I noticed that this might seem out of context since the post I was referring to failed to quote, it was in reference to refusing a flight because it is similar to a time you "scared" yourself.

I have no respect for people who make a no go decision based on one or two similarities to a previous time when they let themselves go too far down the rabbit hole.

I stand by the point of, if the company dispatches you and there is nothing that prevents you from conducting a safe flight (ie. actually getting in the air, not necessarily landing at the intended destination), you should go, said CA didn't accept a safe airplane for a safe flight, there was nothing outstanding about the weather or the aircraft that says it could not have taken off and if necessary returned to the point of departure.

Furthermore, if you are making go/no-go decisions based on times that you scared yourself in the aircraft none of us should ever move beyond the times that we scared ourselves as student pilots in a crosswind of merely 8 knots (as a very basic example). There were times when I myself thought that 500 feet and 2 miles of visibility wasn't enough to take off and get somewhere, I think and know differently now.

Also, do you think the CA would have been suspended had he gone out on the flight and attempted the approach only to return to the point of departure?