EU will restrict visas for states not taking back migrants

[Mayhem]

No, law =/= ethics. The laws are unethical if they force you to spend your resources on saving people who have put themselves in harms way, or face penalties.

You still have an ethical obligation to help people in need. Of course as you're from a different culture your ethics might differ from ours.

[Freighter]

How are your resources more important than the life of someone else?

Complete strangers have no right to my resources. Maybe you don't value property? I know I do.

[Protean]

Complete strangers have no right to my resources. Maybe you don't value property? I know I do.

Things > people
Sounds pretty degenerate. Not to mention completely morally bankrupt.



Edit: actually, to elaborate

You're entitled to that opinion. Since there aren't any wrong feelings. But don't dare try to peddle it as either normal or ethical. It's neither.

[Freighter]

Things > people
Sounds pretty degenerate. Not to mention completely ethically bankrupt.

Believing people to be obligated to spend their resources on complete strangers is, yeah. Even more so if they put themselves in harms way through their own stupidity.

[Protean]

Believing people to be obligated to spend their resources on complete strangers is, yeah.

Absolutely yes. They're just things, and if they were your things you can be reimbursed by people who aren't obsessed with lifeless objects over human lives. But we aren't even talking about your things, we're talking about resources that belongs to the state.

A state/country which is expected to uphold the highest possible moral standards. If not, there's nothing separating it from the countries the refugees flee from.



Again I'd like to state: you believe the resources of the state are more important than the immediate rescue of starving / dehydrated / children, who cannot in any way be held responsible for the situation in which they're in. Because they bring kids on those boats, you know?

[Deleted]

Things > people
Sounds pretty degenerate. Not to mention completely morally bankrupt.



Edit: actually, to elaborate

You're entitled to that opinion. Since there aren't any wrong feelings. But don't dare try to peddle it as either normal or ethical. It's neither.

Our own people's wellbeing is way more important than wellbeing of strangers that try to enter our land by force. The government's first and foremost obligation is to serve their own people.

It's not things > people, its our rights > their rights, at least on our land. Our safety > their wishes.

[Freighter]

Absolutely yes. They're just things, and if they were your things you can be reimbursed by people who aren't obsessed with lifeless objects over human lives. But we aren't even talking about your things, we're talking about resources that belongs to the state.

So?

A state/country which is expected to uphold the highest possible moral standards. If not, there's nothing separating it from the countries the refugees flee from.

Moral standards differ. Shocking, I know. Morality is not universal. We're also not talking about refugees in this topic so I don't know why you bring up refugees.

Again I'd like to state: you believe the resources of the state are more important than the immediate rescue of starving / dehydrated / children, who cannot in any way be held responsible for the situation in which they're in. Because they bring kids on those boats, you know?

I do not care if they have kids on the boats or not, kids are not inherently more valuable than an adult nor are they more worthy of protection than an adult.

[Protean]

Our own people's wellbeing is way more important than wellbeing of strangers that try to enter our land by force. The government's first and foremost obligation is to serve their own people.

It's not things > people, its our rights > their rights, at least on our land. Our safety > their wishes.

And we're specifically discussing the rescue of people in boats sitting off the shore. Not letting them stay in your country and handing them money.

So?


Moral standards differ. Shocking, I know.



I do not care if they have kids on the boats or not, kids are not inherently more valuable than an adult.

We're discussing the ethics here, remember? It's not about value, it's about them never having responsibility for the situation in which they're in. And letting children die just because you disagree with their parents' decision is not ethical.

[Freighter]

We're discussing the ethics here, remember? It's not about value, it's about them never having responsibility for the situation in which they're in. And letting children die just because you disagree with their parents' decision is not ethical.

Yes, it is exactly about value. Why would you save something just for the sake of saving it? To be considered good? That's just fucked up and is not how the world should be functioning.

[Deleted]

And we're specifically discussing the rescue of people in boats sitting off the shore. Not letting them stay in your country and handing them money.

If they made it one way, they might as well use the boat on the way back.

[Deleted]

If they made it one way, they might as well use the boat on the way back.

Actually, they can't. They are dumped by the smugglers on lifeboats (sometimes they even throw people overboards, including pregnants and babies) in the middle of the Mediterranean.

That's what we need to stop, the human smugglers that promise a king's life in Europe in exchange of 1000-2000 dollars.

[Freighter]

Actually, they can't. They are dumped by the smugglers on lifeboats in the middle of the Mediterranean.

They should stop using the smugglers if they care about living.

That's what we need to stop, the human smugglers that promise a king's life in Europe in exchange of 1000-2000 dollars.

Why do you place no responsibility on those who use their services?

[Deleted]

They should stop using the smugglers if they care about living.

Well, thank you Captain Obvious. It doesn't change the fact that people are tricked and then forced by the smugglers.

[Deleted]

So?


Moral standards differ. Shocking, I know. Morality is not universal. We're also not talking about refugees in this topic so I don't know why you bring up refugees.



I do not care if they have kids on the boats or not, kids are not inherently more valuable than an adult nor are they more worthy of protection than an adult.

Could you spout your xenophobic nonsense somewhere else, please?

[Alexeht]

Finally something is happening! We should sanction the hell out of those countries!

I think it is still too late.

[Freighter]

Could you spout your xenophobic nonsense somewhere else, please?

I think you do not understand what xenophobia means if you think I'm spouting xenophobic nonsense.

- - - Updated - - -

Well, thank you Captain Obvious. It doesn't change the fact that people are tricked and then forced by the smugglers.

Why do they have no responsibility themselves?

[Deleted]

Why do they have no responsibility themselves?

Victim shaming, how nice. Lets shame the women and the slaves that are also victims of human trafficking.

[Freighter]

Victim shaming, how nice. Lets shame the women and the slaves that are also victims of human trafficking.

They're the ones seeking them out, they should be obtaining as much information as they can rather than just take them at their word. Why should they not be considered responsible for the situation they put themselves in?

[Deleted]

They're the ones seeking them out, they should be obtaining as much information as they can rather than just take them at their word.

Do you really live inside a first world bubble?

[Freighter]

Do you really live inside a first world bubble?

What? That makes no sense as a response to my post. We live in 2017, pretty much everyone can access internet in present time world, there's no excuse to not to do that instead of taking smugglers at their word.