the Ethical line...

In everything you do, there's always an ethical line we're recommended not to overstep. Question is, how do you determine where the ethical line is drawn.. And who decides it?

It's been a couple of years since i joined the NGO circle. I joined it for many reasons. First being to be able to do something substantial in effort to relieve pain and suffering. And the biggest reason out of my many other reasons, is to run away as far as i can from office politics.

It's a life changing sad fact that no matter where you go, as long as you are not your own boss of a less than 2 men company, there is no such thing is the absence of office politics. It's human nature to be competitive, and some more than the others which breeds politics.. WHat is then ethical beneath the lines of the competitiveness.

Is sending out hate mails ethical? Is talking about the mistreatment you receive from one party ethical? Is it still ethical if the party suffers a reputation slap because you have divulged some disturbing facts about them which concerns issues of them being wrong and unethical in the first place?Is it ethical, considering the public or counterparts deserve to know the hidden agendas and cover-ups they have so often done to save their skins. Will it then be be considered unethical to share what is perceived as private and confidential data of the party with the stakeholders even though it is lawfully and certainly unethical to keep it from them in the first place?

I swear i have never been more confused than i ever have been. My crucial question is, am i unconsciously being unethical for saving the skins of others while have my skin burned for the sake of being ethical?

Do you even get what i mean??