And said drug dealers aren't forcing others to do drugs... Besides, iirc, he's punishing the users as well

He's killing people selling weed... And again, this is all *outside of the legal system* which is a pretty damn bad thing

I'm not defending duterte, I just said I know little about him other than that he kills drugs people and hates God or something

his own words

I've read up on him a fair bit...

I get that you're not defending him, but things are a lot worse than they might seem on the surface

Maybe people should... Stop?

I think if they know what will happen, and are willing to risk their life on it, then it's perfectly fine.

As they made an active decision.

Are we talking about the people doing drugs?

as in, buying them?

If so, I agree.

They know there's a risk - they're willing to risk it - that's perfectly fine.

They're not being forced to.

Nope, and they do it with the full knowledge that they could very well be killed for it.

Oh, the drug dealers?

Okay, so, question.

Should the Philippines outlaw cigarettes?

And kill any tobacco dealers?

If yes, fair. You're consistent at least. If no, why not? Cigarettes are known to be damaging to the health of users.

If they do it with the full knowledge that it could cost them their lives, then yes.

A country is fully allowed to make their own laws.

Why should it have to cost them their life?

Sure, but "being able to" doesn't mean it's moral.

Because they do it with the knowledge that it could.

I presume we're discussing morality in this situation, yes?

And that active choice would lead to it.

Why be racist when you could be duterte

"Why be racist when you could be very racist"

@SilverLining Back to your question about empathy, and this is the problem I have with the argument:

When people say you should look out for foreigners, they say that without realizing people who refuse to do so reject helping them *with the intention* of causing harm to their own people, and believe that flooding their country with migrants that bring crime is going to hurt their own people,

In other words, it assumes a lack of empathy, when there is none, it just manifests itself in a different form

*when there isn't a lack of it

One could argue the neo-liberal open-borders position is the one which lacks empathy, because it's motivated by profit

It's motivated by political gain.

Sure, the neo-liberal open borders position might be profit motivated, but I really doubt most people support open borders/accepting refugees for profit, as most people aren't business owners

A majority of people who support it merely see others in need - others suffering

I misworded that, I forgot to add "and claim you have no empathy towards others", but I;m sure you get it @SilverLining

No, but most people have belongings.

Empathy can be misplaced

And most people have homes.

Besides, this is, of course, neglecting the fact that closed borders actually *helps* profit

Lives that they have built up honestly.