In article >, "Dutch" >
wrote:

> "Ron" > wrote
>
> >> > Those are some, but there are other 'positive outcomes' to the death of
> >> > humans.
> >>
> >> I'm not entirely sure what you're getting at so you'll have to say more
> >> directly what it is that you mean.
> >
> > My existence is the result of the death of others. My professional life
> > allows me to help many, many people.
>
> I don't believe you. You are too stupid to help anyone. You're too stupid to
> be called a "professional".
>
> You are not reluctant to give personal details about yourself when you think
> we'll be impressed.
>
> > Actions that are perceived as
> > socially good. That wouldn't have been possible if there wasn't rape and
> > murder many years ago that caused my grandparent to flee their country
> > of origin. If they hadn't seen women raped and babies caught on
> > bayonettes, they would likely have not made the journey. My mother may
> > not have born. It is unlikely that she would have met my father. When
> > someone thanks me today, I should point out that they ought to be thank
> > the civilians who were killing one another. I wouldn't be helping them
> > otherwise.
>
> That would undoubtedly be beneficial to them, I would not want anyone to be
> "helped" by you.
>
> What you wrote above is convoluted, nihilistic thinking. A violent rape may
> result in the birth of a great person, that does not change the immoral
> nature of a violent rape one iota.

The outcome is certainly different and positive. A person discovers a
cure for cancer for those afflicted and anyone who might otherwise have
it. The person is the product of a woman who is violently raped. I'd say
the "immoral" act has been redeemed. Negative or immoral acts can have
positive or moral outcomes. Unless of course, you think curing cancer
would be immoral.

> Acts just change things, life goes on and
> people survive, this does not alter the morality of the act. If the act had
> NOT occurred an alternate reality would have unfolded that may have been
> much better.

Or much worse!

Your evidence/reasoning of that alternate reality is...

> You have probably decided to withhold help from Tsunami victims because you
> think it would be better if disease sets in and more people die to reduce
> the population. That's not moral bankruptcy, it's moral rationalization.

I think they call that projection.