SOC 331 Distributive Justice and Scarce Natural Resources

In Chapter 3 of the text, the author calls attention to how struggles for scarce natural resources will pose increasingly difficult problems of distributive justice in the future, on both the local and global levels. “Case 3.4 – Fracking Friction” (in Section 3.4) explores this issue in the context of fracking for natural gas.
Suppose that the connection between fracking and adverse health effects is as yet an unproven possibility. Do individuals’ health interests outweigh the property interests of energy companies in withholding information about fracking chemicals, which they claim are trade-secrets? Why or why not?
Your initial post must, from the perspective of distributive justice, explain your response to the above questions as they relate to Case 3.4. Consider the issue from both sides (the pros and cons). Incorporate arguments that draw upon libertarian, utilitarian, and egalitarian views of distributive justice.
To help you successfully complete this discussion, review the following required resources:

ORDER NOW FOR ORIGINAL, PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPERS

a. Fracking secrets by thousands keep U.S. clueless on wells

b. Fracking: Abundant energy, but at what cost?

c. Is fracking making people sick? [Radio broadcast]

d. Fracking our food supply

In Chapter 1 of your textbook, justice is analyzed from three perspectives, each with its own set of relevant concepts. The text includes three case studies for consideration from each perspective. Select one (only one) of these case studies as the focus of your initial post in this discussion. Then analyze the selected case study from the justice perspective which accompanies it and answer the following questions.
a. If you select “Case Study 1.1 – Jacob Little and Walmart,” analyze it from the perspective of justice as a moral concept. Your analysis must address the following questions:

§ Did Walmart offer Jacob a just wage? Why or why not?

§ Was the alderman’s decision to let Walmart operate in the city just? Why or why not?

§ If you were the alderman, what would you do to more fully promote justice in the situation? Why?

b. If you select “Case Study 1.2 – Just Desserts?,” analyze it from the perspective of justice as a legal concept.

§ Was the court’s sentence for Mr. Allen just? Why or why not?

§ Was the court’s sentence for Mr. Brown just? Why or why not?

§ If you were the judge presiding over both of these trials, what would you do to more fully promote justice in them? Why?

c. If you select “Case Study 1.3 – Honor the Sabbath or Keep Your Job,” analyze it from the perspective of justice as a religious concept.

§ Did Chief Gerst treat Corporal Brown justly? Why or why not?

§ Did Corporal Brown act justly after his agreement with Chief Gerst? Why or why not?

§ If you were the Chief of TSU’s Police department, what would you do to more fully promote justice in the situation? Why?