The passing of House Bill 2 (HB2) in North Carolina has been surrounded by controversy. Some groups have stated that the bill is designed to protect citizens of the state and therefore needs remain law. However, others believe that the bill is transphobic, homophobic, does not represent the state in the best light, and needs to be repealed. Both groups defend their positions by saying that the action they would like to see is the best course of action for the state and its citizens. Ethically, utilitarianism can be applied to the debate over what should be done with respect to HB2 in North Carolina, as it is designed to maximize the happiness of the majority. The General Assembly of North Carolina passed HB2 after a series of events began
…show more content…
This group of people believes that this law is discriminatory towards transgender individuals as it does not consider their comfort in being able to use facilities that correspond with their gender identity. This group also sees the negative economic implications that this law has had in North Carolina due to events in the state being cancelled as a result of the law. Not only have sporting events and concerts in North Carolina been cancelled due to HB2, PayPal cancelled their expansion in Charlotte that would have created 400 jobs (Gordon, Price, and Peralta 2016). With the US economy still dealing with repercussions of the recession of 2008, many people believe that the economy can not afford to lose 400 potential jobs within the US. The group that opposes the bill also sees the economic effects of the state losing Title IX funding as state taxes may have to be raised to account for the loss of funding (Gordon, Price, and Peralta 2016). There is also the potential that if the funding were to be lost, the state would not supplement the schools with those funds in any way, leaving some to believe that in the long run the quality of education in NC could …show more content…
Utilitarianism focuses on attaining “‘The greatest happiness for the greatest number’” of people (Melchert 2010, 469). This view poses the challenge of solving how the regulation of the use of public restrooms and changing facilities can be designed to maximize the happiness of most citizens in North Carolina. One characteristic that utilitarians consider when determining how to provide the most happiness to the most people is the extent of the issue (Melchert 2010, 470). In the case of HB2, the population of North Carolina, as well as any individual who may be visiting the state at a given time are affected by the law. However, attaining the maximum amount of happiness in this situation is not as clear as repealing the law or keeping the law in place. Rather, a middle ground between the two groups is the most effective way to maximize
This group of people believes that this law is discriminatory towards transgender individuals as it does not consider their comfort in being able to use facilities that correspond with their gender identity. This group also sees the negative economic implications that this law has had in North Carolina due to events in the state being cancelled as a result of the law. Not only have sporting events and concerts in North Carolina been cancelled due to HB2, PayPal cancelled their expansion in Charlotte that would have created 400 jobs (Gordon, Price, and Peralta 2016). With the US economy still dealing with repercussions of the recession of 2008, many people believe that the economy can not afford to lose 400 potential jobs within the US. The group that opposes the bill also sees the economic effects of the state losing Title IX funding as state taxes may have to be raised to account for the loss of funding (Gordon, Price, and Peralta 2016). There is also the potential that if the funding were to be lost, the state would not supplement the schools with those funds in any way, leaving some to believe that in the long run the quality of education in NC could …show more content…
Utilitarianism focuses on attaining “‘The greatest happiness for the greatest number’” of people (Melchert 2010, 469). This view poses the challenge of solving how the regulation of the use of public restrooms and changing facilities can be designed to maximize the happiness of most citizens in North Carolina. One characteristic that utilitarians consider when determining how to provide the most happiness to the most people is the extent of the issue (Melchert 2010, 470). In the case of HB2, the population of North Carolina, as well as any individual who may be visiting the state at a given time are affected by the law. However, attaining the maximum amount of happiness in this situation is not as clear as repealing the law or keeping the law in place. Rather, a middle ground between the two groups is the most effective way to maximize