• @SelfProgrammed
      link
      302 months ago

      At this point, it feels less “morally allowed” and more “morally required” that we defend ourselves.

    • Kalkaline
      link
      fedilink
      13
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      If you cook the rich over a wood burning fire, it would be a net savings in carbon emissions, hypothetically speaking.

      • qupada
        link
        fedilink
        42 months ago

        My cauldron uses an induction stove powered by renewable energy.

        Braised in wine, the way they’re accustomed to. Attempting to roast the rich doesn’t achieve a great result.

    • NaevaTheRat [she/her]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      72 months ago

      Here is how ethics works:

      • if I push a boulder on you I’m a murderer
      • if I push a boulder that squashes you but on the way down the hill it grinds some flour your death is an externality and I am industrious.

      Since we are in the latter case, it is not self defense. Too bad, so sad.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      72 months ago

      Usually but because it’s the environment then you would get labeled as a terrorist instead of being able to claim self defense. Sorry it looks like the corporations were more forward thinking and got some laws passed to label anything trying to protect the environment is now eco-terrorism.

      Only kinda /s

    • JaggedRobotPubes
      link
      English
      22 months ago

      Yes.

      It’s going to take the courts awhile to catch up.