• LiPoly@lemmynsfw.com
    5·
    10 hours ago

    You guys do realize that you are glorifying a literal murderer, right? Someone who killed a human being in cold blood.

    Okay, just checking.

    • SirQuackTheDuck@lemmy.world
      7·
      5 hours ago

      Someone who killed a human being in cold blood.

      Someone who killed someone who kills people by pretending to be a health insurance, whilst not paying them when people try to use said insurance in cold blood.

      The sentence is a little longer if you give the full context. Nobody was innocent here.

    • SynopsisTantilize@lemm.ee
      8·
      4 hours ago

      All of our hands are at least speckled with blood for complicity in reaping the benifits of our society?

      -Sent from iPhone 17Pro Max Plus

      • LiPoly@lemmynsfw.com
        3·
        8 hours ago

        So you’re saying you’re pro vigilantes and pro death penalty without court order?

        Besides, that CEO didn’t kill anyone personally. One could argue you killed a few kids yourself by buying cheap electronics and clothing. If you now start just killing people that you think deserve dying because of some moral standard you think you have, you’re a fucking lunatic without any moral standard.

        • pfm@scribe.disroot.org
          1·
          2 hours ago

          Can you explain why only victims of the likes of Thompson should fear, but the CEOs don’t need to fear even though they profit from rejecting life- or health-saving treatments?

        • Luminocta@lemmy.world
          7·
          6 hours ago

          So, Hitler wasn’t bad. Stalin was OK, didn’t kill anyone right?

          But their decisions did. Their position of power allowed them to.

          Just cause they didn’t murder directly doesn’t mean they played a fair game. They knew exactly what they were doing. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes goes for bad people too.

            • ddplf@szmer.info
              1·
              4 minutes ago

              The CEO is however a robber baron operating at the times of peace, using different methods but achieving the same end - people dying, most often miserably. I don’t see how that’s better.

            • zergtoshi@lemmy.worldEnglish
              1·
              8 minutes ago

              Right, but still a person who had a part in making the lives of lots of people miserable or unnecessarily short.
              If a CEO isn’t responsible for the policies of the company they’re CEO of, why would you need a CEO in the first place?

            • Luminocta@lemmy.world
              1·
              3 hours ago

              Honestly that fact was known to me, but I just realized he was the good guy/hero we needed after what he did…

        • Nalivai@discuss.tchncs.de
          12·
          7 hours ago

          He didn’t kill personally, he just gave orders to other people to kill people.
          Which means his killer didn’t kill anyone personally either, he just pressed some trigger and the gun did everything else

  • limer@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
    20·
    20 hours ago

    I’m not well versed in the saints, but I think this is a better origin story than most.

    All we need is a tearful prayer, with a vow towards some further action: even if it’s just in a cell for the rest of his life.

    And then he is on the same level, in my opinion, of some medieval saints I know a little about.

    Could easily be a saint for denied claims and other obstacles in healing.