Dr. Ben Carson is being courted as a potential GOP candidate for President in 2016. This is not intended as an endorsement of him as a candidate because there simply is not enough information to form such an opinion at this time. This is, however, a close look at a statement Dr. Carson recently made regarding the source of his strength.

Dr. Carson was asked, "From where do you expect to draw the most support." His answer was candid and priceless, "Honestly, I don't care." Of course, his answer drew a round of laughter from The National Press Club, to whom he was speaking, but he followed that statement by saying, "I'm serious. As long as I have the support of God, that's what matters to me." It would appear Dr. Carson is more concerned about what God thinks of him than he is the image he creates with the media, which is in and of itself a value.

Tying in to yesterday's blog post, Dr. Carson went on to say that the reason America rose to such a prominent place in the world as quickly as it did was because we live by Godly principles such as, "loving your fellow man, caring about your neighbor, developing your God-given talents to your utmost so that you become valuable to the people around you, and of having values and principles that govern your life." Carson went on to say that if we can regain those attributes, we will truly be One Nation.

Over the last 20-30 years, we've been told that we can't exercise our beliefs and values in the public square. Furthermore, it would appear, based on results, that the current system isn't working. My question for you as readers is, would a return to these values return America to the right track? If so, how do we begin to change the culture of business, government, education, and more to accept values and beliefs that are right and good? That isn't intended as a rhetorical question, how do we do it? What steps need to occur in order to get us back on track?

Do businesses have a soul or a conscience? Can a business express a belief and if so, who determines that belief? These questions and more come to mind when Hobby Lobby refuses contraception coverage or Pepsi gives to a homosexual cause.

First, as Christians, God instructs us (people) to serve others, to give and to be fair in our dealings. But, does the Bible say anything to business entities? Does God hold businesses or people accountable? What is a business entity and what makes some types of businesses different? These are the questions I began asking myself over the last year, as more and more businesses on both sides of the issues find themselves struggling to serve their markets without alienating substantial portions of their market.

Perhaps the most important element for us to consider is the legal structure of the business and how that impacts a business' social activism. Businesses can be organized in any number of formats, but at the end of the day, one factor seems to draw a distinction in whether or not a company can legitimately and fairly express itself in the social arena. That is who owns the business? In its simplest form, a business could be a sole-proprietor, LLC, or even corporation, that is owned by a single person. A slightly more complex company might be owned by a family or a smaller group of associated people. On the more complex side, you would have companies that are owned by large groups of stockholders, or perhaps even other companies.

In the simplest of those business forms, it would be fairly easy for a business owner to make a moral decision regarding his company - it is, after all, 100% his company, his values, and his risk.  One such example might be a local baker that chooses not to cater homosexual weddings, or another that elects to refuse service to a local company that isn't considered environmentally-friendly. In the middle you have a company that, while its ownership pool is a little wider, could still reasonably make decisions base on its ownership's values - think Hobby Lobby, which is family owned. On the far end of the spectrum, however, we have companies that typically have thousands of shareholders (owners); companies like Apple, whose CEO, Tim Cook, recently said, "We want to leave the world better than we found it." That is certainly a nice soundbite, but according to whose standards? His? Shareholder #213,549? Who decides how Apple makes the world better? Can companies like Apple reasonably reflect the values of all their shareholders (owners)?

Here is my bottom line. I don't think a publicly-traded company can have a values system. Values are a creation of the mind, heart and soul, not an assembly line. Values are human and should always be expressed by humans. Economist Milton Friedman famously said in 1970, "There is one and only one social responsibility of business -- to use its resources and engage in activities designed to increase its profits." Companies should generate their profits, return them to the shareholders and allow the individuals to make decisions about how and what they will support with their profits. Publicly-traded companies that do otherwise are robbing owners of their possessions and their right to determine what those possessions support.  

Publicly-traded companies would do themselves (and their bottom lines) a major favor by refusing to become activists (on either side) and avoiding alienation of potential buyers. This is what they owe their ownership (you). On the other hand, when privately-held (closely-held) companies want to stray into those waters, that is within their rights. After all, they own 100% of the company and assume all the risks of activism. 

I'd love to hear from you. What are your thoughts? 

If corporate activism concerns you, then you should learn what the companies your mutual funds and retirement accounts are supporting. Visit www.StorehouseAdvisors.com to learn the details.