involved in a traffic stop is already quite intense. When the issues of race and criminal activity are added to this, the emotional intensity increases to a boiling point. I will apply two ethical theories to prove my point that racial profiling is wrong; Kantian Ethics, or respect for persons, and Rawlsian Ethics, or the mutual agreement behind the veil of ignorance.The basic principal of Kantian ethics is respect for persons, “whose central theme is that equal respect must be paid to the personhood of all human beings” (Harris, p. 157). One of the moral standards to consider is the Universalitation Principle, which states that “an action is right if you can consent to everyone’s adopting the moral rule presupposed by the action” (Harris, p. 158). In this case, the moral issue of discrimination is called into question. I believe that no one should engage in racial profiling at any time, whether it be law enforcement officials making a routine traffic stop, or a sales clerk closely observing minority patrons and virtually ignoring white patrons. Can I agree to everyone consistently acting simultaneously according to this same rule? The answer is a resounding yes. Hence, racial profiling is wrong.According to the principal of Rawlsian Ethics, a just society is one “in which no one has an unfair advantage over others” (Olen and Barry, p. 17). Supposed for an instant that I was African-American or Latina, or any other person of color. If I was born into that culture, I would not want to be stopped for no other reason than my skin color. There may be a day where the tables are turned and whites will become the profiled group. No one knows what the future holds, and where one will eventually fall in society. In this ethical theory, every person has the right to freedom and there must be equal freedom to all. Secondly, if there is inequality in society, it must be to everyone’s ad...
