This seems like an extremely biased "class." This is a very controversial topic that I can see both sides to, but for sakes of this question, will only explain the counter argument. How can you advocate killing people to spread a message not to kill people. Does it not seem ironic and oxymoronic to say "We don't support killing people, and we are going to show this by killing people who do it!" Also, some people believe the death penalty is too easy. Some victims' families would like the person to spend the rest of their life slowly dying in prison. Another bug argument is how humane is it? Obviously the electric chair is going to hurt, and even with lethal injection, there have been errors resulting in people having seizures and other body attacks while strapped to a table. These methods are not full proof and can be very inhumane.
Answer:
bro it maybe information sharing. .......
hope it is correct ....
if it is correct the mark me as brainlist ......
and if it is wrong then I apologise ...
I'm guessing the options are "individual preferences", "the same tastes" and "equal marginal benefits". If so it should be the first option.
Answer:
With the film continuing on Godzilla seems to be the ideal example of nuclear energy fear because Godzilla 's essence comes solely from the perspective of the negative impact produced by the atomic warheads.
The day when the nuclear warhead was dropped on Japan has matured until the day the anxiety over it has developed and never diminished. The challenge is mounting because many governments use their own arms. The fear grew manyfolds because as size of Godzilla grew.
A consequentialist approach to ethics is an approach that claims that the morality of an action depends on its outcome. This means that an action is "good" is the consequence it brings is good as well. An example of such a theory is Utilitarianism. Utilitarianism states that an action is morally good if it leads to the most happiness for greatest number of people. However, an objection that can be made to this theory is that utility and happiness are subjective, as well as difficult to measure.
On the other hand, non-consequentialist ethics state that the morality of an action is based on the rightness and wrongness of the actions themselves and not the consequences of those actions. An example of this is the Natural Rights Theory, which states that humans have an inherent right to certain rights, regardless of human behaviour. However, it is unclear who has the right to state what these rights are, which has led to criticism of the theory.
