Employment

Bring your business cards and network in person with other business professionals! Gold Star Referral Clubs is one of the most established professional networking organizations in the country, with multiple groups in central Ohio. Join us!

Join us for a relaxed and delicious brunch at Littleton’s Market! This is the perfect chance to unwind, enjoy great food, and connect with an amazing group of women who are in a similar stage of life. What to expect: * Casual, friendly conversation * Great food and cozy atmosphere * A chance to meet like-minded women and build connections

**Let’s catch up and take an afternoon break.** **Grab a coffee or snack and let’s chit chat! Gayle and I will bring adult coloring books and/or a simple craft if you’d like to unwind and relax.😊**

**Optional movie afterwards**

Some trained COUNT volunteers work together once a month at RMH (http://www.rmhc-centralohio.org/volunteer.php) as Housewarmers (usually on the 1st Sunday from 1 – 5 PM). Some schedule other shifts at their convenience. You may try this out with less fuss by following a "Fast track" or go through the normal process. Fast track • Arrange a time to shadow a COUNT volunteer. Call Dave Nohle at 614-268-9558 (cell). • Show up and try it out. • Complete application, etc. later. Normal process • Complete an online application (http://rmhc-centralohio.org/volunteer/). • Attend orientation in advance. • At orientation you will complete forms agreeing to keep family/patient info private and allowing a background check and tour the facility. • Complete one training shift. Daily shifts are: morning 9 AM - 1 PM, afternoon 1 - 5 PM and evening 5 - 9 PM. • Schedule shifts online using the on the RMH scheduling system (http://www.volgistics.com/ex/portal.dll/?FROM=32895). The Ronald McDonald House (RMH) provides housing and meals for families with sick children. The Columbus RMH is the largest in the world with 137 rooms. COUNT has been volunteering there since May 2014. Housewarmers work with RMH guests to provide a home-like environment - greet, assist with family needs, answer phones, give tours, assist with checkin/checkout, prepare guest rooms after checkout, clean facility, laundry, restock supplies and staff the front desk. RMH Housewarmers volunteer at least one four-hour shift a month. All Housewarmers must complete an application and agree to a background check before they can be full fledged volunteers.

When judging morality, should we prioritize **intentions/duty** or **outcomes/results**? It introduces two influential philosophers as representatives of these approaches. * **Immanuel Kant (deontology):** An action is moral when it is done from **duty** and follows rational, universal principles (the **categorical imperative**). Certain acts—like lying—are wrong regardless of the consequences; you can’t do a wrong thing for a right reason. * **John Stuart Mill (utilitarian consequentialism):** The morality of an action is determined by its **effects**, specifically how much **happiness/well-being** it produces. Mill argues that some pleasures are “higher” than others, and that good intentions don’t redeem harmful outcomes. ## Discussion Questions 1. **The lying dilemma:** A murderer comes to your door and asks if your friend is hiding inside. Kant would say you must not lie. 2. **Can good intentions rescue a bad outcome?** 3. **The organ harvest problem:** A surgeon has five patients dying of organ failure and one healthy patient in for a checkup. Killing the one to harvest organs would save five lives, and the math works out for the utilitarian. Why does this feel so deeply wrong? Is that feeling a point in Kant's favor, or just a bias we should overcome? 4. **Do rules need exceptions?** Kant insists moral rules must be universal, with no exceptions. But most of us can imagine extreme scenarios where any rule seems like it should bend. Does the need for exceptions fatally undermine deontology, or is the strength of the system precisely that it refuses to bend? 5. **Who gets to calculate the consequences?** Utilitarianism asks us to maximize good outcomes, but we're notoriously bad at predicting consequences. If we can't reliably know the results of our actions, is it practical to base our entire moral system on outcomes? Does this uncertainty push us back toward rules and principles? 6. **Everyday morality:** Think about a real moral decision you've made recently, even a small one. Did you reason more like a Kantian (what's the right thing to do in principle?) or more like a utilitarian (what will produce the best result?)? Do most people naturally lean one way? 7. **Justice vs. the greater good:** A town can prevent a deadly plague by sacrificing one innocent person. The greater good is clearly served. But is it just? Can an action be morally right and deeply unjust at the same time? 8. **The big synthesis question:** Are these two systems actually opposed, or do they often arrive at the same answers by different paths? Is it possible that we need both: rules to guide us in the moment and consequences to evaluate systems and policies over time?