[Politics] Should infanticide be legalized?
- Thread starter OneManArmy
- Start date
You said it right there. What you're consenting to is the risk of an accident, not the accident itself. X and risk of X are two different things.
But you already know this. If I rear ended you, then told you "it's ok, you consented to me rear-ending you by driving on the road", you're gonna disagree.
When you move into a house, there's a chance a pipe will burst and flood your home. Doesn't mean you consented to living in a flooded house, and you're fully entitled to repair the burst pipe and the water damage if it happens.
When you go into a casino, you accept the risk that you might lose all your money. Does that entitle the casino to have the bouncers empty your pockets as soon as you enter? It's not robbery because you already consented to losing all your money, right?
I leave it to you to think of more examples where you voluntarily do something with a calculated risk involved, and then seek remedy for the damage when the risk event occurs.
dude you're trying to reason with someone that doesn't have enough sense to not want to fuck children
I explained like 5 times why that's not true. Can you actually offer a counterargument, or are you just going to hop on the "repeat it until it becomes true" bandwagon?
you can explain it your way until you're blue in the face, doesn't mean you're right.
If it's not right, then you ought to be able to explain why, instead of just restating it over and over.
okay lets try this
when i get into a car, i recognize that your dumb ass might smash into me at any point and consent to the risk of that
thats different from what you're saying, which is that consenting to drive means i also consent to you smashing into me. i dont consent to you smashing into me, but i consent to the risk that you could and - if your driving skills are any match for your logical capacity - the likelihood of it happening.
you're arguing two different things and confusing them for one idea.
re-read that last sentence slowly, so you understand. now go back and re-read it once more, please.
while i certainly dont WANT you to drive like a fucking retard, i accept the risk that you might and that it could very well happen to me.
if it does happen, i accept that it was your choice to be a pants-on-head slobbering idiot behind the wheel AND that it was my choice to put myself in the situation in which it happened.
when i get into a car, i recognize that your dumb ass might smash into me at any point and consent to the risk of that
thats different from what you're saying, which is that consenting to drive means i also consent to you smashing into me. i dont consent to you smashing into me, but i consent to the risk that you could and - if your driving skills are any match for your logical capacity - the likelihood of it happening.
you're arguing two different things and confusing them for one idea.
re-read that last sentence slowly, so you understand. now go back and re-read it once more, please.
while i certainly dont WANT you to drive like a fucking retard, i accept the risk that you might and that it could very well happen to me.
if it does happen, i accept that it was your choice to be a pants-on-head slobbering idiot behind the wheel AND that it was my choice to put myself in the situation in which it happened.
Last edited:
I haven't been following all the deflecting and dodging properly
is Amadeus arguing against "if you consent to sex you also consent to carrying a baby to term"?
?? is that where you guys are coming from? because it sounds dumb as fuck, even by TW standards
Idk I'm not really following the thread I just saw
"Consenting to partaking in vehicular travel doesn't mean you consent to being in a car crash"
And found it to be an absurd statement
I'm saying the exact opposite of that. You're the one that keeps saying that consenting to something means consenting to the consequences.
This is what I've been saying all along.
Now let's do a little cut-and-paste:
"i dont consent to you getting me pregnant, but i consent to the risk that you could"
Well, would you look at that...
Well said. Now, for the million dollar question: having accepted all that, do you think you're still entitled to seek remedies for the damage I've done?
Last edited:
Basically, yeah. Or at least, "if you consent to sex you also consent to getting pregnant".I haven't been following all the deflecting and dodging properly
is Amadeus arguing against "if you consent to sex you also consent to carrying a baby to term"?
?? is that where you guys are coming from? because it sounds dumb as fuck, even by TW standards
well if that's the case, if i consent to having sex with a woman and the risk of pregnancy but i don't consent to the event of getting her pregnant, in the case that the pregnancy event happens, i shouldn't be liable for child support, right?
is that what you're trying to say? that because you didn't consent to the actual event occuring, you should never be held responsible for the event if it were to happen?
because that's pretty damned unrealistic, tbch
is that what you're trying to say? that because you didn't consent to the actual event occuring, you should never be held responsible for the event if it were to happen?
because that's pretty damned unrealistic, tbch
Last edited: