Fine. And you had better be willing to accept the consequences of your enslavement of women.
What you don’t want to accept is that your “there can be no agreement” is nothing but a cowardly little cop-out. And I will not let that happen, Max. I will not let you be a coward. So I will continue to hammer you until you stop being a coward.
I’m afraid you are mistaken. Unless somebody boards a boat knowing that he’s going to be abandoned in the middle of the sea, that is, he boards the boat because he wants to be abandoned in the middle of the sea, the boat owner is under obligation to safely transport the passenger to land.
You can’t just kill people because they are in your property - this is no different than killing petty thieves in ‘self-defense’ or killing any trespasser in cold blood.
Besides, the analogy between abortion and boats is nonsense.
I think this over-reliance on law is non-sense and inclines to be nanny government in nature. There’s a lot more than reliance upon law that is necessary to insure flourishing.
The boat owner isn’t killing the person on their property unless they own that spot in the middle of the ocean and even then it’s nature doing the killing. This strict reliance on law to solve the universes inherent conditions is like suing somebody cause a snowflake fell on their nose while they were on their property cause it made them feel cold and maybe got a running nose.
I like this picture of Kali. She is the depiction of the annihilation aspect of nature. I’m not Indian nor deeply into this stuff but think the picture is a good depiction of a reality of life that keeps a person on their toes, or at least me - don’t want bears to eat me.
Here. I point a gun at you and pull the trigger. I’m not killing you - It’s the laws of mechanics that are killing you. Seriously now, you should reconsider your position because it’s wholly wrong.
By the way, you are fully contradicting yourself. You want to justify the murder committed by the boat owner in the name of ‘property’ while at the same time dismissing law - and morality. You need to think this one through =P
I don’t think I’m wrong. But here’s two questions.
Is it lawfully wrong to not let somebody into your house cause they are freezing cold, backpacking, and in the middle of forest? That should sound familiar.
I lost my house, so, I think you should pay for it now cause I might die? While your at it - I need health care reform too?
Just to make sure, do you think that trespassers and petty thieves can be ‘legitimate’ murdered on the spot ? I thought you didn’t but maybe now you changed your mind ?
I already explained it you. I also gave you a correct analogy. Here’s another one : If I force you to drink poison, I’m not killing you, chemistry is killing you.
You’re not giving the person poison. You think the ocean is poison? I mean a bear could kill me if I leave my house tonight. I do live in the woods. Should I blame everything on people especially when the boat owner didn’t pull a trigger or kill the person. He was alive when he left him.
maybe - but you haven’t convinced me of anything. you keep saying the boat owner killed the person. if the person dies it’s obviously the ocean that did it.
if person A visits person B, then A leaves via car, gets in a crash, especially after A left due to B asking him to leave - they were boyfriend-girlfriend, bad break-up - so should B be lawfully responsible? B did tell A to leave.
you could pm me this and actually give me some knowledge to replace what I’m thinking now instead of “your nuts” or “your wrong” - that’s not very informative. it’s not a cozy world all the time - tree branches fall maybe somebody should be blamed for that too? ya gotta give me something - anything, nature can be a beast no doubt.
i think it’s all well and good we pigeon dive away from this discussion too. it’s a nutty discussion to begin with - I mean who in their right mind would actually ask a friend to leave a boat in the middle of the ocean. only somebody cruel and nasty in my opinion.