Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
RE: The Moral Obligation to Choose the Lesser Evil
September 21, 2020 at 1:05 pm
(September 20, 2020 at 9:54 am)Anomalocaris Wrote:
If you don’t vote for the lesser of two evils, your decision does make you culpable for the greater of two evils should that prevail because that was implicitly condoned, if not facilitated By your action. If your Untreatable cancer stricken mother could die in pain or die painlessly, not doing anything to alleviate her pain because dying with and without pain are both very bad makes you responsible for her pain.
If you vote for the lesser of two evils, youR decision does not make you culpable for that level of evil because given only two practical choices, that is the lowest feasible amount of evil. If your untreatable cancer stricken mother could die in pain or die painlessly, doing something to alleviate her main does not make you responsible for her dying because she would die anyway.
To say I would rather that greater evil prevail so I can say “I am not responsible for the lesser evil” make me no less evil, but even more contemptible, than those openly seeking to bring about the greater of the two evils.
This is as elementary and transparent as “breathing is good”. I find it quite likely most of those who obfuscates by claiming as you do are Not doing this out of confusion. Rather, they are sympathetic to the greater evil And wish It not be stopped, but Also wish to avoid the disapprobation that would accompany a forthright admission. This is why Contemptible closet trumpers like online biker so readily resort to exaggerate the lesser of two evils in order to Set the stage to defend the greater of the two evils with a moronic tu quoque, while pretending to be above it both.
I'm not really obfuscating anything. I'm advocating FOR voting, I plan on voting. I was commenting that if your only "practical choice" is between the lesser of two evils then you can't deny culpability for contributing to the evils of society by choosing the lesser. You can't sugar coat it and say "Well it's not as bad as xxx" unless the benefits outweigh the evils. I was also commenting that as the candidates get worse and worse, maybe people will wake up to the fact there are actually more than 2 choices and that the lesser of two evils does not benefit society any more.
OFC, all this implies, that our choice matters, that people are empowered to change their created institutions from the bottom up, or thatthe pile of shit steamrolling downhill can actually be slowed.
"There ought to be a term that would designate those who actually follow the teachings of Jesus, since the word 'Christian' has been largely divorced from those teachings, and so polluted by fundamentalists that it has come to connote their polar opposite: intolerance, vindictive hatred, and bigotry." -- Philip Stater, Huffington Post
always working on cleaning my windows- me regarding Johari