Wow.

I fundamentally disagree that this distinction exists, and even if it did this is not a situation where it would apply.

But it does exist; preaching is persuading or guiding others to follow your own beliefs. If no distinction existed then we would be mechanically bound to preach what we believe, and we’re not, so it’s a choice.

Everyone is a hypocrite to some degree. There are levels of hypocrisy that are breathtaking, and levels that are just meh.

‘Thou shalt not kill’ is a biblical commandment, not a principle. It comes from the fundamental principle of harm minimisation, and the two examples you gave are different (extreme) applications of that principle, see: the trolley problem etc. It’s morality for babies; looking at extreme black and white cases to be able to get a clear, consensus issue. Life is rarely that simple. Morality is never that simple.

They straight up went “when I break my own moral principles it doesn’t feel as bad as when others break them against me”

I’m not sure, that seems like another extreme interpretation of something more nuanced.

This behaviour is morally no better than that of megachurch pastors who preach the immorality of gay sex and get caught paying men to fuck them in the ass.

OP didn’t say they preached their morals though. Holding morals and preaching them are different things. I’d put this more in the category of people who pray secretly to a different god than the state-enforced religion, since OP is living in a capitalist society whilst not holding capitalist values.

I think there’s got to be room for some grey areas in morality. I abhor late-stage capitalism, but I would not rather die than shop at a chain supermarket.

I used to work in France. The 30 days is just the beginning. I ended up with 44 paid holidays per year towards the end of my contract. There are different types of paid leave and I got 9 days extra because one of my children has a disability.

However, the work culture in France is extremely toxic. You face a sort of social othering if you don’t conform with the unspoken rules which are even harder to understand if French is not your first language. Punishments include being managed/bored out and being “put in the cupboard” where you’re given a dead end role and basically left to rot until retirement. There’s a history of work related suicide in France.

Even so, you are a lot more free than in other countries. I’m not complaining. Plus, unions still have actual powers there (although they’re being eroded down)

…while Trump may be laughable, he has never once said anything wry, witty or even faintly amusing – not once, ever. I don’t say that rhetorically, I mean it quite literally: not once, not ever. And that fact is particularly disturbing to the British sensibility – for us, to lack humour is almost inhuman. But with Trump, it’s a fact. He doesn’t even seem to understand what a joke is – his idea of a joke is a crass comment, an illiterate insult, a casual act of cruelty.

-Nate White, on why British people don’t like Donald Trump

There definitely is an element of people just not liking it because it’s new, but there’s also an element of not getting any say in it whatsoever.
Also, they really do get in the way. They make it harder to get a good seal between your mouth and the bottle at any angle, and at the top they hit your nose. They are slightly harder to use, especially if you’re using one hand for any reason, including if you only have one hand. Removing them without tools results in a sharp bit of plastic which pokes and irritates your skin.
Finally, this is another patronising effort which makes consumers lives more difficult (by whatever amount) while not doing enough to combat plastic waste.

Eggs is a different topic

~again you, saying that eggs are separate from veganism.

You appear to be disagreeing with yourself, never mind me.

Veganism IS morally correct

~that’s you. That’s you talking about veganism.

You’re proving my point quite nicely

Veganism is the topic. Vegans don’t eat eggs.

I don’t think you get to make a black and white, general argument about this. How about this: if a person raises and cares for a chicken, giving it a charmed life it would have otherwise never had, but takes and eats its unfertilised eggs, then that’s not morally wrong.
It’s just not as obvious as people think, and your first sentence is a naive oversimplification and a great example of the kind of lazy argument I’m talking about. But I don’t want to get into it with my friends since it’s such a touchy subject, and I’ll never get a decent conversation about it online.

I love vegans. A few of my friends are vegan. There are two things some vegans will say which boil my piss, however. First is that they have a moral high ground because they don’t eat animals. This isn’t a given, it’s a complex and nuanced argument I’d happily partake in if the other party weren’t approaching it with a top-down belief that they’re already in the right. Second is the notion that we should all be vegan to save the planet from climate apocalypse. I don’t want this comment to get too long, but I have multiple problems with this faulty line of reasoning, and it muddies the waters. The only likely effect of it is that less progress is made on stopping global heating. So the upshot is that these people are literally sacrificing the ecosystem they purport to care about in order to bang their drum. Fuck that.

You’ve found the source. This is outright plagiarism.

crickets

You’re denying the moon landing happened although the moon landing definitely, demonstrably happened. You’re getting downvoted for peddling batshit.

How is Boost still working for you? I just get a failed to refresh message

It’s CAROL!

What if being hammered silly by a pneumatic fist is my plan?

🫦

My training is in applied mathematics, so I’m only conceptually aware of strange attractors. It’s my understanding that they are chaotic systems that tend towards a stable state. As such I’m a little skeptical of the claim that the universe itself is a strange attractor, since it is broadly predictable and hence not chaotic, and it’s expanding and thus not tending towards stability!

What caused the initial imbalance, and what prevents it from happening again?

Now you’re talking about some of the biggest unsolved problems in physics :)

I don’t know if it necessitates a creation myth, though. The big bang theory doesn’t imply a creator, but also doesn’t require a steady state.

What’s this about a strange loop? I don’t know if I’ve heard of this before.