> So now, quitting your job (because you're asked to do something unethical) is the equivalent of losing your life and limbs? It's an expression. How about "L

> So now, quitting your job (because you're asked to do something unethical) is the equivalent of losing your life and limbs? It's an expression. How about "Losing your livelyhood." It's a real thing for some people. > Let me guess, you believe all government actions are lawful. All lawful actions are righteous and justified. The only permissible way to change the system is through the system. Did I get the gist of your morality? You're way off on my morality. It's more centered on not causing harm to others, which is what you're suggesting people do, to others that don't fit your sense of morality. > In which case, keep voting and I'm sure you will see the changes you want reflected in legislation just so they can be ignored in by secret courts and intelligence services. In the real world, people respond to threats (e.g prison). That's what the government uses. Why are we expected to behave differently? Do you really think voting or threats are the only two methods to enact change? Neither work particularly well. What does work well is changing the opinion of the majority, and until you do that, you must question whether your minority opinion is actually the correct one, and provide reasons for others to change their opinion of you believe it to be so. Taking the low road and suggesting punishing people who aren't the cause will get you nothing but negative comments on hackernews.