Is it moral to vote out of state repeatedly in order to stack a pole to get a secular result?

 

Interesting discussion - 

 

The pole isn't particularly important in the bigger scheme of things - and it would seem that repeated voting isn't illegal - the site is perhaps designed - like most things in our society - to be an honesty based system.

 

The organisers would perhaps organise a different way to do it - but perhaps it isn't an issue to vote repeatedly.  If it was there would be some way of registration or cookies - which there doesn't seem to be.

 

It could be set up like big brother or other reality tv voting systems where you can vote as many times as you wish.

 

Why get all 'holier than thou' about it?

 

I think we need to use our rational thinking in this case - go through the facts of the case, before condemning others of immoral actions.  What's wrong with some reasoning - rather than public shaming?

 

I'm for the Naturalistic attitude of compassion due to our deterministic universe.

Views: 21

Replies to This Discussion

Gaming this system is not outside my ethical system, for if any system placed upon us leads, through tyranny of the majority, to unethical actions that break the laws of the land, then its rules are unjust.  Following unjust rules makes me no more ethical than not. 

You keep saying I'm compromising my ethics, but I'm telling you I don't see it that way.  I'd rather not just call it an impasse', but you seem stuck on following the rules for the sake of the rules here, and I'm not sure why.  You've clearly stated elsewhere that you understand that sometimes it is more ethical to break rules than follow them.  I take it then, in this case you disagree with breaking rules for the sake of the public and my own personal ethics?

What is an "athiest"? I'm athi, he's athier, she's athiest?

Sorry, didn't see this discussion before I commented on the main thread. This was my thoughts.

 

Whoever started the whole process obviously meant for out of staters to vote. It's like a porn company going online getting people to click the box marked "I'm over 18". They know darn well who's watching their stuff.

If they wanted ONLY people from Ohio to vote they knew darn well how to make sure only Ohio residents vote. This would be the only way to get people from outside of state to vote, yet wash their hands of legal responsibility.

Further more, there is only one reason they do online polls such as this...to make it look more popular than it is. Idol shows love to brag how 10s of million people vote, when in reality only a fraction do. In this case, being that the states is such a strong christian nation, the people who set this all up are expecting christians from all over the nation to vote, so they in turn can brag "see how we're such good christians here in Ohio?" It's the nature of and how online popularity voting works.

And as far as the "honour system" goes...on the internet? Do you really think anyone (including the ones who proposed this) really thinks that would be a possibility? Just being realistic...

There has been lots of claims this way and that - it would be interesting to know the facts of the case.

 

Richard claims that the facts are that this is a closed pole for only those living in the state and that they only are allowed 1 vote each.

 

Whereas it is possible for anyone to vote on the pole from around the world - put any number into the zip code box and vote as many times as they wish without deleting cookies or restarting their computer.

 

So what is the 'ethical' thing to do?

 

Are all players doing the same?

 

Are there a bunch of religious folk who are 'stacking' the vote towards the leading sticker with the word - god - on the sticker?

Richard I wonder if you are going to get off your high horse and treat me like an equal?

I felt frustrated when you posted before, because I need more understanding about what you were expressing.  Morals and values are a personal interest of mine at the moment.  I wasn't schooled on them as a child - as such - although I think I had a lot of subtle indoctrination of them - which wasn't always useful - I was controlled using fear, guilt and shame - which I resented at the time and felt angry about later.  I dont' profess to be either reasonable or ethical - and if you think that makes me a lesser person - I'd like to understand why - because I feel hurt when told I am a lesser person because I need equal respect with other humans.  I see everyone as fully caused in their actions including myself - and so when I do regret things that I've said or done, I forgive myself as I forgive others the same.

 

I am very willing to address your points one by one - although so much is said that I have addressed the points most pressing to me personally - please put a point forward that you wish me to address?

 

After an upbringing that didn't include the words moral, and only included the word ethics in terms of what adults do when at work - it is a new topic for me - and I hadn't thought much on the matter until reading Harris' book the moral landscape a few weeks ago.  So I'm interested to understand more.

 

Also I have a question for you - a question of moral actions:

 

Yesterday my kids asked me to buy them chocolate biscuits at the shops.  I did although I don't often buy them sweet things.  Later that evening our 4 year old asked for one - we have been having trouble with him eating properly at dinner - so we said that he could have one once he ate his dinner.  He didn't, and so we left the biscuits unopened on the shelf for another day.  The next day my 4 year old asked again for a biscuit.  I said yes, so long as he ate all his eggs on toast.  He did and so I got the biscuits down.  They had been opened.  I suspected that my husband and 9 year old had had one the night before.  I asked my 9 year old if he had already had one.  He said no.  I didn't believe him and asked him again and asked him to be honest with me.  He said no repeatedly.  He's not one to lie - so I left it and gave them all a biscuit.  It's important to me that I am fare with all my children - so that they feel fairly treated and I hope it reduced sibling rivalry, arguments and hurt feelings.  Later I asked my husband if they had indeed had the biscuits - he said they had both had one and that he had told our 9 year old not to tell the younger children.  When I had ask my 9 year old it had been in front of the other children.

 

So what next?  What is the moral thing to do in this situation?  Should the 9 year old be told off for lying?  Was it OK to lie, because he was keeping a promise he made to his father?  Was it morally wrong for my husband to tell him not to tell his siblings?  Have I acted in a morally wrong way in this situation?

 

I'm really curious to hear your views - given your claims to superior* moral and ethical standing based on your readings on the matter.

 

* Said with tongue in cheek...

We seem to have been caught in a playing the man and not the ball .....

Ethics are not based upon whether or not you find other people also in violation.

 

Actually they can be.  Ethically we can't lock people in prison.  However, if they violate laws, then ethically we can.

 

EDIT: I misread the preceding comment to yours.  Still the point holds, that situational ethics are at times called for.  It is one of the most difficult things any ethical system can do: provide for different situations on the same issue.

What are you talking about?  Have I said somewhere that since X does it, I'm ethical?  I support my positions.
good point Stephan

therefore, locking up criminals is not the opposite.  You have a faulty comparison.

 

Of course they aren't OPPOSITES, they are the same action in different situations that are dependent on the actions, and hence ethics, of the people involved.

 

Nice to see you saying that since lots of people would agree with my points, they don't apply.  Perhaps I misread you though, what do you mean?

My point was, there is no ethical anything here. Online poll rules? Really? They don't work and it's a silly online poll...who cares? Is stealing a single (note the word "single") pencil at work the same same as robbing a bank? They may both be stealing, but come on..perspective here. If you're talking cheating on voting for government election is one thing, but... And for the record, I don't buy into the "Slippery slope" saying. Stealing a pencil won't lead to bank robbery and so on.

 

At any rate, not sure why I'm even discussing this as I don't really consider it an issue. Guess that's what happens when it rains and I can't do my farm work (^_^). Won't follow this anymore so continue as you like...

RSS

Support Atheist Nexus

Donate Today

Donate

 

Help Nexus When You Buy From Amazon

Amazon

AJY

 

© 2014   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service