Seven years ago, I started a column by recounting how I
had written the words "hard work," "honesty,"
"courage," "fair play," "tolerance,"
"curiosity," "loyalty" and "patriotism" on the blackboard
before I started teaching an evening class on professional ethics on Jan. 20,
2009. I then asked the students what these words were.
"Values," a few of them responded.
"Where have you heard them before?" I asked.
"In Barack Obama's inaugural address this
afternoon," one of the students responded, correctly.
"These things are old," Obama had said.
"These things are true. They have been the quiet force of progress
throughout our history."
In teaching ethics, I typically tell the students that
while I might be able to help give them the tools to think through ethical
decisions, I can't change the values they bring with them into the class.
At the time, I observed how people with wildly different
political views could share values. Obama and his opponent in that election,
Sen. John McCain (R-Arizona), displayed this during the 2008 U.S. presidential
election -- McCain when he took a talk-radio host to task for questioning
Obama's religion and Obama when he refuted supporters' who attempted to
capitalize on the pregnancy of the then unmarried, teenage daughter of McCain's
running mate, Gov. Sarah Palin (R.-Alaska).
I was reminded of these observations after receiving
questions from some readers about whether, given the tenor of the current
presidential campaign, they should allow their children to watch the Republican
candidates' televised debates, or whether it was appropriate for school
teachers to discuss the debates. There was concern that seeing presidential
candidates call one another names, accusing one another of being liars, or
attempting to poke fun at the size of one another's hands might set a bad
example for their kids.
"Is it right to let my kids see adults interrupt one
another and bully one another on the public stage?"
While the tenor of the debates may be unsettling, I'm not
sure the lessons about values is any less tangible. Just as voters could grasp
a sense of McCain's and Obama's values by how they behaved and responded to
comments and events, those watching the current candidates can do the same.
When Gov. John Kasich (R-Ohio) responds, "I'm notbiting," to a question from a debate moderator trying to pit him against
one of his competitors, it tells viewers something about him. During the
Conservative Political Action Conference, when Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Florida)
responds to a CNN reporter's question by saying, "where I grew up, if
someone keeps punching someone in the face, eventually someone has to stand up
and punch them back," that tells viewers something about his values, as
well.
The right thing is for every parent to decide what's
appropriate for their children to view on television in their own homes. It
would seem a lost opportunity for teachers not to use the current political
campaign as grist for lessons in civics and values.
Even if a candidate shares our values, he or she might
not get our vote if his or her political views do not match our own. But
regardless of their political views, voting for someone whose values voters
clearly find abhorrent -- someone to whom they'd be reluctant to expose their
kids -- is going to prove a much more difficult lever to pull.
Jeffrey L. Seglin, author of The Simple Art of Business Etiquette: How to Rise to the Top by Playing Nice, is a lecturer in public policy and director of the communications program at Harvard's Kennedy School. He is also the administrator of www.jeffreyseglin.com, a blog focused on ethical issues.
Do you have ethical questions that you need answered? Send them to rightthing@comcast.net.
Follow him on Twitter: @jseglin
(c) 2015 JEFFREY L. SEGLIN. DISTRIBUTED BY TRIBUNE CONTENT AGENCY, LLC.
