>____ is moral when it doesn’t hurt anybody!
>____ is moral when it doesnt hurt anybody!
Falling into your wing while paragliding is called 'gift wrapping' and turns you into a dirt torpedo pic.twitter.com/oQFKsVISkI— Mental Videos (@MentalVids) March 15, 2023
>t. vaxxoid scum
correct. this is why morality doesn't exist
yeah I'm honestly getting tired of the whole "Why do you care about ____ ? It isn't hurting anyone! (physically)"
MAPs are litteraly hurting people so wrong example.
Anyone can be a murder. You don’t go treating everyone like a murderer for someone they haven’t done. The same goes for MAPS, a term that only describes their orientation and not actions.
I would be inclined to believe you if not for the fact that these people litteraly defend the idea of doing said actions. I think it would not be dereasonable to consider people saying they will commit a crime as "potentially dangerous"
What about those who fap to chinese cartoons?
Fictional depictions are fine. If one criminalizes certain artistic depictions, it suggests that the fiction is tangibly real, consequently requiring the world to acknowledge that imaginary friends and non-binaries genderfags are real.
Sorry, I meant NOMAPs
Moralty and reprecussions are dependent on how much power you have.
You set up a one man protest and the other side has WAY more backing and they assault you? The cops wont do shit because you're just one guy.
Court systems work this way too. There is no justice only how much power/capital you have.
The more people you have on your side the more "right" you are.
You're a handsome serial killer? Lighter sentence and adoration from the public. Handsomeness displays power and health. Ugly? You might as well receive the worst torture and sentence possible.
>only repercussions determine what is moral
You’re a psycho, clinically
>everything is corrupt because the more people that you convince, the more legitimate you are
Are people supposed to support things that are unconvincing? That’s backwards
Self righteous fedora tipper, sole cope is that he (thinks that he) knows better than everyone around him
>I have no argument therefore hat
you must be at least 18 to post here
You can be morality in the right even if historians write you down as the bad guy after you lost
The brainlet is so fucking based, holy fucking shit. He has brain damage caused by a major skull fracture and still is more intelligent than OP.
>uses the vulgar word “fucking” as an intensifier in an attempt to strengthen his dull “humorous” ad hominem
>He says about a post responding to a dull "humorous" ad hominem.
>dull “humorous” ad hominem = ____ is moral when it doesn’t hurt anybody!
It’s not an ad hominem. With all due respect, you’re just an over-sensitive defensive bitchboy. Noah fence.
>>____ is moral when it doesn’t hurt anybody!
This is literally true regardless of what ethical system you follow. the problem is that bugmen use this when they mean "immediate harm" and not any harm.
Two guys fucking has no immediate harm to me but it has harm on society since it has no benefits and only harms like aids.
>____ is moral when i say it is.