Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Sam Oni's avatar

You can, and should fight for all marginalized individuals. You cannot nitpick human rights.

I cannot be chanting black lives matter, then go home and brutalize my wife, that means I am only interested in black male lives. Similarly I cannot be fervently supporting gender equality and then go on to support discrimination of gay or bisexual women. That means I am only interested in rights of cisgender straight women.

While I can understand the constraint our social norms pose on supporting some of these issues, I find that the best solution is that which is proposed by moral relativism. Which holds that people do, in fact, disagree fundamentally about what is moral, without passing any evaluative or normative judgments about this disagreement. In such disagreements, nobody is objectively right or wrong, and because nobody is right or wrong, everyone ought to tolerate the behavior of others even when large disagreements about morality exist.

Now what about rapists, pedophiles and serial killers? Do we tolerate them too?

No, of course not!

As a disciple of Nietzsche, here is where I introduce yet another philosophical solution called consequentialism. Which holds that the morality of an action (or omission to act) depends solely on its consequences or the intended outcome of said action. In this view, any action which causes human suffering or fails to alleviate it, is immoral. Pedophiles, rapists and serial killers all cause human suffering ipso facto their actions are immoral. Bisexual and gay women & men do not in their regular daily existence seek to cause harm, hence their actions are not immoral and if then subjected to discrimination, we ought to fight for their rights.

Expand full comment

No posts