1. Find a peer whose interpretation of an issue is different from your own.
2. What is your perspective on this issue and a possible solution? How close are your views to your peer's views?
3. How could you and your peer compromise to recommend a solution you both approve of?

PAMELA POST

An act of civil disobedience I recently came across is the underground abortion pill networks gaining traction since the overturning of Roe vs Wade. 
These networks aim to provide medications used for abortion to individuals residing in states where access to these medications is very limited or banned. 

An ethical issue related to this act of civil disobedience is health and safety risks. Self-managed abortions using pills are generally considered safe when done correctly, but they can pose risks if people lack proper medical guidance. Distributing pills through informal channels might increase the risk of misuse or complications. Critics argue that these networks could unintentionally harm individuals who don’t fully understand how to use the medications safely, raising questions about the ethical responsibility of these groups to ensure informed consent. 

I agree with the actions these underground organizations are taking to ensure women have a choice when it comes to their bodies. It is well documented in history that women will go to extreme and dangerous lengths to no longer be pregnant. This organization gives women a sense of hope and control that was stripped from them when Roe vs Wade was overturned. An action I feel was unethical in it of itself.

My solution to the ethical issue stated above would be to include informational pamphlets and guides on how to use the medications as well as what symptoms to look out for and when to seek medical attention. I also believe there should be a screening process to determine eligibility for the medication. 
For example, a woman who is six months pregnant wouldn’t be in need of this service and could harm herself by taking it. So essentially use similar processes and procedures that a planned parenthood would take. I feel like this would greatly reduce the chance of these organizations doing unintentional harm to others.

NICOLE POST

A civil disobedience I have recently noticed was the killing of a 15-yr old in the case of mistaken identity that happened a few yrs ago in the Bronx, NY. The young man ran into a store, trying to get away from a gang that was chasing him. He was hiding behind the counter when the gang members came in. They asked the store owner where the young man was at, and the store owner told them where he was hiding. The members of the gang came around the counter and dragged the young man from around the counter, out the store, where they brought him outside, and continuously stabbed him. Thereafter, he would die in the hospital from the numerous stab wounds. Getting wind of this incident, the community become outraged and started showing up to the store threatening to beat and do him like he allowed the gang members to do the young man. They started protesting, looting and destroying his store. The cops were called multiply times to help deescalate the situation, to the point where they started assigning cops to patrol the front of the store. This behavior continued until the store eventually closed down. The ethical issue was the owner not helping and providing safety for the young man, in which could have helped save the young man's life.

        Giving the situation, I don’t agree with the owner, he could have locked the door when the young man ran inside, and not aid anything when they gang was asking him where the young man was. If he didn’t have time to lock it before the gang showed up, he should have called the cops and kept calling them until they arrived. If he had done more, the results would have been different. The protesting could have been peaceful, because violence wouldn’t have changed anything, but arrests and possible police brutality. Also, with a peaceful protest the outcome would have been the same, with the store closing down permanently. The gang members had no right to do what they did at all. The brutality they inflicted on this young man that cost him his life was unacceptable.  I would have recommended repercussions for the store owner, and the looters. Theres always different ways to handle situations without it getting physical. Furthermore, life sentences for all those involved in the stabbing. This was an unfortunate situation where a young man lost his life because of mistaken identity.