Do Romeo and Juliet deserve sympathy?

Romeo and Juliet arguably do deserve sympathy because they die for a feud between their families, the reason for which nobody in either family seems even to remember. If their families weren't feuding, then maybe Romeo and Juliet could have had a normal, enduring relationship. Speaking to herself (or so she thinks) in act two, scene two, Juliet says about Romeo, "'Tis but thy name that is my enemy; / Thou art thyself, though not a Montague." In other words, Romeo's family name is insignificant and is of no consequence as regards his character. In this sentiment, Juliet exposes the foolishness of the feud which would separate her from Romeo.
Romeo and Juliet also arguably deserve sympathy because they are pitted against fate, in a battle that they can't possibly win. Indeed, in the prologue to the play, we are told that their love is, from the beginning, "death-marked." In act one, scene five, Romeo's "mind misgives / Some consequence hanging in the stars" And in act four, scene five, Juliet, with "an ill-divining soul," has a vision of Romeo, climbing down from her balcony, "dead in the bottom of a tomb."
On the other hand, one might argue that Romeo and Juliet do not deserve sympathy, or at least not our unqualified sympathy. They both betray their parents, which in Elizabethan England would have been a much more grievous crime than it perhaps is today. They both also love recklessly, immaturely, and irresponsibly. Indeed, Friar Lawrence, in act two, scene six, warns them that "These violent delights have violent ends," meaning that they are loving too intensely, too recklessly, and need to slow down. He compares their love, with ominous foresight, to "fire and powder," implying that, like a trail of gunpowder, their love is headed for some kind of explosion. One might argue that if they had loved more moderately, and less recklessly, then they might have been able to eventually overcome the obstacles in their way.