• Jerkface (any/all)@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    Whether something is moral or ethical doesn’t depend on the commercial benefit you can derive from it! What the actual fuck!!

      • catdog@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        Yes, thank you for clarifying this.

        Not sure why anyone would assume monetary/commercial benefit here.

        • Jerkface (any/all)@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 hours ago

          Do you think dairy farmers eat their 100lbs wheels of cheese? It’s the same thing.

          In either case, you’re talking about harm reduction when it is so trivial to eliminate harm. It is in fact EASIER. But your attachment to the fruits of abuse won’t let you see it that way, and you’re looking for ways to make your abuse more emotionally palatable.

          Treating a vulnerable individual as a means instead of as an end is fundamentally wrong. No amount of benefit to you short of saving your life can make it morally acceptable. In a famine we have to make hard choices and sometimes we have to sacrifice others. That’s not the situation right now. We grow more food each year than humanity could eat in two years without harvesting any vulnerable individuals.

          • catdog@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 hours ago

            I will repeat myself: Perfect is the enemy of good. In my opinion, you’re spending your finite attention arguing with the wrong person.