117
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] optissima@lemmy.world -5 points 1 month ago

That act in itself is ethically neutral.

Why are you implying that legality has any impact on the ethics of the situation?

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago

That act in itself is ethically neutral.

What makes you the arbiter of what is ethical?

Why are you implying that legality has any impact on the ethics of the situation?

I'm not.

[-] optissima@lemmy.world -2 points 1 month ago

You just asked me for the answer, so in this case, you! Your second sentence does imply that you are, as the "not even X, let alone Y" implies that to reach Y you must pass X.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago

Please answer the question: Why is it ethically neutral to intentionally expose a child (he wasn't passing by, he found out it happened and drove there with his daughter) to such things on a day-to-day basis?

[-] optissima@lemmy.world -4 points 1 month ago

Its not my onus to answer that, that's akin to trying to prove a negative. As the one making the claim, you are supposed to try to prove it. How is exposure to a whale carcass unethical?

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago

Because exposing children to traumatic things can cause psychological issues and watching someone carve up a whale with a chainsaw is pretty damn traumatic for a normal child.

Let me guess: "Prove that it's traumatic."

[-] optissima@lemmy.world -2 points 1 month ago

Nope, it's pointing out that you're moving goalposts.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago

You asked my why it was unethical. I told you. What goalpost did I move?

[-] FrostyTheDoo@lemmy.world -2 points 1 month ago

What makes you the arbiter of what is ethical?

Aren't you the one that asked if it was ethical? Did you not want an answer?

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago

Sure. Why is it "ethically neutral" to expose a child to such things on a regular basis? Again, this was supposedly a day-to-day occurrence.

[-] brennesel@discuss.tchncs.de 5 points 1 month ago

Although legality and ethics do not always coincide, they often influence each other. Many laws are based on ethical principles, such as the protection of human rights, wildlife, or the environment. They reflect a societal consensus that actions that violate these principles are both unethical and should be illegal.

In this case, RFK Jr. most likely violated several laws like the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) and the Endangered Species Act (ESA) which make it illegal to disturb, remove, or possess any part of a whale, even if it's dead, without a permit. This is not "normal" behavior.

this post was submitted on 26 Aug 2024
117 points (98.3% liked)

Political Weirdos

694 readers
663 users here now

A community dedicated to the weirdest people involved in politics.

founded 2 months ago
MODERATORS