Consequentialism as a philosophical framework is something that I think I've subconsciously leaned towards before I even learned the name of it in a college ethics class. Though I'd describe myself as a pluralist, the idea that an action's consequences heavily determine the ethical evaluation of said action seems very intuitively correct to me.
So it's just odd... reading and watching people mourn someone who is responsible for the election and actions of the current President of the United States.
It's even weirder reading blogs and opinions online claiming this person was just speaking words, weirder still reading blogs where the mask of liberal respectability politics isn't even present and the writer tacitly condones this person's words and actions.
"Lover of Jesus Christ" lmao. Certainly not a lover of his own neighbor. Certainly a lover of the rich, who will never get into the kingdom of heaven. Very christlike of positions to take, for sure.
Anyways that is all to say that liberals never fail to dissapoint in eulogizing the worst people imaginable.
To extend an olive branch though: Mr Kirk should take solace in that he paid that 'worthy' price of "some gun deaths every single year so that we can have the Second Amendment". Maybe his conservative allies can honor his memory and finally release the Epstein files as he would have wanted.
Consequentialism here can kind of do the math for us. A person who was doing everything in his power to make the world a worse place for people different than him, no longer being able to do so, is net-neutral or good :).
Shoutout the sane folk out there posting blogs like this.
_ _ _
Thoughts? Send me an email!
kagumail.uselessly535@passinbox.com
Feel free to remain anonymous and send it from a secure mailer!
