, I would not teach things that I believe to be untrue. If required to teach from a position I didn't agree with (example: "This school believes that all true Christians are 6-day creationists, and anyone else has a false faith that leads to hell.") for the sake of being a primary breadwinner I would try to fudge (I could say a sentence beginning with, "This school believes..." Or, "6-day creationism means..."), and I wouldn't need to contest it openly -- but I could not outright say it, or affirm that I believe it.

 

In less dire breadwinning scenarios, I would try to be open regarding a distinction between school policy and my beliefs.

[Truscifi]

If it were a choice between doing the job and my children starving? I can't think of anything.

 

In my current position there are a number of things I wouldn't do because I believe them to be wrong. For example I would not choose to work in a large scale factory farm because even in the normal workings - not people intentionally being jerks, just the normal course of business - a shockingly high number of animals don't get put down in step one properly and wind up going through the next however many steps still alive.

[justasque]

The thread title reads "Search Of KY" ...clerk and marriage...like KY jelly... to me. Thought I should share this deep thought with you lucky folks.

 

I will read the OP now.

(As an aside, in this case, the "S/O" means "Spin Off", as in, the topic of this thread is a spin-off of the Kentucky Clerk Marriage Licenses thread, rather than the S/O meaning [in] Search Of.)

[Guest]

(As an aside, in this case, the "S/O" means "Spin Off", as in, the topic of this thread is a spin-off of the Kentucky Clerk Marriage Licenses thread, rather than the S/O meaning [in] Search Of.)

 

I know :001_smile:

[Renthead Mommy]

Back in the days before smart phones, (or even the days before texting) when you pulled giant laptops into phone lines, I was in hotel sales (as in selling rooms to business for travelers and events, not hotel real estate).  Our hotel had just been sold from 200 hotel owned chain to a guy who owned three hotels.  He was installing computers in the rooms that ran on the brand new cable lines.   We had about 8-10 other hotels in the area that I worked with often and we all had a really good relationship with.  New owner wanted me to print up flyers saying something like "Did your hotel room have an in room computer in it last night?  Our do!" He wanted me to go in the middle of the night and put them on the windshield of cars in our area hotels.  

 

I told the I would not be doing that and if the issue was pushed I was planning on quoting because I could see the direction we were going.   Other shady things started happening and I left soon after before the computer thing ever happened. 

 

Would I have left if I was a single mom?  I don't know.  I would have found a work around as best I could for the flyer issue.  And I certainly would have contacted all my manager/sales manager contacts at those local hotels to apologize and make sure they knew this was being done against my wishes.  I had a relationship with those people, and the new owner did not.  If I was a single mom and needed a new job, I would have been better off being on good terms with all of them. 

[Serenade]

 

 

My husband designs airbag parts, and I do believe we would quit- go on unemployment - struggle - if he felt the company was deliberately passing through unsafe designs or shoddy parts. Like any manufacturing job, there have been screw ups, there have been compromises, and the employees complain about the vast reams of paperwork and regulations and so on..... but that is not the same as compromising safety for profit.

 

 

This is a biggie. It's surprising how often employees are asked to approve bad products.  The company has to make the numbers, don'tcha know?

 

My husband recently rejected some lots that didn't meet the established criteria -- these were hard numbers, nothing subjective.  Later on some higher-ups went back and approved the lots anyhow.  They didn't care.  They needed the stuff to ship by the end of the quarter.  

 

My husband will not approve stuff that doesn't meet the criteria, which doesn't make him popular with the management.   It's probably why he is losing his job.  Of course, if he'd approve the product and then the product was returned because it didn't meet the standards, he'd lose his job anyhow -- then the managers would have someone to blame it on, you know.  It's like the employee can't win.  

[3 ladybugs]

If you have any ideas on how to fix the family court system, please write to, well, the whole world.

 

 

*Not being snarky.

 

Since you asked, here is my idea.

 

Preface: I am a conservative. I currently subscribe to Glenn Beck and I have subscribed to Rush Limbaugh in the past. The only thing I don't agree with Dr. Carson or Ted Cruz on is gay marriage and that is because I believe it takes 2 people to raise a child and I really don't care if they are straight or not. I also think that when 2 people adopt or have a child that those 2 people should be responsible for the child for LIFE. No hiding and saying that that was so and so's thing. Gays shouldn't have an out on this any more then a dead beat dad!

 

So in that light, here is my idea: Have states take over the child support. Right now if Mary and Joe have a baby, Sally, and Joe leaves the family. Mary goes to the state and says "I want child support". The state says "Okay" and Joe is ordered to pay child support. Joe may have a number of reasons that he can't pay child support, and in that case, Mary gets nothing, till Joe pays. Conversely when Joe starts paying child support, he may be so far back that he is paying till Sally is married with her own kids. That isn't helping anyone, not the least of which is Mary who needed the help when Sally was a child, not an adult.

 

My plan is this: If Joe can't pay or refuses to pay, Mary gets paid by the state what Joe is ordered to pay. This way the child gets the help he/she needs and Joe now has to pay back the STATE, not Mary. This may sound like a small thing, but it is HUGE. Now the state can see child support as a TAX. No one wants to be caught not paying taxes as the government really frowns on that. I would also be in favor of Mary not knowing if Joe is paying or the state. Mary knowing this can make Mary (even if she isn't aware that she is doing it) treat Joe differently and perhaps even withhold Sally as punishment for not paying. Joe's financials shouldn't be Mary's concern. They are not together she doesn't need to know. I would also be in favor of a perhaps 1-2% interest rate on the back paying of child support to the state. Nothing huge, but enough to really discourage Joe from not paying. The state would also be in charge of making sure Joe is paying "his fair share". Mary wouldn't be involved in this and would either get a smaller check or a larger check, based on the state's findings. 

 

Now if Joe wanted to pay above and beyond for something for Sally, that is his business, but he shouldn't HAVE to pay above and beyond.

 

This to me would really make the court system more fair and separate things how they say they try to do, but don't really. I think this would also help with custodial issues as neither party would know the other financial situation and therefore try to use the child as a pawn to hurt the other because they didn't like the child support part of the equation. 

 

Feel free to shout my idea from the rooftops. I doubt anyone would listen. But I am thinking of the child first. 

[Rosie_0801]

A state run child support collection has advantages, certainly. I'm finding myself surprised you don't have this, though I don't know why I'm surprised.

 

 

 

I think this would also help with custodial issues as neither party would know the other financial situation and therefore try to use the child as a pawn to hurt the other because they didn't like the child support part of the equation.

 

I can't imagine how this would help with custodial issues. It must be another system difference between here and there. Any payer inclined to be a jerk would sue for custody and you can't take away their right to do so. 

 

I'm interested in solutions for preventing abusers using the court system to continue to abuse. It'll be interesting to see if our state's Royal Commission into Stuff Like That yields anything over the next few years.

[DawnM]

I have been asked to lie or fudge the data on several occasions.  Some of it is subjective, and they numbers were "doctored" to keep the federal grant we were given.  Thankfully, I didn't have to sign that particular document, but it made me really angry that this woman got away with as much as she did.   The most difficult part was that the program was great.  It needed to be done and most of us really wanted to make it work, but this woman who wrote the grant and keep it going was impossible to deal with.

 

But yes, absolutely there are things I would not do based on my convictions.

 

Thankfully, other than the above, I haven't been asked to do anything horrible.

[Chris in VA]

If you are talking about legal things in my job (nanny or preschool teacher) that I won't do because of my own morals/ethics/beliefs, then I guess what comes to mind is corporal punishment. I won't discipline another person's child by spanking, "hot sauce-ing," etc.

[mommaduck]

As long as I'm not being asked to harm anyone or present any kind of message of hate, we're good. I'm a seamstress. I don't care if a suit or dress is for a straight wedding or a LGBT wedding. I don't care if it would be for a Muslim wedding or a Christian or Atheist wedding. I don't care if it's for a cross cosplay event or a funeral. Okay, I might choose not to mess with Furries, because then were getting into some wicked fabrics and an area of costuming that I'm not good with :P 

[Scarlett]

Actually, this is really applicable to our family right now. We're buying a small rural grocery store & won't be selling cigarettes (though the current owners do). I don't imagine it will be well received & I think we're going to lose some business over it but I just can't bring myself to provide tobacco products.

 

 

Good for you!

[MEmama]

The only time I've been in a situation where I was uncomfortable on a moral level on the job was when I worked as a waitress at a bar. A woman who was very, very obviously pregnant ordered a drink, and I just didn't feel right fulfilling that. Fortunately for me I had a boss who respected my position and he served her instead. Obviously I never said anything to her and she had no idea.

 

Would I lose my job over something like that now? No, probably not. But I was 19 and navigating my way through new adulthood. I'm still proud that I mustered up the courage to voice my concerns to my boss--that was hard for me to do at that age but I felt very strongly about it. There are of course many, many job situations I wouldn't put myself in, but maybe I'm fortunate that I'm not forced to make those choices.

[mommaduck]

The only time I've been in a situation where I was uncomfortable on a moral level on the job was when I worked as a waitress at a bar. A woman who was very, very obviously pregnant ordered a drink, and I just didn't feel right fulfilling that. Fortunately for me I had a boss who respected my position and he served her instead. Obviously I never said anything to her and she had no idea.

 

Would I lose my job over something like that now? No, probably not. But I was 19 and navigating my way through new adulthood. I'm still proud that I mustered up the courage to voice my concerns to my boss--that was hard for me to do at that age but I felt very strongly about it. There are of course many, many job situations I wouldn't put myself in, but maybe I'm fortunate that I'm not forced to make those choices.

 

I'm curious (seriously)...was she ordering wine/beer or was she ordering something heavier?

[LMV]

So, besides the obvious of killing, is there anything one could ask you to do in your job that you absolutely would not do because of your moral code? And would you be willing to go to jail for it or even lose the job if you were the primary breadwinner in a depressed economy?

 

Obviously, conundrums like this must go through the minds of everyone at some point.

 

For example, I wonder what went through the mind of the computer person who set up Hillary's email. Or what about the workers in China who made Chinese drywall. I saw a case of a medical student who refused to scrub up for tubal ligations.

 

What are some things worth losing a job or going to jail for?

 

I'm a physician, I have friends who have left positions because they felt too much pressure from administration to sacrifice all (including actual quality care and in some cases safe prescribing of controlled substances) for the all-mighty HCAHPS score. I'm fortunate to work for a hospital that respects physicians and patients more than that but if things were to change I would be looking for a different job.

[MEmama]

I'm curious (seriously)...was she ordering wine/beer or was she ordering something heavier?

I honestly don't remember. It was nearly 25 years ago. :).

[creekland]

I'm a physician, I have friends who have left positions because they felt too much pressure from administration to sacrifice all (including actual quality care and in some cases safe prescribing of controlled substances) for the all-mighty HCAHPS score. I'm fortunate to work for a hospital that respects physicians and patients more than that but if things were to change I would be looking for a different job.

 

Ok, that's scary.  Not your thoughts/ideas, but what happened with your friends.  Messing with finances and figures are one thing.  Messing with lives is another.

[TranquilMind]

So, besides the obvious of killing, is there anything one could ask you to do in your job that you absolutely would not do because of your moral code? And would you be willing to go to jail for it or even lose the job if you were the primary breadwinner in a depressed economy?

 

Obviously, conundrums like this must go through the minds of everyone at some point.

 

For example, I wonder what went through the mind of the computer person who set up Hillary's email. Or what about the workers in China who made Chinese drywall. I saw a case of a medical student who refused to scrub up for tubal ligations.

 

What are some things worth losing a job or going to jail for?

Yes, there are things I would not do in my rental properties.  I don't care if the government decides they are wonderful things that should now be protected.  I'm not moving in druggies or criminals or people who do not meet the criteria to protect my investments.