Originally Posted by 2wins
no Iss, you're backing away. you statement above was completely wrong and only has bearing in an antiquated western ideological world. Schlack's question has merit and illustrates that indeed inaction is far more than a neutral position and can have consequences both intended and not.

No, you are completely wrong. Yes, Schlack's question had merit. I addressed it based on the concept of natural rights. I suspect you are both looking for a semantic escape.
Yours,
Issodhos

"When all has been said that can be said, and all has been done that can be done, there will be poetry";-) -- Issodhos