You don’t have to be able to do anything, just say you’re going to and then demonize the other side when they push back

Then give in immediately while feigning effort to make yourself look good

look guys, we shouldn't worry about being factually correct when we're being *morally right*

and of course to get to their protests they drive their gas powered vehicles wearing their clothes made in other countries transported using fossil fuels so they can buy them

Of course, AOC doesn't seem to understand that being truthful is as morally right as you can get

There was a great article I think Shapiro wrote it where he outlines how being factually incorrect can't be morally right

I might have to disagree with Ben on that (wouldn't be the first time lol) @I Know a Fat Guy

well I don't agree all the time with him either. However I don't see how you can be factually incorrect yet still be morally right....I mean if your facts are wrong how can your conclusion be correct?

I think there are some exceptions to that idea. I can picture many instances where lying about reality might be a more moral option over a fact of reality. But, its not something i would want to do often (maybe if at all).

I can see that on a small scale....say interpersonal relationships.....but on a national scale? ehhhhhhh

Lets go with a big scale, crazy idea. If a meteor were to be on its way to hit the earth, one that could kill most if not all of us, and only the government knew about, or made anyone else who watches the stars knew about it but made them keep quite (this isn't likely, but just tossing out the idea).
If there was nothing we could do about it, would it be morally good or bad to tell everyone. I think i might argue to keep it a secret and lie.

well there is a difference between not saying anything and lying. Take your example. Keep it quiet sure. If asked about the meteor then tell the truth. People are going to find out. I just see the fine line between that and the NSA spying when they lied to congress. Factually incorrect but thought he was morally right.

In my example, its not possible for anyone to find out (outside of the few that already know). But ya, i think we understand, some things are difficult to grade on a scale of whats More moral.

How do you know that the meteor impact is not preventable if you don‘t get input from everyone who might have an idea on how to stop it? If you don‘t say something you might not hear from the one guy that actually would have a plan that works because of his experience in something absurd that you would not even consider to be relevant like... plumbing... or something.

I‘m all all for zero carbon emissions as long as i‘m not the guy that has to kill all the cows.

@I AM ERROR Chelyabinsk meteor?

Who saw it before enter the atmosphere?

How you prevent it?

Lying is never moral. It may sometimes be EXCUSABLE or UNDERSTANDABLE, but never moral.

The purpose of moral philosophy or theology is to give us standard operating procedures for when shit hits the fan.

90% of my time in the military and 99.9% of my tens of thousands of (well spent) martial arts training were about that.

Seeing as the former prevented any of my own troops from dieing and the latter has saved my life on at least five occasions, I consider this preparation well spent

YMMV of course. Many people have a high-k approach to life

@DroneHost the premise was the the government knows but lies about it. If they are not aware of it it does not matter if you see it before it enters the athmosphere

The premise was also about it not being possible to do anything about it, not like some action movie where we find the one guy with and idea to save us all. But i also said, i was just tossing out a fast crazy premise, if i took time i could make it far more concrete. @I AM ERROR

You never know that it is not possible to do anything about it if you don‘t ask everyone if they have an idea.

Tunnel vision is a thing after all.

But in general: there are very few, if any, instances where you can be morally right while being factually incorrect.

None of those instances include advocating for socialism.

Quick question is it kneck or neck

Neck

Ken

Kek

Thank you

I had to prove a teenager wrong

Whats kneck?

Lol. Glad we could help with that difficult task! Teenagers know everything!

Man, like Blonde, Ann Coulter can sure be annoying at times.

Coulter is intentionally annoying. It's part of her schtick

Ya, i know. But it works better when she is right, its harder to stand when she is wrong (or just misguided).
But thankfully, i don't follow her much.

I find Blonde way more palatable than Anne Coulter.