Johnseal

Immoral is a challenging idea in this regard. If society deems it immoral, likely it’s immoral. However, just because society says something is immoral doesn’t always work on every case. For example: A woman who must do sexual acts in order to earn her freedom? Would you say that in itself is immoral? Or perhaps there’s a self sacrifice that must be done in order to provide for others. It’s challenging to say. Namely it comes down to the person and the society. If that person acts justly and does what would be “right” in their eyes then it’s in their favor. Objectivity is blurred in this question. Which makes it a great idea.

The question that obesity is a disease, to me, is a bit too short for context. Do I believe that obesity in itself is a disease? No. Does obesity cause diseases? Absolutely yes. Cigarettes themselves are not a disease. They can however lead to lung disease. Likewise we don’t immediately look at skinny person and think they have a disease because of their lack of weight. We simply classify them as skinny. Same applies to obesity in my opinion. We don’t look at people and automatically claim they have a disease. So I guess what I’m saying is the figure of speech ‘obesity’ historically isn’t used to classify those with a medical condition. Rather the term is used to categorize the appearance of people.

This makes sense. I don’t believe blaming others (I.e. you’re becoming obese and therefore it’s your fault) is the correct stance. Rather a disclaimer, such as found on tobacco products, is suffice. Society shouldn’t blame smokers nor should it blame those who are obese. A collective recognition of the repercussions will suffice. On an economic standpoint, it is not societies fault nor responsibility to afterwards “give way” for those who had reasonable notice of the choices they were making. Society should aim to incentivize individual health mentally and physically by simple promotion of treating one’s body kindly and fairly.

I agree that colleges are overpriced. I believe there should be regulation to check them. I do not believe you should get a free ride. You agreed to pay for a service. The bank issued you a loan for the service. You must pay back what you voluntarily agreed too. It is not the peoples responsibility to bail you out because you choose to pay for a service.

Morality is the source of happiness.
Epictetus’s work on a stoic life is predominantly around the topic of happiness and morality. Happiness can only come from within. The happiness you create must come from your fulfillment of your own moral duty. The best part about that is it’s up to you to determine what a moral life is. It’s up to you to determine what a good moral person should and would do. You act in accordance with your morals regardless of the external outcomes. You should never compromise yourself and thus by resisting the worlds external events you create happiness and tranquility within. Morals support the foundation of happiness.

We hunt for food. It’s cheaper and keeps the white tail deer population within limits. Far too many cars and too many deer.. you can put two and two together. From a fatherly standpoint, I feel more comfortable feeding my family something I know is natural with no extra ingredients.

Lots of people I know have tattoos, I have tattoos, friends and family have piercings. There is however a limit. Different jobs require a different person. What is acceptable in one place isn’t acceptable at another. Namely excessive piercings and tattoos on the face are distracting. Yes, distracting. Certain jobs want a company represented in a certain fashion. This means they don’t want the wrong image. While we believe this is wrong to discriminate because it has nothing to do with one’s performance, it is still a factor and always will be. So long as people judge by the clothes we wear, they will almost certainly judge your body alterations

My mom is a great listener. My girlfriend not so much sometimes. I don’t think either gender is better or worse. I do believe in the laws of effective speech.. know your audience and delivery.

I cannot justify strapping explosives to children and then claiming there is an eternal reward for killing a child in a such a fashion. Such things in my mind have no place amongst the civilized nations

Stealing is never right, nor is it morally acceptable. Becoming resourceful and using your ability to get food in a legal way (especially here in the US) should be very reasonable. To allow others to steal because they’re entitled to it opens the door to other issues. What else are they entitled too? Why not continue to take what you didn’t work for? I regard this question in same light as homeless in the US. It is a choice. With all the programs and people who genuinely wish to help, there is no reason to lower yourself to becoming a thief.

This question is loaded…if equality isn’t enough, then you tip the odds into another’s favor. That in itself is inequality because now your giving advantages the opposite wouldn’t have.
Equality as it is written, makes everyone equal. As society should be. Everyone is born in different circumstances. But ideally, by merit and work, you could eventually reach a higher status. A society that allows the rising of ranks for any person is an equal society. But not everyone gets to start at the same rank.

As someone has already mentioned, the state should have no business in the private affairs of citizens. That being said, if the state were to recognize such affairs , then naturally tax considerations will come into effect. Someone who was claiming against Poly relationship brought the point of destabilizing western society. In my thoughts, the destabilization comes from a much deeper rooted problem than poly marriage. Rather, we should be focused on individual liberties, but that’s a different conversation.

That is simply not true. The prime animal in testing being rats have a very similar biological structure to humans. That being said, many new groundbreaking experiments must be first analyzed and prove ground. A potential life saving treatment may come with a cost. So while a human life could be spared we do so at the expense of animals. As someone who person suffers from CKD a numerous amount of studies have undergone on rats to prove that kidney function was improved. However, had the treatment in question gone wrong a human life could’ve died at the expense of researchers.
In reality this question boils down to: is it more humane to use animals for testing or human subjects.

You are entitled to however you see yourself. It’s the one thing you are given in this world. While it’s your right to use what you prefer, to expect others to follow through with your personal view will most definitely disappoint you. However, regardless of what others do or don’t do, it’s again solely your decision.