195
196

Pardon Ross Ulbricht (change.org)

justbeyourselfman が 投稿

並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A
あなたは単独のコメントのスレッドを見ています。

残りのコメントをみる →

[–]justusranvier -4ポイント-3ポイント  (13子コメント)

Facilitating the transaction of ILLEGAL goods.

Do you also condemn the criminals who hid Anne Frank's family from the LEGAL authorities?

[–]HitMePat 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

Are you implying that murder for hire should be legal?

[–]justusranvier 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

ILLEGAL goods

murder for hire

Move those goalposts...

[–]ReelBIgFisk 1ポイント2ポイント  (5子コメント)

Holy shit you did not just compare Ross fucking Ulbricht to Anne Frank.

[–]tatertatertatertot 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

No. He compared Anne Frank to illegal drugs, actually!

[–]gr8b8m8ir88_8 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

Well, they both kept diaries...

[–]justusranvier 0ポイント1ポイント  (2子コメント)

That is correct. I did not compare them.

If you read a bit more carefully, you might be able to see what I am actually comparing.

[–]etchalon 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

You're comparing a family who bravely hid a family human beings who would be slaughtered by a tyrannical regime, under threat death, with someone who made it so kids could buy some MDMA for Bonoroo.

[–]ReelBIgFisk -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

Oh thank god, for a second I thought he was completely and totally fucked in the head. Thankfully he's just mostly fucked in the head.

[–]cmwillis02G -1ポイント0ポイント  (1子コメント)

No, but frankly that is a silly comparison. The Nazi's were a fascist totalitarian government who had by that point invaded multiple countries, started a world war, and were perpetuating genocide on a startling scale. Ross was selling drugs for profit.

I would concede that the question of morality vs legality is a tremendously complex question that is always difficult to answer. This comparison however (Protecting a group of people from mass robbery and genocide v. selling drugs for MILLIONS of dollars in profits) is willfully ignorant and useless in this context.

[–]justusranvier 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

I would concede that the question of morality vs legality is a tremendously complex question that is always difficult to answer.

No, it really isn't.

A lot of people have a vested interest in preventing the answer to that question from being widely known, so they do their best to obfuscate and distract, but it really isn't a hard question at all.

Ethics in one sentence: the only valid moral rules are rules that apply universally.

Anything proposed rule that can not be applied universally can not be a valid ethical principle.

The obvious simplicity of ethics is an enormous problem for people whose paychecks, pensions, and world views depend on ethically invalid institutions, so naturally they do their best to make sure as few people as possible obtain this understanding.

[–]tatertatertatertot -1ポイント0ポイント  (1子コメント)

Do you also condemn the criminals who hid Anne Frank's family from the LEGAL authorities?

I don't equate Anne Frank with heroin.

[–]justusranvier 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

The problem is that you equate law with morality.

That's legal positivism and it's one of the most destructive forces in the world, as a simple historical example illustrates.