99
submitted 2 days ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

gunpoint

top 22 comments
sorted by: hot top new old
[-] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

Lemme guess, this is the one time a landlord ever forgot to jack up the rent

[-] [email protected] 57 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

spoiler: their staff ethicist says yes it is OK

they suggest donating the money you get from being a landlord for ICE to the ACLU and Dem campaigns

it's too much

i am looking into the sun

[-] [email protected] 36 points 2 days ago

"donate" ICE profits to Dem campaigns

Dems never close ICE facilities

infinite money glitch

[-] [email protected] 30 points 2 days ago

And this is why 'ethics' is considered to essentially be a dead field to most people in the liberal arts. If someone calls themselves an ethicist, it is a surefire way to know that they are going to be one of the worst people you have ever met.

[-] [email protected] 12 points 2 days ago

Reaching levels of liberalism previously unseen

[-] [email protected] 47 points 2 days ago

Is It OK to Earn Rental Income

no mao-shining

[-] [email protected] 42 points 2 days ago

Is it OK to earn rental income...

No

red-sun

[-] [email protected] 39 points 2 days ago

i feel like every time the dems lose we get to watch them in real time adapt their morality to be worse

these sorts of pipeline questions feeding people who, maybe had goodness in their hearts at one point, slowly being guided away from the light of God.

[-] [email protected] 29 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

i feel like every time the dems lose we get to watch them in real time adapt their morality to be worse

I’m watching in real time how ‘let’s get more racist’ is becoming their MO. Republicans might incite the hatred to absurd levels, but the Dems really do the dirty work and long lasting damage by normalizing it.

[-] [email protected] 17 points 2 days ago

Dems really do the dirty work and long lasting damage by normalizing it.

Its their job.

[-] [email protected] 12 points 2 days ago

They've been doing it longer than I've been alive. Just look at what LBJ was saying behind closed doors after passing Civil Rights and Great Society laws.

[-] [email protected] 20 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Warning: dangerously high concentration of liberalism.

spoilerIt’s understandable that you’re troubled. Court rulings, investigative reporting and firsthand accounts have shown that ICE has acted in ways that not only harm noncitizens but also erode the rights of citizens.

Even so, the existence of an immigration-enforcement agency isn’t inherently the problem. Most people accept that states have a right to control their borders and that there’s a legitimate role for authorities charged with enforcing immigration policy, especially when it comes to those who have committed serious crimes. ICE also investigates trafficking, smuggling and other transnational offenses that clearly require federal oversight.

The core issue is less the agency’s mandate than its methods. Well-documented abuses — denials of due process, inhumane conditions and politically motivated enforcement — have undermined public trust and raised serious ethical concerns. The worry is not whether immigration law should be enforced but how, and at what human cost.

The holding facilities ICE uses are part of this system: They house people awaiting deportation, court appearances or further investigation. What’s in dispute isn’t the need for such spaces; it’s the treatment of detainees within those spaces. Many facilities have drawn criticism for degrading or dangerous conditions. Still, as a beneficiary of a trust that rents a property to ICE, your leverage is minuscule. You can’t unilaterally break the lease. Even if you could, ICE would simply relocate its facility. And while moral complicity is a serious concern, receiving income from a legal tenant, however problematic, isn’t generally considered an ethical transgression on its own.

We’re all entangled in systems we don’t control. As citizens, we’re already implicated in the actions of government agencies that act in our name and that we help fund. If those actions are shameful, they cast a shadow on all of us. But that shared entanglement also opens the door to shared responsibility — and response.

You mentioned your Jesuit university. You’ll probably remember, then, the emphasis placed on “discernment” — not just abstract moral reasoning but the habit of examining one’s own position in the world, with clarity and courage, and then acting on that understanding. So here’s one constructive path: If this money feels tainted, redirect it. Use it to support organizations that advocate for the rights you believe ICE has violated — groups like the A.C.L.U., the American Immigration Council or local legal-aid nonprofits that provide support for detainees. Back candidates pushing for humane immigration reform. It’s a way to turn your sense of passive complicity into a measure of active redress. You may not be able to change the trust’s lease, but you can choose what your share of the proceeds stands for.

✅ Look, it's not illegal.
✅ It's not like you can do anything to effect change.
✅ Even if you could, they'd just move elsewhere.
✅ BUT AT WHAT COST?!
✅ Capitalism makes sinners of us all.
✅ Use your Catholic education to decide to donate the money to ACLU.

[-] [email protected] 4 points 2 days ago

Most people accept that states have a right to control their borders and that there's a legitimate role for authorities charged with enforcing immigration policy,

I do not accept this, actually.

[-] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago

Don'tcha know that ethics is entirely consensus based, though.

[-] [email protected] 30 points 2 days ago
[-] [email protected] 3 points 2 days ago

That was my favourite bit too. But it was also about as far as I could read.

ALAB.

[-] [email protected] 30 points 2 days ago

around this time next year in the NYT: "is it OK to earn income by selling the gold fillings of the people I am liquidating?"

[-] [email protected] 26 points 2 days ago

kind of evil

THE. NEW. YORK. CRIMES.

Real gangster shit, no one does it better

[-] [email protected] 17 points 2 days ago

i'd say it's acceptable if and only if you're sabotaging their operations and wasting their money and your facility has the highest agent fatality rate

[-] [email protected] 17 points 2 days ago
[-] [email protected] 8 points 2 days ago

No, but it is okay to redacted-1redacted-2 the NYT and other willing collaborators of empire.

[-] [email protected] 27 points 2 days ago

If they don't accept the rent money someone else will settler

this post was submitted on 07 Jun 2025
99 points (100.0% liked)

chapotraphouse

13875 readers
823 users here now

Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.

No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer

Slop posts go in c/slop. Don't post low-hanging fruit here.

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS