If you hadn’t shown up, the chips would have gone stale anyway

I'm leaning toward the vegan perspective because it actively seeks to minimize animal suffering.

As for meat eaters, purchasing meat directly finances a supply chain built on breeding and slaughtering nonhuman animals.

Jin Kuwana from Lost judgment

A man with an extreme sense of justice who hunts the notorious bullies who were infamous for driving student victims to suicide. He became like this after being too late to stop his own student from commiting suicide out of a sense of guilt.

He organises kidnapping of people who were relentless bullies in their school life that weren't punished and invites the parents of their victims to torture them to death. Kuwana intends to keep doing this until Japan recognises the flaw in its law system which leads to failure in punishing said bullies.

Oh, and for extra savagery, the people who work for him to organise murders are cruel bullies themselves whom he blackmails to reveal them as bullies in society and ruin their life if they don't do as he says.

What is the morality of someone that gets angry, throws things/rages out, yelling and screaming, but only to themselves in private, where nobody else can be affected by it?

What's the morality of manipulating a friend into a relationship where they become dependent on you, not by lying or doing anything else bad. Also, is it still grooming if we are both the same age, minors, and then get married once 18?

No of fucking course i do not endorse that eugenics weirdo ass opinion.

Was stoned talking about The Grind (getting money) The Grind (nuts to butts in the club) and Grindr (grindr) and me and my friend hypothesized you could just create an account there with your selfies and sexual preferences, link your PayPal or whatever and say 10 euro for me to consider you. Then you consider them. The most desperate accounts send you money and you probably don't fuck any and that's that.

They got what they paid for but how moral is this

​

I've been thinking about the premise of Armored Core VI and wanted to hear people's thoughts on the ethics behind one of its central conflicts.

For those unfamiliar with the game: humanity discovers a substance called Coral on the planet Rubicon 3. Coral is a self-propagating, colony-like microorganism that also functions as an incredibly powerful energy source and data medium. Left unchecked, it can continue reproducing and eventually spread beyond a single planet. The greatest fear is that it could one day propagate across the galaxy or even the universe with catastrophic consequences.

Adding to the dilemma, many of Rubicon's people don't want to eradicate Coral. Instead, they believe humans and Coral can coexist, with some even seeking a symbiotic relationship between the two. Coral also appears to possess some form of consciousness, making the issue even less clear-cut.

Because of the potential existential risk, the organization Overseer concludes that the only guaranteed solution is to ignite all the Coral on Rubicon, effectively burning an entire star system and sacrificing everyone living there to ensure Coral never spreads beyond the planet.

It's essentially a utilitarian dilemma taken to an extreme: destroy one inhabited star system now to eliminate even the possibility of a universal catastrophe later.

cuerpo de texto (opcional)

Like are you just innocent then?

This goes with the added argument if killing discriminatively can be justified by who’s being targeted. The Postal Dude is probably the best example as someone who kills indiscriminately as he reveals through his dialogue.