0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Aha! So invasion is an inevitable consequence of third-party attitudes,
and self defence is a matter of choice.
They can choose to flee.
Quote from: hamdani yusuf on 09/05/2022 10:04:27They can choose to flee. Not if they are killed, surrounded and starved, enslaved, or males of military age. What fairyland do you inhabit?
So the civilians currently trapped in the Mariupol steelworks have only themselves to blame? And the soldiers defending themselves are as immoral as the scum attacking them? Get real, HY.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_manA straw man (sometimes written as strawman) is a form of argument and an informal fallacy of having the impression of refuting an argument, whereas the real subject of the argument was not addressed or refuted, but instead replaced with a false one. A common form of setting up such a straw man is by use of the notorious formula "so what you're saying is ... ?", converting the argument to be challenged into an obviously absurd distortion. One who engages in this fallacy is said to be "attacking a straw man".The typical straw man argument creates the illusion of having refuted or defeated an opponent's proposition through the covert replacement of it with a different proposition (i.e., "stand up a straw man") and the subsequent refutation of that false argument ("knock down a straw man") instead of the opponent's proposition. Straw man arguments have been used throughout history in polemical debate, particularly regarding highly charged emotional subjects.
https://www.brainyquote.com/topics/politics-quotesOne of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors. PlatoFreedom isn't free. It shouldn't be a bragging point that 'Oh, I don't get involved in politics,' as if that makes someone cleaner. No, that makes you derelict of duty in a republic. Liars and panderers in government would have a much harder time of it if so many people didn't insist on their right to remain ignorant and blindly agreeable. Bill Maher
Second Amendment, amendment to the Constitution of the United States, adopted in 1791 as part of the Bill of Rights, that provided a constitutional check on congressional power under Article I Section 8 to organize, arm, and discipline the federal militia. The Second Amendment reads, “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
The answer to mass shootings is surely to note that the sole function of an automatic weapon is to kill people, so whenever anyone asks to buy such a weapon, he should be required to list and inform those he intends to kill.
https://edition.cnn.com/2022/06/06/politics/gun-mass-shootings-politicians-poll/index.htmlAs Congress considers, again, the possibility of moving a package of gun control reforms, a number from a new CBS News/YouGov poll jumped out at me as evidence of why solving America's gun violence problem is so hard.It's this: 44% of Republicans said that mass shootings are something we have to accept as part of a free society. (A majority of Republicans -- 56% -- said mass shootings are something we can prevent and stop if we really tried.)That number is a striking departure from how the country as a whole views the issue. More than 7 in 10 Americans (72%) said that mass shootings could be prevented if we really tried, while just 28% said they were part of living in a free society.Consider what those Republicans are saying: There is no policy -- or cultural -- solution to the problem of mass shootings. Instead, it is a necessary evil of living in a free society.
This is a philosophy video lecture that compresses a course that normally takes 15 weeks into just one video. Or really, it only manages to condense half of that course into 22 minutes. What is the morally right thing to do? Is there some moral law that applies to everyone, or is morality relative in some way? And what’s so good about morality anyway? To answer these questions, we read Plato, Aristotle, Hobbes, Hume, Bentham, Locke, Kant, Nietzsche, Nozick, Singer, O’Neill and others. This is an introductory level philosophy course. Students do not need any prior experience with philosophy.For more of my videos: https://www.jeffreykaplan.org/youtube
The test we use in my medical research ethics committee is "would the man on the bus approve if we did it to him?". Clearly the answer depends on whether he is fit and healthy or at death's door, so the concept of true universality is meaningless.
https://twitter.com/evolutionofgods/status/1536201030601699328?t=iABtr52mgWblDcJwFQmMLA&s=03In dark ages people were best guided by religion, as in a pitch-black night a blind man is the best guide; he knows the roads and paths better than a man who can see. When daylight comes, however, it is foolish to use blind old men as guides.'
Suppose I could have prevented the birth of Pol Pot. Serious negative impact on one known conscious being, major benefit to everyone else. Moral or immoral?
Abortion of unwanted pregnancies:moral or immoral?Contraception?Spaying a pet dog?