Responsibility

Ok I thought up a few questions when I was bored at work and want to know what everyone's views on these questions.

Is Albert Einstein responsible for the deaths at Hiroshima?

Is a person you makes guns responsible for the deaths caused by it?

Is a bar tender responsible for a patron that has a wreck and kills someone due to being drunk?

Do you consider a doctor that preforms an abortion a murderer?

Sorry if any of these are reposts.

No.

No.

No.

This question is very different than your others. I believe the answer is no, but others may believe the answer is yes. Your other questions are "Is someone responsible for someone else's actions." This question is more direct -- it's really asking whether or not you believe abortion is murder. That's a question that belongs on (and has been debated to hell and back on) the Current Events boards.

i'd say that not having a point is pretty irresponsible.

I have a point.

Yeah sorry about the last one. I had thought of a ton of ones like the first three, but by the time I went to post forgot and threw in that just cause it came to mind.

No one seems to take responsibity for there actions these days, just wondering where the line is drawn for being responsible. Guess I could have asked explained a little better when asking the questions.

i'm going to keep it simple and say that aside from what pop-psychology may tell us, people are generally responsible for their own actions.

this is a big pet peeve of mine -- people who don't take responsibility for their own actions.

as you can probably guess, my answers are similar to Shalome's.

You have to OWN it.

When I got busted for pot at school in 8th grade, my friends were afraid that my parents would be mad at them for giving it to me.

They weren't, they were mad at me for accepting it and being stupid enough to bring it to school.

Responsibility, what's that? Responsibility why not yet?

I was having a somewhat similar discussion with a few friends recently-- one of whom is in a Baptist seminary, the other of whom is a newly-converted, way-overzealous Christian. I found it interesting that, despite a theology that clearly puts the onus of responsibility on the "sinner" and not their influences, they're quite willing to call in extraneous things to blame-- Satan and demons, evil rock music lyrics, liberal media outlets, etc.

Me? I'm for personal responsibility, and a person's choices are no one's fault but their own. There may be extraneous influences, but only I am capable of making my decisions.

For whatever reason, when we get into that debate, it ends up revolving around the Judas Priest suicides, so you can add that one to your list, PyroBoy.

so other people might not think yes to those other questions?

i personally do think that it is possible for both of the answers to these two questions below

to be yes

but there are other circumstances have to be involved. if a bartender knows that the drunk person is going to drive home, then the bartender is at least partially responsible.

also gun makers in this country do everything they can to make sure that guns are easily accessible to everyone, that is something that shouldnt be so easy

Nah, the two things were seperate thoughts. I was pointing out that the question was different than his other questions, and then I gave my answer to his question. Sorry that it wasn't phrased terribly well.

i see, whoops

No. Physical law is physical law; if not Einstein, someone else. Is Newton responsible for the deaths of people killed by artillery fire? Newtonian mechanics is essential to good artillery shooting.

Maybe. It's too easy to say that people kill people. Providing the tools for them to do that looks culpable, to me.

Partly. The bar owner has a responsibility, as well.

Not as such. Murder is a social construct (is meat murder?).
Abortion is regrettable. But I can't see it as being murder.

My personal feeling is that we need a more statistical basis for the whole "killing people" thing. It annoys me when I hear descriptions of "saving a life"; because that has not happened. What's actually happened is that a life has been extended. The person will die anyway; it's a question of when.

"Not as such. Murder is a social construct (is meat murder?)."


To answer your question, though I doubt you really wanted/expected it answered, yes I do believe that meat is murder.

Is that you, Morrissey?!

Why aren't salads murder? Are plants less alive because they can't run away screaming...? Fuck that, I've giving up vegetables until you heartless vegetarians give up this vendetta again your silent victims...

you got busted for posession in 8th grade?
you are so cool.

Is Albert Einstein responsible for the deaths at Hiroshima?
I think not, because I don't think he was aware of what his work would lead to necessarily.

Is a person you makes guns responsible for the deaths caused by it?
Gun-making companies are aware that they are making weapons designed to kill. That's what they're made for. I would hope they don't sleep well at night, that's all I can say. But hey, I think the person who pulls the trigger has some blame in the issue.

Is a bar tender responsible for a patron that has a wreck and kills someone due to being drunk?
Well, alcohol is not made to kill, so I would say on the whole no. But can the barman see the carpark from the bar? Or has he overheard the person's intentions to drive home? If he is aware in some way that the person intends to drive and they do nothing to deter them then I would say yes, but otherwise, a barman is not a babysitter.

Do you consider a doctor that preforms an abortion a murderer?
Unless it is a very late abortion, no. I personally don't believe conception is the point that it becomes a baby, I believe that is somewhere later on. So I'll say in the majority of cases no.


These are just my opinions though, I could be wrong.

What's your point?

Far from it... just choosing to be silly instead of bringing up the reality of the natural order which dictates that life feeds on life ad infinitum and labelling one destruction of a lifeform as murder while muching away at the other is just a rationalization ignoring that natural order.

Granted a good number of us have migrated from a naturally traditional primate diet, but the human desire for variety and exploration, coupled with the advent of technology, has led to the redistribution of foodstuffs from their native lands to multinational outlets so that many palletes have been diversified from what would, within the limits that exist before technology, have been limited to those foodstuffs which existed in the local region.

If I were anti-choice, I'd be calling for a wholesale roundup of vegetarians to be brought into meatdom in guarded Bacon Reintroduction Facilities.

that was my point. shit, did i really have to point it out to you?