Is The American Lung Association Truly Evil?

[Toby iVapour]

I don't think it has anything to do with money. I think it's simply the organisation's principles.
.... and with regard to the suppression of information....Would I want information suppressed that could, in my view, prevent a tragic outcome? ... sure, maybe... that comes under 'doing the wrong thing for the right reasons' it's a dangerous game but morally I don't think it's out of the question.

Their principles are flawed ethics... (and they don't even have a bad religion to back it up)
And in a desire to suppress information, they are facilitating a tragic outcome...
.. so it comes under 'doing the wrong thing for the wrong reasons'...

 

[zouzounaki]

I don't think it has anything to do with money. I think it's simply the organisation's principles.

.... and with regard to the suppression of information....Would I want information suppressed that could, in my view, prevent a tragic outcome? ... sure, maybe... that comes under 'doing the wrong thing for the right reasons' it's a dangerous game but morally I don't think it's out of the question.

aye, i don’t really have a view on what their motivation is to be honest as i don’t really know anything about them. but my point is only that even in the worst case scenario, still they aren’t evil.

they have a view about ecigs that is at odds with ours. so for some this means they can only be disingenuous, evil, however else we would choose to describe them, rather than entertaining the possibility that they are acting in good faith and we just have a fundamental disagreement about the subject in question.

 

[Rickster]

aye, i don’t really have a view on what their motivation is to be honest as i don’t really know anything about them. but my point is only that even in the worst case scenario, still they aren’t evil.

they have a view about ecigs that is at odds with ours. so for some this means they can only be disingenuous, evil, however else we would choose to describe them, rather than entertaining the possibility that they are acting in good faith and we just have a fundamental disagreement about the subject in question.

Sometimes using "pure evil" is a debate endgame....that bastard Ian Brady was pure evil...so I think in Grimms mind this was endgame for him.

 

[zouzounaki]

Sometimes using "pure evil" is a debate endgame....that bastard Ian Brady was pure evil...so I think in Grimms mind this was endgame for him.

i get you, but still i think “evil” is a lazy way to write off depraved and morally corrupt or otherwise unacceptable behaviour as somehow a kind of consequence of fate, or supernatural or whatever. load of pish.

but you are probably right that the american bloke here is playing a game and has chosen his words carefully. he should have just said they’re a shower of cunts

 

[Simon G]

Their principles are flawed ethics... (and they don't even have a bad religion to back it up)
And in a desire to suppress information, they are facilitating a tragic outcome...
.. so it comes under 'doing the wrong thing for the wrong reasons'...

It might be flawed, but they believe it's unethical to do anything that would encourage non-smokers to start vaping. We don't have to agree with that but I don't think it's a completely prosperous position to have when you are the American Lung Association. To them a tragic outcome would be thousands of kids starting to vape. We could certainly make a better counter argument to that than saying they are evil and they want people to start smoking instead. Especially when you are in a position like Grim.

 

[vapervince]

I dont even read this bollocks any more, it`s just yanks being yanks reference president donald trump ... c`mon.