What about "active" transportation?

In Outside:

I’m continually shocked at how much disdain and vitriol e-bikes—especially the mountain variety—elicit. If you raise the topic among a group of cyclists, as I did recently at Outside’s annual bike test, you’re sure to get an earful about how pedal-assist bikes are making the world a lazier place, causing all manner of trail conflicts and trail closures, and generally just ruining cycling. 

My position: Calm down, people. We’re talking about bicycles, not Satan...

But what about the moral superiority cyclists claim for cycling as exercise as opposed to the "passive" reliance on motor vehicles? Same question arises on the popularity of electric scooters, which is another reason that cycling has actually declined here in San Francisco. 

Alas, scooters raise the same safety issues as bicycles.

The Bicycle Coalition welcomes, more or less, the advent of electric scooters. After all they aren't cars, which, like bikes, makes them morally superior. But the coalition's director admits that scooters and bikes have the same safety issues and, interestingly, that scooter users and cyclists should share the bike lanes.

I wonder what SFBC members think about that?

See also As tech invades cycling, are bike activists selling out?