<<
that's the pussy way out of it. you're attempting to absolve yourself of the situation. you don't want to have to make a bad choice, so you decide to default, trying to say that you didn't make a bad choice because it was the default action. do you see the flaw in this logic? just because you do not act does not mean you did not consciously choose one life over the lives of billions. there is no justifying it with some bizarre notion of morality. it really doesn't matter whether you actively or passively cause a death. the end result is the same.
if you sit on your ass all day, and do nothing, you will end up broke and homeless. who's fault is this? you did take a neutral stance, after all.
and you never answered my question... how selfish of you is it to put your own need to feel good about yourself (yes, that's what this is about), over the lives of billions? >>
You pose the question "do you see the flaw in this logic." For sure, logic would dictate that we take the childs life. But where do you equate logic with morals? Morality, while intertwined with logic in some part, is not in itself always logical. You yourself said that morals are subjective, while logic is generally considered to be objective. I believe he was speaking from a moral viewpoint, so you pointing out that he has a flaw in his logic cannot be a correct assessment, for he didn't use logic as the basis for his argument.