4 ms·

Except that there are plenty of countries that don't do this and are secular. Christianity and Islam is used as an excuse to perform all sorts of horrors, so i

Except that there are plenty of countries that don't do this and are secular. Christianity and Islam is used as an excuse to perform all sorts of horrors, so it's almost like it has absolutely nothing to do with that, and far more on providing incentives for people that align with not being a complete asshole.

rayiner 2y ago
There’s lots of putatively secular countries where people simply adhere to Christian morality without calling it that are acknowledging Jesus. What constitutes “being a complete asshole?” Starting from secular first principles, what’s the argument that people shouldn’t be happy a wealthy CEO of a company that people perceive does a lot of harm got assassinated?
- happymellon 2y ago
  Considering I'm watching the US tear itself apart in the name of Christianity, I have no idea what you are on about. You literally have women dying daily due to poor healthcare driven by religious ideology.
  - rayiner 2y ago
    Incorrect, but you’re changing the subject. Help me work through how secular morality handles the assassination of a CEO of a widely hated company.
    - happymellon 2y ago
      Subject didn't change, you just don't seem to understand the scope of your own question as there are many facets. I will try and answer it from my perspective of my own secular country which is difficult as we don't do that sort of thing. 1. In terms of murder, we would prosecute the murderer as life is precious. 2. In terms of preventing the same actions from happening again, there was uproar when shootings did happen here so we restricted gun ownership. The issue you have here is that it isn't just a widely hated company. It is a company that is probably related to 10-20k preventable deaths a year. This isn't being viewed through the scope of the assassination of a widely hated company CEO so your question is wrong which is the reason you don't get it. This is a man that presided over the deaths of many people for the seeking of profit. He was CEO for 3 years and the discussion shows that he was well aware of the damage he was causing society. Your morally bankrupt Christians haven't been calling for universal health coverage. How would a Christian society handle the murder of a man who knowingly took the money of 60k people and then proceeded to kill them?
- happymellon 2y ago
  > Starting from secular first principles, what’s the argument that people shouldn’t be happy a wealthy CEO of a company that people perceive does a lot of harm This should not exist. We have government to look after the people, why do you have a CEO in this position in the first place? If a medical professional determines that the person needs attention, then the company should not deny it. It has been deemed necessary by medical professional. Secular is not the same as "always generating money", and if this is not a money making business them it should be covered by cooperatives. But that only would need to happen if your government is far too corrupt to do the correct thing and look after its people.
  - rayiner 2y ago
    You’re punting on the actual question. No government will catch every bad company. What’s the morality of assassinating their CEOs? And you seem to be drawing a moral distinction between public and private sector that doesn’t make sense. In any system where you have a large number of people paying for the healthcare of a smaller number of people, you need someone to make decisions about what is covered and what isn’t. You’re simply advocating placing that decision making power in a different private actors: a doctor, who has his own interests and motivations. Doctors aren’t any more moral than anyone else. (We demonize the opioid companies, but hundreds of thousands of doctors prescribed those drugs, many receiving benefits to themselves for doing so.) Nobody gives doctors that much power over spending decisions, including in countries with socialized medicine. Those countries make coverage decision through bureaucratic processes just like private insurance companies do. But that’s raises an interesting point. There’s lots of public sector organizations that do tremendous harm through bad decisions. Many American urban school districts receive more funding than affluent suburban districts, but generate atrocious outcomes. They create a classroom to prison pipeline that chokes lives in the crib. What would secular morality say about assassinating their executives?
- immibis 2y ago
  There's no need to keep using weasel words. We *know* his company does a lot of harm. We can estimate it directly killed at least hundreds of thousands of people.

rayiner 2y ago

There’s lots of putatively secular countries where people simply adhere to Christian morality without calling it that are acknowledging Jesus. What constitutes “being a complete asshole?” Starting from secular first principles, what’s the argument that people shouldn’t be happy a wealthy CEO of a company that people perceive does a lot of harm got assassinated?

happymellon 2y ago
Considering I'm watching the US tear itself apart in the name of Christianity, I have no idea what you are on about. You literally have women dying daily due to poor healthcare driven by religious ideology.
- rayiner 2y ago
  Incorrect, but you’re changing the subject. Help me work through how secular morality handles the assassination of a CEO of a widely hated company.
  - happymellon 2y ago
    Subject didn't change, you just don't seem to understand the scope of your own question as there are many facets. I will try and answer it from my perspective of my own secular country which is difficult as we don't do that sort of thing. 1. In terms of murder, we would prosecute the murderer as life is precious. 2. In terms of preventing the same actions from happening again, there was uproar when shootings did happen here so we restricted gun ownership. The issue you have here is that it isn't just a widely hated company. It is a company that is probably related to 10-20k preventable deaths a year. This isn't being viewed through the scope of the assassination of a widely hated company CEO so your question is wrong which is the reason you don't get it. This is a man that presided over the deaths of many people for the seeking of profit. He was CEO for 3 years and the discussion shows that he was well aware of the damage he was causing society. Your morally bankrupt Christians haven't been calling for universal health coverage. How would a Christian society handle the murder of a man who knowingly took the money of 60k people and then proceeded to kill them?
happymellon 2y ago
> Starting from secular first principles, what’s the argument that people shouldn’t be happy a wealthy CEO of a company that people perceive does a lot of harm This should not exist. We have government to look after the people, why do you have a CEO in this position in the first place? If a medical professional determines that the person needs attention, then the company should not deny it. It has been deemed necessary by medical professional. Secular is not the same as "always generating money", and if this is not a money making business them it should be covered by cooperatives. But that only would need to happen if your government is far too corrupt to do the correct thing and look after its people.
- rayiner 2y ago
  You’re punting on the actual question. No government will catch every bad company. What’s the morality of assassinating their CEOs? And you seem to be drawing a moral distinction between public and private sector that doesn’t make sense. In any system where you have a large number of people paying for the healthcare of a smaller number of people, you need someone to make decisions about what is covered and what isn’t. You’re simply advocating placing that decision making power in a different private actors: a doctor, who has his own interests and motivations. Doctors aren’t any more moral than anyone else. (We demonize the opioid companies, but hundreds of thousands of doctors prescribed those drugs, many receiving benefits to themselves for doing so.) Nobody gives doctors that much power over spending decisions, including in countries with socialized medicine. Those countries make coverage decision through bureaucratic processes just like private insurance companies do. But that’s raises an interesting point. There’s lots of public sector organizations that do tremendous harm through bad decisions. Many American urban school districts receive more funding than affluent suburban districts, but generate atrocious outcomes. They create a classroom to prison pipeline that chokes lives in the crib. What would secular morality say about assassinating their executives?
immibis 2y ago
There's no need to keep using weasel words. We *know* his company does a lot of harm. We can estimate it directly killed at least hundreds of thousands of people.