Who should be sacrificed for the common good?

[shintao]

Workers who work around unsafe conditions?

People who are exposed to carcinogens?

People with respiratory trouble?


Who else should be sacrificed by getting rid of "job killing regulations?" Feel free to suggest your own

Throw in the steel trades, and kick OSHA out the door. We really need to kill off a lot of those loafers walking beams & hanging iron. Just leave your rigging belt in the change shack and hit it.

 

[uscitizen]

Artificially supporting the weak, slow, stupid, old, and sick creates an unnecessary, unsustainable strain on already limited resources and, on the whole, weakens the species.
This is intolerable; The Common Good is best served by severing this support.

then we should end medicare and SS immediately...

Absolutely. The resources wasted here are better used elsewhere.

and abandon our infants to fend for themselves.

Those that are sickly and/or fail to thrive? Certainly. Weed them out.

While what you say is true from an extreme pov...

It is true, period.
The Common Good is best sevred by what is best for the species, by what gives it the best chance to survive. Wasting resources on luxuries such as supporting the weak, sck, etc runs contrary to this and must be stopped.

Umm but do not guns support the weak?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Same rights violated in each case, wildly different sentences. It's about morality.

You are incorrect.
Differing degrees of punishment reflect differing degrees of violation (or the threat thereof) of the right in question, not some subjective decision that one crime is morally worse than others.

That is just a bald faced lie.

On the contrary - it is absolutely correct. This is EXACTLY why, when comparing apples to apples, some crimes have differing degrees of punishment.

It's all about morality.

If you are right, then why aren't all things immoral also illegal?

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

We're now discussing sacrificing people for the collective?

Wow. Just wow.

 

[M14 Shooter]

then we should end medicare and SS immediately...

Absolutely. The resources wasted here are better used elsewhere.

Those that are sickly and/or fail to thrive? Certainly. Weed them out.

While what you say is true from an extreme pov...

It is true, period.
The Common Good is best sevred by what is best for the species, by what gives it the best chance to survive. Wasting resources on luxuries such as supporting the weak, sck, etc runs contrary to this and must be stopped.

Umm but do not guns support the weak?

Is someone artificially supporting the weak by giving them guns?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Apparently you dont have any real argument since you've already gone to personal attacks. Surprise Suprise.

Not at all. If you had actually worked for a living you would know that virtual all work is dangerous if not for workplace safety codes.

That is absolute nonsense.

Using this logic, we should also have the government create homeplace safety codes as clearly, individuals have no incentive to take care of themselves.

True. Many, many more people die of home accidents than they do of workplace incidents.

 

[loosecannon]

Hate crime laws protect ALL Americans.

Really? How does extra-harsh sentencing for killing - for example - a black person protect white people? How does extra-harsh sentencing for killing homosexuals protect straight people?

Sorry, but I've evolved out of the belief that some people are more valuable and important than others. I think the loss of EVERY life should be punished to the maximum extent possible, and ALL harm done to other human beings is heinous and disgusting, regardless of why.

When a black man in the old south was killed as an example to all blacks, fear and hatred was spread to all blacks in the town. The victim of a hate crime is not just the individual but all members of the hated group. It is a more heinous crime and should be punished more severely.

in a word: terrorism

 

[loosecannon]

You are incorrect.
Differing degrees of punishment reflect differing degrees of violation (or the threat thereof) of the right in question, not some subjective decision that one crime is morally worse than others.

That is just a bald faced lie.

On the contrary - it is absolutely correct. This is EXACTLY why, when comparing apples to apples, some crimes have differing degrees of punishment.

It's all about morality.

If you are right, then why aren't all things immoral also illegal?

OK, so why don't we prosecute public officials who don't pay their taxes?

And why don't we prosecute our own immigration laws?

Why are laws on the books ignored?

Dude, you are dead wrong. Sometimes it is morality, sometimes it is politics but the bottom line is that the law is slanted to favor the white, the men and the rich and is slanted to penalize all else.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Hate crime laws protect ALL Americans.

Really? How does extra-harsh sentencing for killing - for example - a black person protect white people? How does extra-harsh sentencing for killing homosexuals protect straight people?

Sorry, but I've evolved out of the belief that some people are more valuable and important than others. I think the loss of EVERY life should be punished to the maximum extent possible, and ALL harm done to other human beings is heinous and disgusting, regardless of why.

Ditto.

Murder is murder no matter the reason.

Beating the shit out of someone is Assault and Battery no matter the reason.

I never could understand why anything is a hate crime.

If I murder you because I hate your guts or I murder you for you wallet your just as fucking dead. Jeeze talk about stupid.

True. The idea, I suppose, is that it's extra-heinous and awful to kill someone "just" because of their skin color or whatever, but when I think about it, it seems just as heinous and awful to end someone's life for the money in his or her wallet. Either way, you're saying that that life has no more value than the petty, trivial (to me, at least) motivation.

 

[loosecannon]

Not at all. If you had actually worked for a living you would know that virtual all work is dangerous if not for workplace safety codes.

That is absolute nonsense.

Using this logic, we should also have the government create homeplace safety codes as clearly, individuals have no incentive to take care of themselves.

True. Many, many more people die of home accidents than they do of workplace incidents.

Thanks, you just PROVED the OP's point!

 

[loosecannon]

True. The idea, I suppose, is that it's extra-heinous and awful to kill someone "just" because of their skin color or whatever, but when I think about it, it seems just as heinous and awful to end someone's life for the money in his or her wallet. Either way, you're saying that that life has no more value than the petty, trivial (to me, at least) motivation.

No, the idea is that hate crimes are terrorism.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Really? How does extra-harsh sentencing for killing - for example - a black person protect white people? How does extra-harsh sentencing for killing homosexuals protect straight people?

Sorry, but I've evolved out of the belief that some people are more valuable and important than others. I think the loss of EVERY life should be punished to the maximum extent possible, and ALL harm done to other human beings is heinous and disgusting, regardless of why.

Ditto.

Murder is murder no matter the reason.

Beating the shit out of someone is Assault and Battery no matter the reason.

I never could understand why anything is a hate crime. Jeeze. Talk about stupid.

John Roll - Judgepedia Warning Graphic Image.

So? That's somehow worse than bashing some granny's head in for her cash? Worse than assaulting and killing someone in a bar because you had a bad a day and got shitfaced? Worse than cutting your husband's brake lines so you can get the insurance money? Is there a way to murder someone that ISN'T sickening and horrible?

 

[loosecannon]

Ditto.

Murder is murder no matter the reason.

Beating the shit out of someone is Assault and Battery no matter the reason.

I never could understand why anything is a hate crime. Jeeze. Talk about stupid.

John Roll - Judgepedia Warning Graphic Image.

So? That's somehow worse than bashing some granny's head in for her cash? Worse than assaulting and killing someone in a bar because you had a bad a day and got shitfaced? Worse than cutting your husband's brake lines so you can get the insurance money? Is there a way to murder someone that ISN'T sickening and horrible?

YES! it is worse than, it is terrorism! It targets a whole race at once not just the immediate victim.

Imagine if women were hung from trees just to keep them "in their place" barefoot, pregnant and subservient to their husband masters.

Imagine if everytime some uppity woman strayed from her second class role that she was made an example for the rest of her sex that she needs to stay in line, OR ELSE.

 

[The Rabbi]

John Roll - Judgepedia Warning Graphic Image.

So? That's somehow worse than bashing some granny's head in for her cash? Worse than assaulting and killing someone in a bar because you had a bad a day and got shitfaced? Worse than cutting your husband's brake lines so you can get the insurance money? Is there a way to murder someone that ISN'T sickening and horrible?

YES! it is worse than, it is terrorism! It targets a whole race at once not just the immediate victim.

Imagine if women were hung from trees just to keep them "in their place" barefoot, pregnant and subservient to their husband masters.

Imagine if everytime some uppity woman strayed from her second class role that she was made an example for the rest of her sex that she needs to stay in line, OR ELSE.

Are you smoking something? That is quite a fantasy you're spinning.
It is not terrorism. It is a crime. Period. Otherwise everything is terrorism because victims of crime always are terrified.
Sheesh.

 

[M14 Shooter]

OK, so why don't we prosecute public officials who don't pay their taxes?
And why don't we prosecute our own immigration laws?
Why are laws on the books ignored?

You ddin't answer my question.

Dude, you are dead wrong.

No. I am -absolutely- right.

"...That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men..."

Governemnt exists to protect/secure the rights of the people, not impose someone's subjective version of morality upon them - imposition of a subjective morality is exactly what the government is NOT supposed to do.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

I'd sacrifice half of this bloated government that we have today for the common good.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Obamacare specifically addresses the 'sacrificing of people for the common good'. Please reference that document.

 

[loosecannon]

OK, so why don't we prosecute public officials who don't pay their taxes?
And why don't we prosecute our own immigration laws?
Why are laws on the books ignored?

You ddin't answer my question.

Dude, you are dead wrong.

No. I am -absolutely- right.

"...That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men..."

Governemnt exists to protect/secure the rights of the people, not impose someone's subjective version of morality upon them - imposition of a subjective morality is exactly what the government is NOT supposed to do.

I didn't answer your question because I had already proven you dead wrong and yet you refuse to admit it.

 

[loosecannon]

So? That's somehow worse than bashing some granny's head in for her cash? Worse than assaulting and killing someone in a bar because you had a bad a day and got shitfaced? Worse than cutting your husband's brake lines so you can get the insurance money? Is there a way to murder someone that ISN'T sickening and horrible?

YES! it is worse than, it is terrorism! It targets a whole race at once not just the immediate victim.

Imagine if women were hung from trees just to keep them "in their place" barefoot, pregnant and subservient to their husband masters.

Imagine if everytime some uppity woman strayed from her second class role that she was made an example for the rest of her sex that she needs to stay in line, OR ELSE.

Are you smoking something? That is quite a fantasy you're spinning.
It is not terrorism. It is a crime. Period. Otherwise everything is terrorism because victims of crime always are terrified.
Sheesh.

I will repeat that for the thinking impaired:

YES! it is worse than, it is terrorism! It targets a whole race at once not just the immediate victim.

Imagine if women were hung from trees just to keep them "in their place" barefoot, pregnant and subservient to their husband masters.

Imagine if everytime some uppity woman strayed from her second class role that she was made an example for the rest of her sex that she needs to stay in line, OR ELSE.

 

[shintao]

So? That's somehow worse than bashing some granny's head in for her cash? Worse than assaulting and killing someone in a bar because you had a bad a day and got shitfaced? Worse than cutting your husband's brake lines so you can get the insurance money? Is there a way to murder someone that ISN'T sickening and horrible?

YES! it is worse than, it is terrorism! It targets a whole race at once not just the immediate victim.

Imagine if women were hung from trees just to keep them "in their place" barefoot, pregnant and subservient to their husband masters.

Imagine if everytime some uppity woman strayed from her second class role that she was made an example for the rest of her sex that she needs to stay in line, OR ELSE.

Are you smoking something? That is quite a fantasy you're spinning.
It is not terrorism. It is a crime. Period. Otherwise everything is terrorism because victims of crime always are terrified.
Sheesh.

The crime has to be committed with the intent to create terror. That is different that robbing a bank for money, where the object is getting the money.