(July 29, 2014 at 11:37 pm)answer-is-42 Wrote:(July 29, 2014 at 11:20 pm)bennyboy Wrote: Your rant against my post, which makes no sense, also makes baby Jesus cry. Oops, I mean it MAKES baby JESUS cry.
replied to wrong one - meant to be the same you replied to, thought that was obvious. But your attempts at humiliation are weak at best - I do use caps for emphasis, not randomly - neither MAKES or JESUS needs emphasis, though in your previous sentence NO SENSE would seem reasonable. Therefore I must conclude that you're a butt hurt douche (rectal tampon?)
(July 29, 2014 at 9:23 pm)Losty Wrote: I will just have to agree to disagree with you. You haven't given any reasons for your opinion that make me want to change mine. I don't have any desire to change your opinion on the matter.I'm not trying to change your opinion, if anything I am looking for feedback on whether I should change mine. I specifically asked for feedback on my opinoin (what do you think, why, etc) NOT this is right and you are wrong for your beliefs. If you took it that way, that's on you. However, given that i DID ask for feedback, you haven't given me any reason that I would or should change mine. It's unfortunate that there is so much pedantic bickering and squabbling that it drowns out the actual conversation that I was trying to have (not really directed at you losty, atleast I got some directed responses). Regardless, it was helpful to me, as it gave me a forum to "air out" my position on a topic that is hard to find such a venue. I did realize how much my arguement depended on the fetus being a moral agent to whom someone (the mother) had moral accountability. Since I do feel that way anyway, it didn't change my belief, but did help me see a potential "crack." Too bad I had to come to this realization on my own, but again the arguements here get so pendantic that the PHILOSOPHY get diluted {again not so much with you losty}.
My opinion is that people engage in risky activities all of the time and I don't ever think it's immoral for them to try to mitigate (thanks esq. for the new word) the consequences of those actions. Sometimes I think that's all life really is. We take risks and we either enjoy or mitigate the consequences.
Regarding your second statement, of course we try to mitigate (which means LESSEN) BOTH risk and consequence and I have never argued against that {eg birth control, condoms, rhythm method, homosexuality, masturbation, whatever}. HOWEVER there is a difference between MITIGATING and SHIRKING (which means AVOID -- didn't even need a dictionary) responsibilty for consequences, which was my arguement. Back to my ball through the neighbors window analogy - you can mitigate risk by using a rubber ball, putting up a fence, etc, but ultimately if you hit a ball through you neighbor's window you have a moral responsibility and obligation to repair the damage - you could mitigate the total damage by paying some small amount ahead of time INCASE you broke his window, have spare windows in your garage, be involved with a window repair man/woman, etc - but ultimately I still argue you have a moral responsibility to repair his window. If this is NOT a position you support then I would be interested to know why not so that I may see if it causes ME to adjust my views or arguements.
Regarding the extension of this analogy to abortion, I have heard it many times that abortion is "taking responsibility." This is NOT a sentiment I share. Again IF you accept that the fetus is a moral agent (different arguement that I would be happy to have seperately) then you are NOT addressing your obligation to THEM but only to you -- again analagous to burning down the neighbors house or killing them (again I DO NOT FEEL THAT ABORTION IS MURDER, THIS IS ONLY AN LOOSE ANALOGY) in the sense that ultimately you problem of responsibility for the broken window is gone, but you have not really redressed the obligation to the other party.
IF you feel that the fetus IS a moral agent and do not agree with this line of thinking, I would be interested in understanding why?
Your analogy is flawed. A fetus is not an 'other party'.