“You are mistaking intangibles like integrity for emotions. That says something about you and why you have such a twisted outlook concerning responsibility and basic decency.”
And this isn’t an appeal to emotions?
“If I publish all of the military secrets of the United States - all factually correct - does that mean I have not done something wrong on some level? You would have to say I did nothing wrong because I published “facts”.”
Publishing your country’s military secrets is treason, so I would say it is “wrong”. Publishing a cop’s address is NOT treason or any sort of crime. You may not like it, but that does not make it a crime.
“Your view is unreasonable, unworkable, and stupid. Just because something is “factual” does not mean it should be published. Just because someone has the ability to do a thing doesn’t mean he should.”
Again, full of emotion appeals. Look, if I ran the slimes, I would not publish it. But what slimes does is their prerogative.
Rest of your post is just going on and on. Have a good night.
“And this isn’t an appeal to emotions?”
See what I mean? You think that responsibility and decency are emotions. That’s bizarre. Responsibility and decency are products of reason because they require the use of reason, restraint, self-control and require planning and accountability. A person driven by emotions - like yourself- is much less likely to possess these things than a rational person. You are so far into the emotional life that you can’t even see this.
“Publishing your country’s military secrets is treason,”
Not necessarily - because that would require the intent to aid an enemy. That’s why no one is tried for treason here.
“so I would say it is “wrong”. Publishing a cop’s address is NOT treason or any sort of crime. You may not like it, but that does not make it a crime.”
Not a crime, just a reckless, stupid, wrongful action because it puts a family at risk unnecessarily. My analogy holds. My view is consistent. I am using logic while you are driven purely by emotions.
“Again, full of emotion appeals.”
Nope. Not a single one. Everything I said is purely rational. I made no emotional appeal at all. Are you honestly going to say this rational truth is an emotional appeal: “Just because someone has the ability to do a thing doesn’t mean he should.”
That is a point of logic. Someone has to use forethought and examine actions for potential moral issues. That is all about reason and not at all about emotions. Apparently your part of the poorly educated mass of emotion driven people who actually think conscience is an emotion!
“Look, if I ran the slimes, I would not publish it. But what slimes does is their prerogative.”
Wait. So you would NOT do it? Why not? Aren’t you the one saying it is okay to do it? Now you’re saying it would not be okay for you do it, but okay for someone else. That has all of the illogic of, “I’m personally opposed to abortion, but I wouldn’t want to interfere in someone else’s right to have one.”
“Rest of your post is just going on and on. Have a good night.”
I did have a good night. I hope you have a good day. I hope you learn to put emotions aside and think rationally instead.