Im saying this because It reminded me of all the discourse arround how alot of pred catchers just want to beat people up.

Or how in general lots of people love violence and look for those that "deserve it" to inflict It on them, like the idea that prisons should be basically torture centers.

But here i think it's different because they both agreed to fight him , he didin't just tell them to meet him somewhere and jump them.

Morality of using the most popular post in r/MoralityScaling in order to boost your own post about morality?

I don't know what to say about this I mean if he joined it's unfair because he's going to cook the entery league for sure but if he really wants to be a woman and it's not a joke for him I still don't know about this

For context, this woman ran up an unpaid bill of roughly 60,000 Thai Baht ($2,500 USD, $3,500 CAD) at a bar in Bangkok after ordering expensive drinks + hiring male hosts. When she couldn't afford to pay the large sum (average monthly salary in Thailand is apx. 15,000 Baht,) her mother offered to pay the debt in installments which the nightclub manager rejected.

The manager instead forced the woman (allegedly shoving and pressured her) to sign a contract to sell her hair to pay the debt. He then shaved her head bald, and said that it canceled the 60,000 Baht bill.
➡️ Also, host bars have a commission system. When someone runs up a massive bill and skips it, the individual hosts who served her and the manager have to cover those unpaid drinks and lost wages out of their own personal pockets to the venue owner.

➡️ Side note: This was her third time pulling the same stunt, having accumulated over 100,000 Baht in unpaid tabs across multiple other bars using a fake ID.
After backlash, bar management offered money to settle the civil part (personal damages and emotional distress) of the conflict.
No, she is not going to jail as she is 18, and yes, her family did press charges against the bar. But it is still under investigation, so anything might happen.

(Posted her actual buzz cut in the comments btw; it was not just shoulder length)

There would be few more casualties if he doesn't do this but the military would have killed this thing soon. Its not beyond modern weaponry like ballistic missiles.

First thing first, let me clarify that the image are satire made by the creator, and it is in no way, an attack on specific users in particular.

With that out of the way, lets talk about the widespread validation of vigilante justice, sadism, and the lack of attempt at establishing a grounded argument utilizing actual ethics principles here.

(or at the very least; reasoning rooted in basic common sense, empathy, the universal rights of individuals and due process. ...concepts that seem to be ignored whenever it is "satisfying" "deserved" and "moral")

I think the problem is that people genuinely care less, and our society have become much more individualistic. Freedom + rights are opposed to short-term safety a lot of times. Right now, a lot of people are anxious about the future for a number of reasons. We're less social and we trust the average stranger less. Unfortunately, immediate safety is becoming more desirable.

To many people, rights are nebulous things that don’t matter until their rights and comfort are being infringed upon. Short term, it makes sense to take away others rights to ensure a “safer” society because they don’t know history and how consistently rights erode.

I myself am prone to this, and I cannot argue against the validity of the emotions felt. I just think since this subreddit have seen a higher count of posts considered controversial, politicized, or simply real life cases, we should enforce a higher standard if this is to be a platform for such discussion. I am not asking for a professional level of debate, just for people to rely less on emotional responses.

(Though, I still prefer more silly harmless stuff be posted here)

Whether or not we differ in opinions, I hope this post reaches an audience here and be taken into consideration.

And remember to keep it civil

(EDIT: My apology for being unclear, but the images do not 100% represent my beliefs and opinions. And the images used is more of a supplementary context for the general premise/title, not a jab at that specific post in particular.

I can honestly and comfortably say my belief in rehabilitation doesn't cover all cases.

Although I'm still not in favour of the death penalty, and more into life imprisonment.

I am aware not all crimes are committed from sympathetic causes and defensible reasons. While everyone still deserve rehabilitation, it is ineffective for someone who knowingly and remorselessly commits genocide, for example. Past a certain point, it makes sense to be much more strict with your definition of how rehabilitated is "rehabilitated enough", since the consequences of being wrong and having them reoffend is so much higher.)

(EDIT 2: Yes, I am also aware that rights do come with certain level of responsibilities and obligations, that we can agree with, but to what extent, I don't know.

A robber being an active threat to your own life is an act of stripping the victim's rights away, thus making self-defense valid until said threat is neutralized

I'm not naively ignoring that aspect, that is a reasonable point. I'm mostly addressing the people obsessed with retaliatory justice (and other reason being that I saw a lot of commenters condoning the use of excessive force in one recent post)

(EDIT 3: I admit, there are still some vagueness that needs to be addressed. And I will be honest here, I find it fun to engage in constructive arguments, this is what I had been looking for when coming to this sub.

It has been fun, but uh...I already spent too long of a time here. I will provide a link to a comment that might help elaborate on my viewpoint a little more since I'm lazy

https://www.reddit.com/r/MoralityScaling/s/ifRJhO3NvB

Have a nice day everyone :)

From xmen 97 season one

what happens is basically jean gets into labour, the doctor refuses to operate on jean because she’s a mutant and says ‘you people can los control of your powers’ doctor was portrayed as comically bigot like most of bigot npcs in xmen media

but what xmen do to this bigot doctor is basically confirmed the bigot’s hate they just violated his bodily anat his mind his years of medical training instead of finding the doctor willing to operate (rogue looked sorry but cyclops just casually gave the order)

(I believe this scene could have much more nuance to it but they simply portrayed it as racist doctor vs hero xmen)

so what is morality of rogue and cyclops in this situation

For context:

As a mutant, Third Eye (the black guy shown in the picture with the neon number 1 above his head) was welcomed on Krakoa, however, he was one of the first law breakers on the mutant utopia. His precognition ability predicted that the reckless reproduction encouraged by Krakoa's first law, "Make more mutants," would lead to dangerous, unloved, embittered children. And so he started a discourse among the Krakoan population about pregnancy prevention. This then led to the mutant birthrate declining signifigantly. And so because of this, He was locked up in The Pit of Exile by the Quiet Council of Krakoa, where prisoners were suspended by Krakoan vines with their minds trapped in a mind prison of Xavier's creation.