this post was submitted on 26 Aug 2024
114 points (97.5% liked)

Political Weirdos

729 readers
57 users here now

A community dedicated to the weirdest people involved in politics.

founded 3 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago (8 children)

That act in itself is ethically neutral.

What makes you the arbiter of what is ethical?

Why are you implying that legality has any impact on the ethics of the situation?

I'm not.

[–] optissima@lemmy.world -2 points 2 months ago (5 children)

You just asked me for the answer, so in this case, you! Your second sentence does imply that you are, as the "not even X, let alone Y" implies that to reach Y you must pass X.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago (4 children)

Please answer the question: Why is it ethically neutral to intentionally expose a child (he wasn't passing by, he found out it happened and drove there with his daughter) to such things on a day-to-day basis?

[–] optissima@lemmy.world -4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Its not my onus to answer that, that's akin to trying to prove a negative. As the one making the claim, you are supposed to try to prove it. How is exposure to a whale carcass unethical?

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Because exposing children to traumatic things can cause psychological issues and watching someone carve up a whale with a chainsaw is pretty damn traumatic for a normal child.

Let me guess: "Prove that it's traumatic."

[–] optissima@lemmy.world -2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Nope, it's pointing out that you're moving goalposts.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

You asked my why it was unethical. I told you. What goalpost did I move?

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)