People here are happy to rally behind this person for something that is ethically identical to what Kim Davis did when she refused to issue same-sex marriage licenses.
There’s a consensus that not infecting people with diseases that might kill them is ethically bad and there’s no similar ethical consensus for the issue of same-sex marriage licenses.
Here the issue is trading of ethical values for the profit of a particular company. That qualitatively different then trading of different ethical values against each other.
It’s hard for my to understand how you think that’s identical.
I think the common ideas of ethics is that the kind of personal reasons matter a great deal.
By your standards stealing something from a stranger (whom you are told not to interact with) because you are greedy is ethically identical to giving them a gift because you feel generous as both are personal reasons.
The fact that there are communities with strange ethics, in no way implies that our rationalist community shouldn’t have it’s resoned ethical norms. We also aren’t the work peers of the OP.
-
There’s a consensus that not infecting people with diseases that might kill them is ethically bad and there’s no similar ethical consensus for the issue of same-sex marriage licenses.
Here the issue is trading of ethical values for the profit of a particular company. That qualitatively different then trading of different ethical values against each other.
It’s hard for my to understand how you think that’s identical.
-
I think the common ideas of ethics is that the kind of personal reasons matter a great deal.
By your standards stealing something from a stranger (whom you are told not to interact with) because you are greedy is ethically identical to giving them a gift because you feel generous as both are personal reasons.
-
The fact that there are communities with strange ethics, in no way implies that our rationalist community shouldn’t have it’s resoned ethical norms. We also aren’t the work peers of the OP.
-