Comment: I am not arguing to argue.

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: I feel that ... (see in situ)

I am not arguing to argue.

I am not arguing to argue. I keep asking the same question in an attempt to obtain an on point response. I have asserted the concepts immoral and wrong involve aggression or injury.

You have not offered any different definition or pointed out any inconsistency with the definition I asserted.

I have repeatedly asked for you to define the injury.

Despite that you have done neither you keep making the same point one is not responsible for protecting their own body but proselytize responsibility. You admit consensual sex is not immoral but somehow pregnancy is? It is a leap in logic so vast there is a black hole in the middle of it.

I have no desire to live in a society of arbitrary rules or legislated morality where anyone can claim anything is wrong with no evidence of aggression or injury. There is enough victimless crime already being prosecuted. In order for something to be wrong there ought to be some consistency not just someone saying something is wrong. What kind of dealio is that?