In article >, "Dutch" >
wrote:

> "Ron" > wrote
> > "Dutch" > wrote:
>
> [..]
>
> >> > And if humans have a basic right to life then, you too must go further.
> >>
> >> And humans do go further to mitigate danger to humans, much, much
> >> further.
> >>
> >> > (It is the same theory and I am just using examples to demonstrate the
> >> > double standards that are involved.)
> >>
> >> I have already explained the principle of mitigation, although it ought
> >> to
> >> be self-apparent. Please go back and read it again.
> >
> > I agree that you explained how humans are hypocritical and develop a
> > thought system to justify the things that we claim are wrong in some,
> > but still allow us to do them. It's called justification.
>
> Mitigation of danger has nothing to do with rationalization.

Of course, it does. Check a few synonyms for the word. Mitigating is a
way to make the action appear less harsh. Killing is killing. Killing
somone because they are convicted of a crime, robbing me, breaking into
your home, out of sociopathy, etc. are all examples of killing another
human. We like "alleviate" or reduce the harshness of the reality and
talk about "mitigating" circumstances.

Killing is killing.

> It means taking
> concrete measures, instituting safety systems, installing safe equipment,
> training and education. The worker who uses safe work procedures is
> mitigating the risk to himself and others.

The workers is also demonstrating fear. The worker is also exhibiting
unrealistic asessment skills on the potential dangers versus the actual
dangers involved.

Don't worry, I won't ask you to run with scissors.

> The driver who exercises all due
> caution and obeys all the rules designed to protect lives will not be found
> culpable should his car accidentally collide with another and kill someone.
> He has mitigated the risk to the best of his ability, yet in this world,
> shit happens. The driver who speeds down the wrong side of the road and
> kills someone is not mitigating risk, he will be found guilty of dangerous
> driving and/or manslughter.

If you don't want to be held accountable then stay off the road.

> > Such
> > justification leads to all sorts of logical errors as we've seen with
> > your approach to the topic of veganism and pot smoking.
>
> Pfffhhht, what a joker you are. You aren't even trying to get any of this,
> you're just desperate to redeem your sorry ass.

Redeem? Okay.

The vegan mitigates their responsibility by following all the rules and
the laws associated with killing animals.

Come on, Dutch. You lost.


> >> > So, do humans have a basic right to life or not? Is this an absolute
> >> > right.
> >>
> >> Yes, and no.