Don't forget raped repeatedly. Even if there's no women or children among them, the media narrative is that at least half of them are. Either they have to admit they are all fighting age males or they don't care about women and children being raped.
The humane solution would be to sink the human traffickers before they load up. Forcing half a dozen traitors to swim to the Libyan shore would be an ironic punishment.
But I don't think that you understand what I mean. As far as I can understand, you interpret it as a 'the ends justify the means', but I actually mean it as a deterrent strategy. Having a lot of abortions does not actually deter unwanted pregnancies, indeed, it might do less to deincentivize them. But if migrants know that they won't be picked up by human smuggler helpers when they traverse the Mediterranean on leaky boats, they will stop coming, and that will end the problem.
Whether abortions are justified to prevent future suffering depends on your view of the moral status of the embryo/fetus.
In medical emergencies triage may require you to allow people to die to save the most lives possible with the resources on hand. The only difference is active/passive involvement.
But if you believe the solution to the trolly problem is to actively change tracks, then you could consider AoV's solution humane if it causes less total deaths.
I wouldn't say that protecting your border is murder. But let's assume that it is. I'm merely remarking on the irony that something that is supposedly 'inhumane' would lead to the most humane outcome, namely invaders not coming and not dying in leaky vessels.
Unironically, that would be the humane solution. That'd stop them coming and dying in decrepit vessels.
Don't forget raped repeatedly. Even if there's no women or children among them, the media narrative is that at least half of them are. Either they have to admit they are all fighting age males or they don't care about women and children being raped.
They care as much about that as they do about the grooming gangs, or the girls raped when crossing the US border.
Rape is only bad when they can use it to take down someone they don't like.
It's never about them. We know "they" are a lost cause; it's about making them more obviously evil to normies.
imagine mistaking the Great Pan-Afrikan Celebration Success Rape Orgy tribal ritual for mere rape... what racists!
The humane solution would be to sink the human traffickers before they load up. Forcing half a dozen traitors to swim to the Libyan shore would be an ironic punishment.
That's like defending abortion as humane because it avoids all the child's future sufferings.
Pretty sure babies don't come from another country and consciously choose to invade someone's womb.
You can't deter babies from existing by making examples of them, but societal leeches on the other hand...
Unborn babies aren't making a decision to invade someone else's land.
I do defend abortion with this logic though.
Upvoted for challenging a popular view.
But I don't think that you understand what I mean. As far as I can understand, you interpret it as a 'the ends justify the means', but I actually mean it as a deterrent strategy. Having a lot of abortions does not actually deter unwanted pregnancies, indeed, it might do less to deincentivize them. But if migrants know that they won't be picked up by human smuggler helpers when they traverse the Mediterranean on leaky boats, they will stop coming, and that will end the problem.
Whether abortions are justified to prevent future suffering depends on your view of the moral status of the embryo/fetus.
I'm just against calling murder humane.
In medical emergencies triage may require you to allow people to die to save the most lives possible with the resources on hand. The only difference is active/passive involvement.
But if you believe the solution to the trolly problem is to actively change tracks, then you could consider AoV's solution humane if it causes less total deaths.
I wouldn't say that protecting your border is murder. But let's assume that it is. I'm merely remarking on the irony that something that is supposedly 'inhumane' would lead to the most humane outcome, namely invaders not coming and not dying in leaky vessels.
You are purposely mixing things together.
That's the point of analogies.
Your analogy must contain a correspondence or partial similarity, "yours" had none and thus isn't an analogy.