I would argue I am never required to accept someone elses version of ethics, but the laws do have to agree to some sort of consensus. Generally i think we do a pretty good job with allowing people to adhere to their personal ethics without breaking the law
Surprisingly enough, I dont think there is much in the accountability front that you can organize. It's like the final layer of accountability. You can only act in a way defendable by your genuine morals and the consequences are what they are. Maybe you can be somewhat negotiable and adjust and push your morals to their limit in order to limit the negative effects to yourself, but if its a true moral i think you shouldnt fully break it. I think that level of accountability with yourself is necessary to have peace of mind. Everything else is out of your control, including whos ethics the consequences are bound to.
If you were the same as you are now and you were placed into what you believe to be a genuinely evil society, and you have to severely go against your morals to fit in and avoid negative consequence, are you going to do that?
Surprisingly enough, I dont think there is much in the accountability front that you can organize. It's like the final layer of accountability. You can only act in a way defendable by your genuine morals and the consequences are what they are. Maybe you can be somewhat negotiable and adjust and push your morals to their limit in order to limit the negative effects to yourself, but if its a true moral i think you shouldnt fully break it. I think that level of accountability with yourself is necessary to have peace of mind. Everything else is out of your control, including whos ethics the consequences are bound to.
If you were the same as you are now and you were placed into what you believe to be a genuinely evil society, and you have to severely go against your morals to fit in and avoid negative consequence, are you going to do that?