Jason can report on the trespass and the theft of food and of information. Such reporting does not require him to publish the information itself which was stolen (or even what specific food was stolen, etc). By publishing the stolen information, he aides and abets the trespass and theft of the information. That is NOT…

“How do you go from wandering into an office building and enjoying a free lunch to rape and murder?”

Thank you for demonstrating you don’t understand the meaning of the term “principle”. The principle you advocate is ‘the ends justify the means’. It doesn’t matter HOW you get a story. All that matters is THAT you get…

“Good shit, Jason. I come here to learn everything I can” because it doesn’t matter HOW one learns something. Trespass, theft, rape, murder? Irrelevant. The ends JUSTIFY the means.

Always amazing to see people make such nonchalant appeals to blatant immorality. (But then again, it shouldn’t be - this is, after all,…

“why would anyone report on crimes as if they were news stories.”

Reporting a crime and aiding and abetting the criminal are two different things. When private information is stolen, a crime can be reported ABSENT the publishing of that information. When a woman is raped, a crime can be reported ABSENT the publishing…

“Two thumbs up!” to the principle ‘the ends justify the means’! It doesn’t matter HOW one gets a story. Trespass, theft, rape, murder? Who cares?! Demanding not JUST “paid advertising” means justifying any and all means of getting a story.

Journalistic ethics?! What are those? Morality? Doesn’t matter. All that matters…

PREACH IT! The ends justify the means! Journalistic ethics? What are those? It doesn’t matter HOW one gets the story - trespass, theft, rape, murder - who cares?! Hell, a juicy murder would get them some great free publicity!

Jason has no problem with HOW you get your information. Theft? So long as its for “stories we think are interesting and/or important” the MEANS don’t matter. ONLY the ends matter. The ends JUSTIFY the means.

By Jason’s principle, it wouldn’t matter if a person was MURDERED to get the information. “stories we think are…

Because there’s nothing morally wrong with using the property of another without their consent - nor is there anything morally wrong with stealing the property of another without their consent.

Obviously this means you have NO moral problems with people just using your car or emptying your fridge. After all, they are…

“Really...morally wrong? Come on.”

Its morally right for anybody to enter your house through a window you didn’t happen to lock, talk to your kids, play with your dog, watch your tv, while sneaking food out of your refrigerator for a meal. Hey, he exposed a security weakness and shared all the porn under your bed and…

“the science-hole cover is in a superpositional state of both in space and not in space until it is observed, right”

Exactly. Which is why the title of the story states “No” the cover dis NOT get launched into space, while the story says “probably” the cover did not get launched into space - which is the statement the…

“Except it probably didn’t.”

““Every time the government forces us to give up freedom” IS an “overreach” - because the individual is NOT a slave to the government.”

“I even think, very begrudgingly, that it warrants the curtailing of individual liberty for that overall benefit.”

This is what I have been trying to argue against. This is the claim that the individual is NOT sovereign - that -something- else takes precedent and may dispose of the individual, regardless of that…

“I am not sure what you want me to refute or support at this point.”

“you are quoting yourself as if I said the words”

And attacking people by calling them names (the logical fallacy of ad hom) is easier than trying to be rational. Funny. What’s a word for the person who is not rational? Oh yeah - “crazy”. Thanks for that demonstration of projection by means of banal laziness. :)

“You have no right to knowingly put someone at risk. We have drunk driving laws, we have reckless endangerment laws for that sort of thing.”

Hey calbear - let’s take os at his word here. No individual has the right to knowingly put others at risk by walking around freely (at Disney, at school, at work, at the mall, etc…

“This isn’t about “well, Disney didn’t specifically prohibit unvaccinated people.” This is about the irresponsible parents who didn’t get their kids vaccinated and in doing so, not just put their own kids in danger, their kids gave measles to other kids”

This is a restatement of your original claim. It is not an…

“Because I believe in heavy regulation, you twist that to say that I believe people are slaves”

No. I identify the fact that your argument is that you “believe in heavy regulation”. I do not twist that fact at all. I simply ALSO identify the fact that such “heavy regulation” proceeds from the presumption of guilt and…

“like you’re trying to goad me by twisting my arguments.”

Interesting that you don’t identify even ONE of these supposedly “twisted” arguments (ie straw men) you claim I have attacked.