Serious statement: I don't understand the argument that not voting for Harris was the morally correct thing to do, because of Gaza. Why does anyone believe this?
And I'm being serious. I feel like there might be an argument there, I just don't understand it. Can someone please "steelman" that argument for me?
Morals and ethics are subjective and based on emotions. That's why science doesn't say what's good or bad. I don't think you can prove or disprove this argument. People who are strongly focused on Gaza simply reject views that challenge their own.
its arguable but not without merit. its very much the same as you don’t negotiate with terrorists. honestly its disgusting that we are questioning morals of not endorsing genocide instead of demanding aipac and dnc to be investigated for war crimes and defrauding its members for the 3rd election in a row.
That’s a somewhat skewed lens to view it through, as not everyone agrees that what we’re seeing is a genocide. I definitely don’t think it is. I’m open to hearing arguments to the contrary, but so far, everyone I’ve tried discussing it with either gets emotionally captured or doesn’t argue honestly and in good faith, so the discussion goes nowhere.
i don’t know if i can help someone who is ignoring the obvious here which is being echoed by un and every major humanitarian org. if your just objecting from legal pov rather than moral then maybe go through the case prepared by south africa.
copy pasting some links from earlier discussions below on the moral and intent side of things which is based on the what they are themselves acknowledging or rather bragging.
this pos had already killed someone in westbank in front of his kids and wife before oct 7. anyone really believes idf full of slime like this aren’t murdering civilians even kids the moment they see them ?