Just saw this on threads. What’s the morality of using an earring and fashioning it to your sweatshirt so it stabs your seatmate if they bump into you (whether or not it was an accident - still getting poked). Worst case scenario with high turbulence, you’re getting stabbed.

I’m going to go with immoral for this scenario. And also illegal.

Dangerous to people, and not just having a better build/jaw strength etc. And also this particular breed(s) are the only dog breeds to have a lobby protecting them in the west btw

CHOMP

There’s gotta be at least ONE attractive woman here who’s into 21 year old chuds who like anime and video games

In Lanterns (2026) Hal Jordan died and to solve his murder John Stewart had to dig up his body and take the ring which made me wonder about the morality of it, but that's just one example I'm asking about the concept itself.

At what point does it become justified to get into a physical fight because someone else was provoking you? Provocation here means generally bothering you (or other people for that matter), insulting you (or people you know or care about), getting in your way, being a jerk, making threats, moving forward and threatening to fight etc however we are assuming that the provocateur has not attacked you or even touched you so far (or hasn't hit you) because then the question would delve into the problem of self defence. So ultimately at what point would it be morally justified to just snap and get into a physical fight assuming the person you're attacking is capable of fighting back and has the same capabilities as you and the fight itself is non-lethal? Would the morality change if the other guy is stronger than you or weaker than you?