Hello friends, I've posted here a lot over the course of me deconverting from a Jehovah's Witness and afterward. I go to the exjw subreddit on Reddit.com for a community to go to for support, discussion, etc. But recently I got into a debate about ethics with a mod on the subreddit. He seems to hate me or at least dislike me very much for debating with him on an honest subject. I have no idea why. Ever since the beginning he has had a hostile tone in his discussion instead of a respectful debate as I wanted in the first place. The reason why I am posting here is I need some help. I either need clarification on the subject if I am indeed wrong on the matter, or some support on the subreddit because everyone seems to be taking his side. I have no idea if it's because I'm wrong on the matter, if it is a matter of opinion, or if since he is a mod he is persuading their opinion on the matter. I have no idea, so I'd like some help from the smart and reasonable people on here. I don't believe I am wrong, and trust me I have went over this so many times in my head wondering what I could be thinking wrong. So since everyone was against me, of course I have to wonder if I am wrong, so I asked a random guy on my MSN Messenger contacts list who bought something off me a long time ago. This should answer all your questions: EDIT: Cleaned up the IM sp34k. So what do you think? TL;DR: What makes someone a bad person? Is it someone who deliberately does someone wrong or just plain someone who does something wrong? (This is the main gist of the whole debate I have come to the conclusion.) Note: Before you read, I want to say that my illustration with: "What if he turns around and molests the child?" may be a bit irrelevant, and that may have provoked the hostile attitude, but that shouldn't detract from the main point I wanted to get across: Just because someone is misled, and does wrong, it doesn't make them an inherently bad person. My line of reasoning with bringing that up is that this is a complicated subject. Just because someone does something wrong, it doesn't make them bad, and just because someone does something right, it doesn't make them good. *The act* may be good, but the motives have to be taken into consideration. If the parents saves the child with the intentions of abusing it later, that is a bad person, even though the act was good. If a parent neglects to save the child because they are misled and think and truly believe they are doing what is right and morally right for the child, it doesn't make them a bad person. The act was bad, but motives count. I hope you guys understand and if you do I would really appreciate if you could respond to some of those people there or leave your support here and I may link them to it if you can't respond there. "ScrewYouAndYourHorse" seems the most open ATM, but "JWTA" is the hostile one and has been so closed-minded and unreasonable it is scary, attacking me half the time instead of debating the subject. Such as, "the amount of downvotes you get proves that I'm right." When that doesn't prove anything, it's just basically an appeal to authority. Thanks so much for reading guys! And I *am* open-minded, so if you have a problem with my logic here, PLEASE let me know so I can correct this thinking. Thanks!