ITT: We theorize

[MadMojoMonkey]

Any assertion with the verb "should" is a moral/religious assertion.
These assertions are hypothetical in nature and based on a presumed, but not confirmed, future timeline.
(Contrast with evidence-based assertions)

Any assertion about how someone "should" feel about their choices is inherently a moral/religious assertion.

***
Feeling superior over someone whom is different from you is usually predicated on a non-compassionate understanding of the other's motives and history.

Using your words and actions to intentionally diminish another human is a power trip.

***
We all make mistakes; we all have quirks; we all embrace habits which could be considered self-destructive or anti-social.
(Shame on us, amirit?)

It's not like weight correlates to murderers or pedos.

***
If I were convinced that weight or fatness corresponds to a definite increase in societal costs, then I would support a fat-tax.

Excuse me, sir, but are you licensed to be wearing a 42 inch waistline?
I'm afraid I'm going to have to write you a ticket for being over your licensed rotundity.
You can get this ticket waived if you apply for a "XXXL" license - and pay the associated tax, of course - at city hall by the end of the day.

[spoonitnow]

Any assertion about how someone "should" feel about their choices is inherently a moral/religious assertion.

It depends if you assume that all evaluations are made from a moral ground.

Feeling superior over someone whom is different from you is usually predicated on a non-compassionate understanding of the other's motives and history.

And there's nothing wrong with that.

Using your words and actions to intentionally diminish another human is a power trip.

Plain wrong. Someone with no power can easily intentionally diminish someone with it, though the degree to which anyone cares is typically low.

If I were convinced that weight or fatness corresponds to a definite increase in societal costs, then I would support a fat-tax.

If you aren't convinced that it does, then you haven't examined the issue very deeply.

[MadMojoMonkey]

It depends if you assume that all evaluations are made from a moral ground

Evaluations can be made on any ground (regardless of the veracity of the input). Valuations are inherently morally based.

I don't see how this is even questionable. All value statements can only be made in an { ethical / moral / religious / philosophical } context.

Nothing is good or bad outside of the context of thought and reflection.

And there's nothing wrong with that.

Thank you. I was not making value statements, rather offering a caution. It is easy to forget our own faults when we look to criticize / ridicule someone else.

Plain wrong. Someone with no power can easily intentionally diminish someone with it, though the degree to which anyone cares is typically low.

You say I'm wrong, but then you describe a power trip as a counter-example to a power trip.

By power trip, I mean anything someone would do to aggrandize themselves.

If you aren't convinced that it does, then you haven't examined the issue very deeply.

You're bigger than this.

[spoonitnow]

Evaluations can be made on any ground (regardless of the veracity of the input). Valuations are inherently morally based.

I don't see how this is even questionable. All value statements can only be made in an { ethical / moral / religious / philosophical } context.

Nothing is good or bad outside of the context of thought and reflection.


Thank you. I was not making value statements, rather offering a caution. It is easy to forget our own faults when we look to criticize / ridicule someone else.


You say I'm wrong, but then you describe a power trip as a counter-example to a power trip.

By power trip, I mean anything someone would do to aggrandize themselves.


You're bigger than this.

This post explains a lot.