Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

DirtyOldPanties OP t1_j05n6sf wrote

Reply to comment by Vainti in Objective Moral Values: Basic Human Needs by DirtyOldPanties

I think you're projecting a bit if you associate the word parasite with the disabled or children dying of cancer.

1

Vainti t1_j05vksh wrote

The article describes a dichotomy between those who are productive and parasites. If you think this author believes children with cancer and the disabled are productive, I have no idea how you came to that conclusion since the article seemed to only describe productivity in terms of being paid or maintaining self sufficiency. Why do you think this author would say a kid with a mortal case of cancer isn’t a parasite?

1

DirtyOldPanties OP t1_j05wowl wrote

I think the distinction is one of choice and the capacity to support oneself. If a person is capable of supporting themselves they'd have a moral responsibility to do so.

1

Vainti t1_j06dyp6 wrote

I don’t believe you can square the use of parasite with a concern for that entity’s agency. It’s like trying to trust a person who says, “I don’t hate Jews because of their genetics; I call them rats because of the choices they’ve made.” Even if I grant that you don’t condemn people for being unproductive through no fault of their own, this parasite rhetoric still evokes imagery of hate toward desperate victims (like drug addicts and the mentally ill). It’s not like the people you’re calling parasites are benefiting from their behavior. They need rehabilitation and community more than condemnation.

1