Thursday, August 03, 2006

integrity

Honesty or uprightness as a personal completeness or total reality—this is the standard concept or total reality—this is the standard concept and common understanding of integrity. It is a wholeness that accepts no breakage such that it is either whole or broken—never both. Thus: water is either clean of dirty. When water is a little dirty, dirty is remains as it is not clean. In the same way, a plate is either whole or cracked. Once its but a little cracked, it is not whole anymore, no matter what one thinks and says.

Someone who steals no matter how little, is a thief. The person who steals is dishonest and crooked. It is incongruous to call a thief honest or to consider the same as upright. In the same way, when one who cheats, the person remains a cheater. It is contrary to elementary logic and fundamental ethics for a cheat to claim honesty and uprightness.

One who steals and managed to keep what the same stole, remains thief. The fact that was is stolen remains kept— little though this is— in no way cancels the fact of thievery. In the same way, someone who cheats remains a cheater no matter how little is cheated. Even if the cheater is not caught cheating. No one is allowed to steal a little. In the same way no one is either permitted to cheat a little.

Cheating becomes more serious and culpable, more unjust and unacceptable when the cheater has advanced education, wields power and influence. The cheater then better knows the evil of cheating and becomes thereby more accountable. When a child cheats, there is still cheating though less responsible and punishable. When an educated adult cheats, this is more despicable and abominable.

A cheat in the elections remains a cheater even if the same cheated but a little and thereby announced as the winner. This event could be understandable if there is an election law that allows candidates to cheat a little. The fact remains that to cheat little or much in elections is unethical, and wherefore unacceptable among decent and civilized electorate.

Even if everybody is said to cheat in elections, this in no way makes cheating right. A winning cheater has no moral claim to a public office. In the same way, a cheat winning an election in no way makes the same worthy of public trust. The mixing of cheated and non-cheated votes comes up with a cheated count. This is the only conclusion by applying the principle of integrity.



+O.V. CRUZ, D.D.
3 August 2006