| ▲ | ceejayoz 6 hours ago | |||||||
It means you’re deliberately killing people, but indirectly enough it can’t be prosecuted. Fucking with vaccines kills people. Getting rid of USAID kills people. Selling cigarettes kills people. But none of these are crimes. Some of them probably should be. | ||||||||
| ▲ | j16sdiz 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] | |||||||
It's not the same for an individual choice vs government choice. Individual different is real. Law of large number is true only for large number. Until you can claim omniscience, I don't think we should make an individual responsible for a "statistical" crime for one individual. Government policy, on the other hand, ... | ||||||||
| ||||||||
| ▲ | cityofdelusion 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | |||||||
There is no way to have enough nuance for this to actually mean anything. If I drive my child in a small car instead of a massive truck, is this statistical negligence? Or driving at all, very likely the most dangerous thing people do daily. What about the trees outside my home and their hundred pound limbs — if one breaks it will almost certainly be fatal. But many people accept that death is inevitable and minimizing the chance of it isn’t worth doing. Society also speaks out both sides of its mouth — why does an infant refused a vaccine constitute murder but 11 days earlier in the womb its life had no value? The world has a lot of things it needs to figure out with all this stuff. Blanket statements just aren’t very valuable IMO. | ||||||||
| ||||||||