Originally Posted by issodhos
Originally Posted by 2wins
im jumping in the middle here but whoa on the inaction thing Iss. inaction is not neutral. it is a serious choice that may have serious consequences, depending upon the circumstances. in fact there are always consequences.

I wrote, "Yes, inaction is a choice. It has repercussions. They may be social, moral, or ethical, but it is not an infringement of his natural right to life because a natural right cannot obligate another to provide that right, and inaction is neutral in that regard."
Yours,
Issodhos
please illustrate because i do not agree and would enjoy a convincing argument. i believe inaction can indeed infringe upon one's natural right to life depending upon the motivation.

sure, you can talk to god, but if you don't listen then what's the use? so, onward through the fog!