Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

RussBLib

(9,769 posts)
4. situational ethics
Mon Jul 11, 2016, 09:23 AM
Jul 2016

It is a bit hypocritical to slam "states rights" if those states want to prolong slavery or keep minorities from voting, but then turn around and laud "states rights" if those states want to legalize marijuana.

I guess one should look at the end result of the "states rights" argument. If that argument is used to restrict rights of some people, then it should be slammed and disallowed. But if the "states rights" argument is used to expand the rights of all citizens within that state, I really see nothing wrong with it.

So, yeah, I'm all for situational ethics. Sometimes "states rights" sucks, and sometimes "states rights" is a good thing. Depends on what the argument is being used for. Some (not referring to you Mountain Grammy) cannot see the distinction.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Cannabis»Democratic Party platform...»Reply #4