Imagine a company and it’s CEO. We’ll call him Bob.
Bob’s father, Robert, was the founder of this company, and ran it himself for many years. A while back he gave 50% control to Bob. Although technically they are equal partners, for all intents and purposes the company is really run by Bob these days.
It doesn’t matter what Bob’s company does; just that his company is one of the biggest in the world, has been around for many, many, years, and has a few major competitors.
Now let’s say some time in the past Bob’s company discriminated against people who were not born in a certain area (for this example, we’ll say northern Ohio). Not only would the company not hire people born elsewhere, but it would not sell it’s good or services to people from outside this area as well…
At this time the company also supported child labor, sexist hiring practices and other versions of misogyny, racism, and other forms of bigotry.
As well, during this time, the company’s founder, Robert, made it clear that all tactics were allowed in order to beat the competition.
Lying under oath, allowed.
Breaking into the other companies’ offices, allowed.
Physical intimidation (including assault) of employees of the competition, allowed.
NOTHING was off limits.
During this time an employee manual was written by Robert, which outlined all of this and many more ideas which today we would look at as unconscionable.
After Bob took over, the old employee manual still was used and technically in effect, but employees mostly picked and chose which parts to follow and which to ignore.
Child labor, well it’s for the good of the children who otherwise would starve.
Beating your employees, it teaches them discipline.
Lying, well as long as it’s for a “good” cause, where “good” is determined by the corporation.
Ignoring women’s rights, well that’s just good business.
The only difference between the new regime and the old, the new one at least attempts to come up with a ethical sounding justification for it’s actions, while the old regime did not bother with such trivialities…
Now it doesn’t really matter what this company does, nothing can justify these horrific actions. This company could be coming up with the cure for cancer, and working to feed all children on the planet, but would you really argue that the “ends justify the means” and that this company was a benefit to mankind? Of course not…
Nobody looking objectively at such a scenario would ever support such a corrupt institution. And yet over 2 billion people today call themselves christians, and have no problem with being associated with such barbaric practices.