Humans generally don't consider active and passive moral actions in the same way. Killing someone and standing by while someone dies is for example viewed differently, even if the outcome is the same.
I think the main difference between getting vaccinated, and drunk driving lies in this difference. Not getting vaccinated is a passive action because you are not actually doing anything. Driving under the influence is an active action.
There are many psychological studies that have looked into this. The trolley problem is one of the most famous if you are interested.
C0ntr013r
JoinedPosts by C0ntr013r
-
154
Logical Fallacy… can I get some help here?
by DATA-DOG indr. leanna wen is currently spreading the fallacy that unvaccinated persons should have vaccines mandated because they are like drunk drivers… they have the right to be drunk at home she says, but wanting to be part of society at large without being vaccinated is like driving drunk and putting others at risk.
besides ignoring the science proving that persons who have had sars cov-2 have natural immunity that equals or exceeds anything that could be imparted from the mrna shot, without the side effects or need for boosters, ( sorry big pharma, you’ll be losing $$$ ) this illustration just smacks of illogical reasoning.
it reminds me of the borg comparing getting baptized to getting your driver’s license.
-
-
C0ntr013r
-
5
"How Did You Come to the Conclusion That Your God Is Moral If You Can't Make a Moral Judgement."
by WeatherLover ini love the atheist experience show on youtube!
i just re-watched this video and it's one of my favorites.. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=mlakj_z_cgk.
-
-
C0ntr013r
Even if we buy the premiss 'that God decides what is moral', It turns into an infinite regress. What objective standard is god using; what objective standard is the thing based upon that god is using etc...
And if the answer is 'logic' or 'pragmatism', then why do we need God for morality?
Where did God get his morals? Why is Gods opinions on morality better than mine? Or is he always right because he is God? (circular reasoning)
Also, I don't agree with atheists that believe in objective morality.
-
-
-
C0ntr013r
Original video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-uBpGbZraw -
-
-
C0ntr013r
Hm, I think I can see the resemblance... xD
-
19
Hello again
by BlackWolf inhello everyone, it's been a while since i've posted anything on here so i thought i might give an update.
next month i turn 18 and my mom is constantly berating me about getting baptized, so much so that my siblings have even told her to stop.
ive just been flat out telling her no which i know is irritating her.
-
-
C0ntr013r
You may or may not want to do what I did since it might not work in your situation, but I had a discussion about shunning someone who is unbaptized with my relatives. And I managed to get them to agree with my position.
The argument goes something like:
Do you think that people should have religious freedom?
No:
Does not God want us to serve him of our own free volition?
(They should agree with this)
Yes:
So am I free to make a decision about what I want to believe?
No:
Same argument as previous question
Yes:
"But if you don't choose God we wont have anything to do with you"
Am I truly free to choose to believe what I want if you are threatening me with the loss of my family? Would Jehovah want me to serve him because you are threatening to disown me?
I was brought up in this religion with no choice and if I am free to believe what I want, then I should get a free choice without any punishment.
My relatives agreed with this line of reasoning, so you could try it if you find yourself in a potential shunning situation.
However it might be more potent to just assume this is the case without a discussion and take the angle:
I have been thinking a lot about this and I have come to the decision that I can't prove that this is the truth to my self. Thank you for letting me have my own opinions and choose my own path.
Not sure which one is better or if either of them would work for you, I can only tell you what worked for me.
Another tip that might backfire but thankfully worked for me, is to have them ask the elders and hopefully they will tell your parents that they need not shun you. (there is no JW doctrine requiring them to do so)
My aunt went to the elders and asked if she could associate with me and they told her that it was fine as long as I don't try to unwitness to her, hehe :P (I had unwitnesses a little once in a while, so she was worried she might have to stop speaking with me)
However, this could backfire if they tell your parents not to have contact with you...
Best of luck regardless of how you choose to play it! :)
-
25
Raising kids in a split faith household
by rathernotsay inhi guys, don't know if this is the right place to ask but id like to hear other peoples experiences with raising kids in a household with split faiths.
just for a bit of a back story, my wife and i have been married for comming up 6 years.
we have 3 kids, 2 boys aged 5 and 3 and a 8 week old girl.
-
-
C0ntr013r
Statistically there is a 66.66% chance that they will not be JWs as adults. The odds are in your favor.
Not very reassuring since he has 3 children, that would mean 2 get out and 1 stay..
-
11
Reminder about how posting limits work
by Simon inbecause some people still seem to struggle with the concept.. posting limits suck for normal posters and in an ideal world we could do without them but they do serve some useful purpose:.
they limit the impact of any spammers inundating the site.. the prevent people with too much time and no self-filter from completely taking over and / or trying to use the forum as a live-chat system.. they are a useful throttle for anyone behaving badly (i.e.
where an outright banning would be inappropriate).. normal posting limits are very rigid in that when you hit them, the post that you possibly spent a long time working on is gone (unless you saved it first).
-
-
C0ntr013r
So that is whyThanks for the explanation Simon
-
85
My letter to Bethel about the flood
by Cornbread ini've decided to go full public with a new username on this forum.
it's been almost a decade since i've been out and i don't care at this point who knows.
that being said, here's a letter that i'm mailing to bethel.
-
-
C0ntr013r
Ginko tree is millions of years old and survived the extinction of the dinosuars....guess Noah had a garden on board.
Funny but sadly false, the oldest Ginko tree is about 1250 years old, you are probably thinking about the age of the fossils.
-
42
Evolution is a Fact #10 - Non-Coding DNA
by cofty inevery cell in your body contains a big book of how to build another you.. although it's approximately 3 billion letters long only a small fraction of it contains instructions on making humans.. imagine trying to use a workshop manual but it reads like somebody messed up at the publishers.
there are a few paragraphs of meaningful text followed by pages of gibberish, another page or so of useful instructions then 9 more of random words.
some of it looks like copies of original text but full of typing errors.
-
-
C0ntr013r
Obviously the amount of energy required for cell duplication with a large genome is so small that it doesn't amount to a selection pressure. Perhaps there is an upper limit but evenonions with their gigantic genomes ten times as large as humans haven't reached it yet.
That could be it.
I was thinking that with DNA being 250g of the body weight and a hand weighting between 250g - 500g the impact would be big enough, but you might be right.
How would a mechanism work that could distinguish between useful and DNA and random copying errors?
Natural selection? The individuals with "random copying errors" die and the once "with useful and DNA" procreate. But as you said, maybe the selective pressure is to smal.
Your quote doesn't show that. What criteria?
I was referring to: 1 useless piece sucking energy. 2 random changes within DNA naturally accruing.
In my mind that is all that is needed for change.
A new aspect I just thought of:
If we have varying amounts of "bloat code" within different species, would that not indicate that something is going on? With billions more or less of the base pairs, if all code was copied all the time, would not all species living now have billions of base pairs? Also, the more something has evolved, would that not indicate more "bloat code" in a human than say a trilobite and so on?
-
42
Evolution is a Fact #10 - Non-Coding DNA
by cofty inevery cell in your body contains a big book of how to build another you.. although it's approximately 3 billion letters long only a small fraction of it contains instructions on making humans.. imagine trying to use a workshop manual but it reads like somebody messed up at the publishers.
there are a few paragraphs of meaningful text followed by pages of gibberish, another page or so of useful instructions then 9 more of random words.
some of it looks like copies of original text but full of typing errors.
-
-
C0ntr013r
No there really does not seem to be any mechanism for editing "bloat code" unless it has a deleterious effect.
From what I understand, that would not be required. Individuals born with less "bloat code" would have an edge over the other members of their spices since they would need slight less energy to survive during their lifetime.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directional_selection
Whether or not it contributes to the phenotype is not important as long as it is in a genome alongside genes that do build bodies.
Could not a speciation or mutation within a species have reduced "bloat code"?
In biology, a mutation is a permanent alteration of the nucleotide sequence of the genome of an organism, virus, orextrachromosomal DNA or other genetic elements. Mutations result from damage to DNA which is not repaired, errors in the process of replication, or from the insertion or deletion of segments of DNA by mobile genetic elements.[1][2][3]Mutations may or may not produce discernible changes in the observable characteristics (phenotype) of an organism. Mutations play a part in both normal and abnormal biological processes including: evolution, cancer, and the development of the immune system, including junctional diversity.
To me it looks like all the criteria are filled for the "junk" to slowly vanish.
Can you explain in more detail?
Thank you for your responds! :)