It would be less provocative to say "don't hesitate to put hands and feet wherever they need to go to destroy naziism". Also much less succinct I suppose.
If you get a universal answer please let me know. Brilliant philosophers have argued about this for thousands of years. It's probably the most important question in philosophy. A universally satisfying answer would be like Einstein's theory of general relativity.
I think in reality people usually decide what's moral based on intuitions learnt/taught in childhood.
Philosophers disagree about if the same (in)action made with different intents has the same moral value. Ie it's not agreed that "doing nothing because you're too busy" is morally different than "doing nothing because you're trying to be sensitive to her wants".
If you felt like your presence wasn't wanted you were probably right. Is there a reason to think the people already attending her wouldn't have thought to suggest a rape kit?
What impacts did your inaction really have?
Okay enough consoling you. This isn't really about you, it's about her and people that might be in a situation like hers in the future.
Regardless of whether or not you should have done things differently then, is there anything you can do right now? There are probably lots of things you could do to reduce the chance of something like this happening again in that neighborhood. Think of 3 yourself then get 2 more from people that know the situation better. Pick one of the 5 and do it.
Some googling suggests to me that you're talking about the murder of Paul Schmidt by Inderdeep Gosal.
I couldn't find anything firmly linking him to Khalistani independence movements. But I did see this article suggesting there is a smear campaign against Sikhs/Khalistanis.
Also my 5 minutes of research suggested that he came here as a young child. So I don't think he came here for the purpose of agitating for an independent Khalistan from the safety of Canada.
I think a lot of the time people see stupidity in differences of values and limited visibility of the context the decision was made. I think this is why so many people think so many people are stupid. 'Stupid people' make choices that the observer sees as having 'poor results'.
Like when a lane ends on the highway:
-- People are stupid (and selfish) for not letting cars in when their lane ends (dangerous)
--People are stupid (and selfish) for waiting until the last minute to move over (dangerous)
-- People are stupid for moving over well before their lane ends (missed opportunity to get ahead)
-- people are stupid for being in either of those lanes that merge when there is a third lane that doesn't merge.... (short sighted and dangerous) (no I won't let them in! They should have thought ahead)
--People are stupid (and selfish) for driving cars (dangerous, climate change)
--People are stupid for thinking it's reasonable to live without a car (missed opportunity to get ahead)
Not me though, I consider everything from all sides all the time no matter what. Anyone that doesn't invest their time like this to make decisions is... stupid. (/s)
I have an issue when people migrate to a new country and start raising hackles and creating the potential and reality of violence
It's easy to understand the feeling that when you move to the new world you should leave old world politics behind.
Are you consistent with this view though? It's a difficult thing to do. During the Great Hunger in Ireland would it have been wrong for the Irish diaspora to advocate economic reforms in Ireland?
Was Canada right to refuse entry to Jews fleeing Europe in 1939?
Khalistan does not exist...
I'm not in a position to comment on the probability of the khalistan movement succeeding in the creation of an independent state. I don't like the idea of ethno-states and non-secular government but I'm sympathetic to people advocating for the right to self determination.
zero Canadian blood should be spilled over it
So why are you applauding India killing Canadians?
Anybody who has social media or online presence that even uses the word Khalistan should be immediately inadmissable
People like us?
...nor do they have the necessary resolve to make that difficult decision that may lead to their own blood being spilled rather than that of their compatriots
You realize that we're talking about someone that WAS (allegedly) killed for their resolve right? Is that the irony you were referencing in your original comment?
...spouting their violent rhetoric or talk of overthrowing...
Canada does have anti terrorism laws so if he was violating those he should have been prosecuted, but I'm not on board with Canadians being killed for exercising their rights to free speech. India accused him of some pretty serious stuff, why couldn't they get Canada to prosecute him?
As a Canadian, this is just so perfect full-circle irony and hypocrisy, its surreal.
I'm so happy to see this acronym catching on. I think it's much more inclusive. I actually recall suggesting it to someone like 5 years ago, although I think it should technically be SOGIM with the M standing for minorities. So if you're talking about taking to school kids about crushes, or what they feel it means to be a boy, that's SOGI education (inclusive of cis het) while members of the lgbtqia2s+ community would be SOGIM.
Just a hunch, but I'd imagine that one of the conditions of getting a security clearance is "don't tell anyone what we're about to show you" and he won't promise not to expose anything that makes the liberals look bad.
It means tweak existing programs to incentivizes others to build homes, don't make an organization that tries to build homes.
I can't imagine myself voting conservative, but he's not wrong to suggest the federal government should be pressuring municipalities to get housing built.
But we don't need housing starts, we need housing completions. The proposal incentivizes cities to approve projects now but doesn't stop them from tying them up in red tape later.
It puts the largest burden of building housing on cities that have already been building instead of on cities with untapped potential. I suspect cities like West Vancouver will just walk away from the money.
Unless the success bonus is a bigger carrot than the penalty is a stick, it creates an incentive not to exceed 15% growth because it will make it harder to meet quota the next year. Cities will make quota then tie up new starts until the new year.
My feeling is that cities with high housing costs (especially wrt local income) should face more pressure to build. Cities with low densities should face more pressure to build.
I've just sent it to a bunch of my friends that love or hate puns.
My rewrite:
Beastie boys have been trying to issue a 5 part anthology. There's some sort of conflict between labels with the 5th volume though. Volumes A through D will be released before Christmas but Beastie Boys will have to fight for their right to part E.
It would be less provocative to say "don't hesitate to put hands and feet wherever they need to go to destroy naziism". Also much less succinct I suppose.