dittany: "The end was that this man and so many men like him was that he went to Thailand to commit rape. Yes that end matters. Only a fool and a moral imbecile would think differently."
I think it is difficult to argue with you because you are so uncompromising and see things in such black and white terms. Some of the time that is helpful but most of time it's not. I am not a fool or a moral imbecile. We have a different perspective, that is all.
The ends matter a great deal, but so do the means. There is a perfectly respectable tradition in moral philosophy that argues that the means determine the end. It is argued that, in a very real sense, the means are the end in human life. For most of the time in most lives this is true. In consideration of this, and because the means are the only things we have full control over, we had better attend to them. This is something that is worth reflecting on deeply.
Those you disapprove of most do not reflect on this question. They are very much of the 'means justify the end' school of thought.
"You could only say that if you really didn't give a shit about rape and a global sex industry that destroys women and children."
I think this statement perfectly demonstrates the kind of folly you will fall into when you follow your way of reasoning. Folly rarely achieves its purpose and often results in great harm so you would be better to abandon it. Your method of reasoning must be faulty because it leads you to a falsehood. Because your reasoning leads you to being wrong about me, it will almost certainly lead you to be wrong about many other things as well. That is what faulty reasoning does.
I care a great deal about rape and the destruction of children. I may care about it more than you because I'm less vain and that allows me look outside myself more effectively and we need that for compassion. I worry that when you consider the victims of abuse you may be more concerned with how dittany feels about them than with how they are feeling and that risks making you blind to them. It is the same blindness that the rapist and the abuser suffer from. They are worrying about their own feelings too. I'm sure this is an outrageous claim in the matter of degree. I hope I can be certain you are incapable of that level of blindness. However, most of the time we are not dealing with that level of blindness - we are dealing with something closer to yours. That is why you should curb your own tendencies in that direction when you are exhorting others to do the same. If you do not, morally, you are giving them consent to the opposite. I know this because I'm not a moral imbecile.
The truth is that the world is worthy of an explanation that goes beyond an exhibition of the feelings you are most proud of, however noble those feelings are and whatever they arise from. Because you put those feelings first you are liable to make false claims about the world as you assert the primacy of your feelings over how it actually is. That is what leads you to make a foolish claims about me and, probably, the man who went to Thailand.
Despite what we might claim of each other in a rhetorical manner, I think we want the same outcome. The dispute is about the means of achieving it. I think I could talk to the friend of the OP, who was originally the topic of thread before it turned into a competition in moral outrage, and he would be less likely to return to Thailand as a sex tourist as a consequence. If you spoke to him I think he would be more likely to return.