Do you think it's reasonable and appropriate for investors to"vote their conscience" on social issues? What if he impact of sucha vote is lower profits than might otherwise be possible? How do weresolve disagreements between investor groups who might haveopposing, but equally passionate, ethical arguments for or againsta particular business decision? (Example: a pharmaceuticalmanufacturer has developed a new abortifacient that is quick, safe,effective, and inexpensive. It would be prescribed by a physician,but could be administered by any trained pharmacy technician,similar to a flu shot. Pro-choice investors want the company tobegin manufacturing and distributing this medication immediately.Pro-life investors not only don't want the medication sold, theywant the formula and research notes destroyed so that no otherparty can make the drug. The company has spent millions of dollarson research and testing; if the product isn't introduced to themarket, those research monies would represent a significant loss tothe company and a commensurate reduction in stock prices anddividend payments; however, if introduced to the market, theprofits would be astounding, stock prices would soar, and dividendpayments would skyrocket.)
