|
|
|
|
|
by GregarianChild
2002 days ago
|
|
Could you elaborate by which moral principle you come to the
conclusion that a vague slippery slope and even more vague outrage
is more important than stopping a pandemic with hundreds of thousands
of preventable deaths? Most moral systems of my acquantance are based on a hierachy of values
that puts saving human lives over just about anything. |
|
False. While not explicitly stated there is a threshold usually measurable in money spent after which saving life is considered of being "not worth it". Ford Pinto case that went through the courts I think can serve as a very good particular example where cost analysis made it legal to allow otherwise preventable deaths.