Reasons to not feel bad for pro-moral people

Can you tell the difference between a mentally incapable person (ex. a person with autism, Alzheimer's, or "special needs" people)?

The same thing happens in everyday life, except, in this case, it's on a much smaller scale rather than being obvious of mentally incapable people.
It's the same way with hiring: hiring managers don't want to hire those who are incapable, only those that are capable, treating those that are not capable like subhuman and ghosting them.
Basically, just because you respect them as human beings, don't confuse that respect to assume they are worthy human beings of your time. Sometimes, those that are subhuman don't deserve basic human rights, even though they are human beings.
You have been conditioned to think stupid people are worthy if respect, just because they look like a human being
You are not special just because you are a human being

If you want to start explaining human behavior, start to refer them to: Maslow's hierarchy of needs

Stop assuming everyone works the same way as you (just because you respect them as a human being)

obviously, when respecting someone, you trust and expect them to work in the same way as you in regards to respect and making that common ground as without this, violence and passive aggressivism breaks out.

Mental illness is real, it's not merely a moral failing of self control, but rather an external circumstance

Instead of walking into a sweets shop when on a cut or a diet, do yourself a favor and avoid places like that, better yet, put yourself in a place where you wouldn't even come across that kind of content. Like putting parental controls on child's laptop to prevent them from coming across pornographic content.

It is often the moral people who have the most immoral thoughts that aren't shared.
Pro-moral people tend to think that everyone should be able to comprehend and perform the same morals, they fail to realize the existence of mentally incompetent people and intellectual people - both groups of human beings that are nowhere close to your average joe

"Not everyone is created equally" -> just because we are all human beings, does not mean we should share the same morals. Some people are just better than others, survival of the fittest.

moralists can't even answer what enables them to practice morality and what enables them to merely even continue practicing it ignoring the science behind morality
This takes into account the nature of human thought and human behavior and what motivates us. By recognizing your motivation, you can further understanding the reasoning behind your behavior.

Unspoken communication is real- we communicate with our environment. Communication isn't just verbal.
Not everyone that looks like a human is a human. Not everyone has the same morals. It's a possibility and reality.

This logic is the following: Since other people have similar characteristics like me and exist in my presence that must mean they work exactly like me have the same preferences, etc. For example, if I look brown and like pizza that means all other brown people like pizza.
not everyone is the same

Pro-moral people are just not as intellectual evolved to comprehend the different levels of self-control
Morality is based on mutual feelings
Limits of your opinion

Pro-moral people tend to develop opinions on everything, those who tend to hold more opinions, the stupider they tend to be. Like, who goes around saying: I want to develop an opinion on why others get an abortion and bitch about it!

Moralists break the rule of "assuming everyone thinks like you"
Moralists fail to acknowledge that not every human being is the same just because they share some physical traits such as having a formed face, 4 limbs, etc. This leads me to the conclusion that moral attitude is conditional because everything is conditional.

Sure, just because something isn't moral does not mean our minds will side with the moral side all of the time, that is simply not how human beings work. A rule can be made, however, to prove the theory that morality is conditional would require the definition of morality and the purpose of this definition. Is it self-control, is it the absence of bad factors, what is it?

Moralists fail to answer the question of: why does goodness only apply to people and not to plants, why do we eats plants, plants scream when their fellow plants are plucked.

Instead they tend to answer with responses that avoid answering the question such as: "What is a human being?" in a scientific perspective and immediately switch to a legal perspective.

No matter what you think you are learning constantly, so take your learning seriously.
There is not enough resources for everyone to be rich, sometimes actions are subtle (for example, a depressed person not having any alone time may lead to more depression)
Moralists do not take the cause of immorality seriously, they do not consider the things that influence peoples' immoral decisions or moral decisions rather.

Ebenezers' Freethinking Notes