It isn't for your or I to determine if something is worthwhile just because it's not a public need. - ADreamOfLiberty
#47
I'm not sure I agree, but will think on it.
If they are not ashamed and you cannot give objective reasons why they should be, then they are not degenerates. ADreamOfLiberty
#47
I'm a nihilist, 'I think 'all reasons are subjective, including cannibalism or killing.
But being human, care and react as though they 'are objective.
I argue,
If I view wearing polka dots as morally wrong,
Then the people who wear them 'are degenerates,
And I myself to them,
In my not wearing or disliking of polka dots.
Your reply on the illegal existence of X, reminds me of a question someone made on Youtube, and my reply,
Of why do people choose to pick up policies that 'increase the number of unsafe X.
I think,
(A1) Fear of allowing X to become Normalized in society
I'm not sure that it is always so clear cut though,
If I get asked to vote on a measure banning X, I might say yes, we should ban that,
But then the lawmakers have excessively harsh laws, that don't fit the crime,
And I'm like what the f*** lawmakers?
But then if I vote 'no, I don't want to ban that, one worries about society becoming acclimated to the now not banned substance or practice.
It can be hard for a society to kick a habit once it is ingrained, take alcohol or slavery as examples.
So I often end up voting yes, ban that X,
Even though I hate how the lawmakers go about it.
Take marijuana as an example, I 'Really don't think legalizing it, 'decreased how many and much people use it.
Though the government had c** idiotic laws in 'how they approached the banning of it, I think.
(B1) Participation
People sometimes find it hateful to participate in an action they abhor, even if legalizing it might decrease it.
Though one might argue one 'still participates if they ban it, I don't think that's how people look at it.
Though if X is banned, it may still see people partake in it, but they feel they are doing their best to dissuade them from an evil action.
The banner may view it as 'those people's choice to do wrong,
Whilst if I 'allow it, lawfully, it then also becomes 'my choice, by my saying yes it is allowed.
My second brother still does drugs such as meth on occasion, but he does it far less, than if he was not urine tested, and reminded of the requirements for him living with us.
. . .Banning him from using certain drugs, 'can result in worse situations, where he is homeless, less happy, scared, abused by others, higher chance of death. Such 'has been his way of life in some moments of the past,
But to 'allow him to use drugs? To enable and participate in his degradation through enabling? Horrible to us.
'Even if the outcome is better for him using meth at home with family, than using meth while homeless.
That tough love 'eventually worked for us, for now.
But the point of (B1), is how I think people sometimes see voting to allow some X, as their own participation in the action.
(C1) Deontological Ethics vs Consequentialism in number or depth of Occurrence
For some people, allowing abortion means 'acquiescing to the murder of an unborn.
If some bandits come to my village, and demand a single person as sacrifice every 10 years,
We may lose 100 villagers fighting, but it is better than 'sacrificing one of our villagers.
We 'clearly lose more villagers through the fight option,
Even though part of the reason for our action is not wanting to lose someone,
Part of our motivation is the 'action itself,
We do not want to 'Sacrifice one of our own, even if it means 100 die, the action of them dying is different.
. . . , , , Though I suppose they are sacrificing themselves in a way, they are sacrificing themselves to 'fight an outside evil,
Not sacrificing themselves to 'submit to an outside evil.
Though 'banning other people from an action, isn't them self sacrificing,
Anti Abortion people often value the unborn, the unborn lacking the ability to make their own choice, perhaps Anti Abortion people think it better that they are sacrificed attempting not to be sacrificed,
Than sacrificed in acquiescing to (In the Anti Abortionists view perhaps) the outside evil bandits.
Given these discrepancies I must conclude that it is more normalcy bias than some kind of coherent collectivist mindset, and they would thus still lose the argument. - ADreamOfLiberty
#47
Can't always win an argument if you don't convince the judges.
