2 ms·
I see the distinction, but as an important aside ... > these are normative statements, expressing what one expects to be right or moral. As these are based on
by hackuser 10y ago
I see the distinction, but as an important aside ...
> these are normative statements, expressing what one expects to be right or moral. As these are based on belief systems, they may not be convincing to some of us in the forum.
While I respect that people have varying moral beliefs, many much different than mine, I don't believe that morals are infinitely relative and any belief is possible or acceptable. It's sort of the new political correctness, never to discuss morality, assume it, or argue for it. I think there are some pretty universal, natural morals; morals aren't artificial constructs and amoral people aren't normal or common, they are ill and called sociopaths.
Yes, there are among our 7 billion fellow humans some that believe people should be left to die at the hospital door because they can't afford care, but it's so few that I don't have to take them into account. More might argue it theoretically, but if someone was dying in front of them they would be horrified and help.
- jimmywanger 10y ago> Yes, there are among our 7 billion fellow humans some that believe people should be left to die at the hospital door because they can't afford care, Wow, strawman argument much? What if they're dying of an acute cancer that requires a million dollar treament? A treatment that could provide food or medical treatment for thousands of other people? What if they were dying of some incurable disease and would simply take up a hospital bed for no use? You seem to think of costs as floating in a vaccum, rather than a redistributive method for limited resources.