libertarianism and abortion [W:294] (1 Viewer)

[Medusa]

LIST OF JUST SOME OF THE REASONS LIBERTARIANS WANT GOVERNMENT OUT OF THE ABORTION ISSUE

The fetus is not a human being with rights until it is born (based on a number of rationales) and/or only the mother confers rights on the fetus; even if the fetus has rights, and abortion is murder, the rights of the mother to evict trespassers -- for whatever reasons -- through abortion are greater (based on a number of rationales); the government is the problem, not the solution, including in this issue; it's my body and the government should keep its laws off it; people can decide this issue in their private, contractual communities; only voluntary means of convincing a woman to have a child are libertarian; the decision on whether it is murder is based on political power and adult women have more power; it is wrong to force a deformed baby or unwanted child to come into the world; OTHER???

Pro-Choice Libertarians

 

[Josie]

 

[Cyrylek]

LIST OF JUST SOME OF THE REASONS LIBERTARIANS WANT GOVERNMENT OUT OF THE ABORTION ISSUE

The fetus is not a human being with rights until it is born (based on a number of rationales)

Well, that is the core of the problem: how valid are those "rationales"? How is a baby half an hour before birth different from a baby half an hour after? Does air in lungs make us human?

While it is absurd to claim that an organism made out of two or sixteen cells is a human, it is equally absurd to declare that a baby who has a recognizable face and forms memories is just a chunk of expendable tissue.

I am pro-choice for the first trimester, pro-life in the third trimester, and open to arguments and negotiation in between. Doesn't make me any less libertarian.

 

[Henrin]

I really hate the slogan "pro-choice in everything". The only way you can be pro-choice in everything is if you're an anarchist. What is even worse is that these same people that love that slogan start talking about the rights of the people as if being pro-choice in everything actually has the potential to protect the rights of anyone.

 

[JayDubya]

Being a pro-abortion libertarian makes as much sense as being a pro-slavery libertarian.

If grievous human rights abuses are going on to some of the human population around you, just not you, that still doesn't make it okay... not if you want a free society that cares about and protects human rights. That's the basic, bedrock function of government, the night watchman. And that's the function we the people have to keep working through our own vigilance, lest we have a failed government that needs to be replaced.

 

[Aunt Spiker]

LIST OF JUST SOME OF THE REASONS LIBERTARIANS WANT GOVERNMENT OUT OF THE ABORTION ISSUE

The fetus is not a human being with rights until it is born (based on a number of rationales) and/or only the mother confers rights on the fetus; even if the fetus has rights, and abortion is murder, the rights of the mother to evict trespassers -- for whatever reasons -- through abortion are greater (based on a number of rationales); the government is the problem, not the solution, including in this issue; it's my body and the government should keep its laws off it; people can decide this issue in their private, contractual communities; only voluntary means of convincing a woman to have a child are libertarian; the decision on whether it is murder is based on political power and adult women have more power; it is wrong to force a deformed baby or unwanted child to come into the world; OTHER???

Pro-Choice Libertarians

Well that was a wasted effort - going to that link and I saw nothing that we haven't heard before. It seems that 'Libertarians' didn't add anything new to the debate.

Well, that is the core of the problem: how valid are those "rationales"? How is a baby half an hour before birth different from a baby half an hour after? Does air in lungs make us human?

While it is absurd to claim that an organism made out of two or sixteen cells is a human, it is equally absurd to declare that a baby who has a recognizable face and forms memories is just a chunk of expendable tissue.

I am pro-choice for the first trimester, pro-life in the third trimester, and open to arguments and negotiation in between. Doesn't make me any less libertarian.

Air in your lungs is HOW you can live - is it not? What we define as 'separate, birthed individual' has changed over years - in the past, that is what it took - to be capable of sustaining your own basic functions (breathing, heartbeat, etc).

But, yes - I agree with your underlying point: apparently Libertarians want the government to cede ALL views to the mother - even if she chooses a partial-birth abortion, it seems. If they don't believe this, they sure as heck fail to explain.

 

[jonny5]

LIST OF JUST SOME OF THE REASONS LIBERTARIANS WANT GOVERNMENT OUT OF THE ABORTION ISSUE

The fetus is not a human being with rights until it is born (based on a number of rationales) and/or only the mother confers rights on the fetus; even if the fetus has rights, and abortion is murder, the rights of the mother to evict trespassers -- for whatever reasons -- through abortion are greater (based on a number of rationales); the government is the problem, not the solution, including in this issue; it's my body and the government should keep its laws off it; people can decide this issue in their private, contractual communities; only voluntary means of convincing a woman to have a child are libertarian; the decision on whether it is murder is based on political power and adult women have more power; it is wrong to force a deformed baby or unwanted child to come into the world; OTHER???

Pro-Choice Libertarians

Whats your point?

 

[Medusa]

if jaydubya likes it ,no need to say anything else :lamo

 

[Medusa]

Whats your point?

admit you are a conservative capitalist without hiding behind libertarianism

:2razz:

 

[HumanBeing]

I don't get it. It seems like the entire OP is based around the assumption that human life starting from birth is the default libertarian view, then all the other arguments seem to stem from that. The post doesn't actually have much to do with libertarianism at all, it's just the standard "when does a fetus become a person and get human rights" debate.

There is nothing about libertarianism that dictates human life as starting at the moment of birth. Most libertarian philosophies stem from an underlying respect for the NAP, and whether or not abortion (or prevention of abortion) is a violation of the NAP is a massively debatable subject.

 

[Medusa]

I don't get it. It seems like the entire OP is based around the assumption that human life starting from birth is the default libertarian view, then all the other arguments seem to stem from that. The post doesn't actually have much to do with libertarianism at all, it's just the standard "when does a fetus become a person and get human rights" debate.

There is nothing about libertarianism that dictates human life as starting at the moment of birth. Most libertarian philosophies stem from an underlying respect for the NAP, and whether or not abortion (or prevention of abortion) is a violation of the NAP is a massively debatable subject.

you will get more likes for this post

because maybe they think deciding for women doesnt conflict with the true libertarian philosophie

l dont know since when calling abortion murder or lacking empathy for rape victims has been a part of this philosophie

maybe it is another definition of neo liberalism ,a globalist one

they both serve for capitalist movements

 

[HumanBeing]

you will get more likes for this post

because maybe they think deciding for women doesnt conflict with the true libertarian philosophie

No, if I got likes for it, it would be because people are smart enough to recognize that the fetus being aborted may also turn out to be a woman, thereby greatly confusing your argument that abortion supports women's rights. Again, it all goes back to your assertion that human life begins at the moment of birth. If that's "correct", then you'd be right in saying that preventing a woman from having an abortion would be a violation of her right to do what she wants to her own body. But if you're "wrong" and life starts before birth, then you're just supporting the right of one woman to kill another, and I'm sure you'll agree there's nothing libertarian about that.

So again, this isn't really a libertarian point you're making, it's just a differently worded version of the "when does human life begin" argument.

[Just to be clear, I put the "right and wrong" in speech marks because I'm not convinced there actually is a right or wrong in this argument, I'm simply using the terms to make my point]

they both serve for capitalist movements

I have no idea what you think capitalism has to do with the issue, though I guess I'd be interested to hear it.

 

[Medusa]

No, if I got likes for it, it would be because people are smart enough to recognize that the fetus being aborted may also turn out to be a woman, thereby greatly confusing your argument that abortion supports women's rights. Again, it all goes back to your assertion that human life begins at the moment of birth. If that's "correct", then you'd be right in saying that preventing a woman from having an abortion would be a violation of her right to do what she wants to her own body. But if you're "wrong" and life starts before birth, then you're just supporting the right of one woman to kill another, and I'm sure you'll agree there's nothing libertarian about that.

So again, this isn't really a libertarian point you're making, it's just a differently worded version of the "when does human life begin" argument.


I have no idea what you think capitalism has to do with the issue, though I guess I'd be interested to hear it.

woman is a human and thats why we need to defend her rights in the name of " human rights " ,not women rights


if it was the men who could give birth ,we would be defending their rights too ,no need to change the topic

l believe abortion is morally wrong too but if we begin to ban every action which we think of ethically wrong ,how can we claim we support invidiual rights,human rights ,other rights etc ?

many rightist ones usually want the government to stay out of their private lives and not to regulate economic affairs but they forget from where this ideology takes its source when it comes to abortion , secularism ,gay rights ,black community

because they are still conservative

l dont know why it is hard to understand its relation with capitalism

leftists are against abortion ,gay rights etc?

 

[HumanBeing]

woman is a human and thats why we need to defend her rights in the name of " human rights " ,not women rights

Right, but you're missing the point, which is that you're simply assuming that human life starts at birth. If it starts before that, then you aren't supporting women's rights (or human rights) by supporting abortion, you're just allowing adult women to kill unborn women.

Again, just in case I wasn't clear enough: I'm not saying that this is what I believe. I think its a very complex issue and a highly debatable one at that. I'm just saying that your argument has nothing to do with libertarian philosophy, because you are basing the whole thing on the false premise that libertarianism dictates human life as starting at birth. It doesn't, nor does it dictate the opposite. Like I said, it's debatable, but the debatable bit is where a fetus ends and human life begins, which isn't an arguement that is confined to libertarians.

if it was the men who could give birth ,we would be defending their rights too ,no need to change the topic

I didn't change the topic or say anything about men, but again, you're missing the point. A fetus can be male or female. What matters is whether you consider it human enough to be entitled to human rights. Evidently you don't, but some might, and arguments for or against have nothing to do with libertarianism.

l believe abortion is morally wrong too but if we begin to ban every action which we think of ethically wrong ,how can we claim we support invidiual rights,human rights ,other rights etc ?

I didn't say it's wrong. I simply disagreed with your idea that there is something about libertarian philosophy that pinpoints the moment that human life begins. I do think it's an interesting subject, because I'm an ardent supporter of the NAP and I think this is one of few issues where it gets ethically cloudy.

many rightist ones usually want the government to stay out of their private lives and not to regulate economic affairs but they forget where this ideology takes its source when it comes to abortion , secularism ,gay rights ,black community

I'm not "rightist", nor do I have any sort of a problem with the idea of equal rights.

because they are still conservative

Don't know who "they" are, but most conservatives hate me and my views. I'm not into conserving stuff, as a general rule.....

 

[jonny5]

admit you are a conservative capitalist without hiding behind libertarianism

:2razz:

Im not. Whats that got to do with your post?

 

[Josie]

if jaydubya likes it ,no need to say anything else :lamo

That was an intelligent response.

 

[JayDubya]

if jaydubya likes it ,no need to say anything else :lamo

Yeah, I liked the video and I liked it on youtube and I'll probably watch more of her videos. I'm thankful to Josie for posting the link.


Uh-oh. Let me guess, now you think the lady in that video "needs rape" too? :roll: I forget, was that everyone who disagrees with you that deserves to be attacked, or was it only some people... It's so puzzling.

 

[Spriggs05]

Being a pro-abortion libertarian makes as much sense as being a pro-slavery libertarian.

If grievous human rights abuses are going on to some of the human population around you, just not you, that still doesn't make it okay... not if you want a free society that cares about and protects human rights. That's the basic, bedrock function of government, the night watchman. And that's the function we the people have to keep working through our own vigilance, lest we have a failed government that needs to be replaced.

No, its a woman's body and her right to chose what to do with it, the night watchman is to protect her rights as well, or in your opinion are women lesser as I have seen from some posters on the forum.
I see where the pro life libertarian argument comes from, if your not willing to do the same for pro choice then that is not debate it is stubbornness and ignorance. Judging by your first sentence you don't appear to be civil, prove me wrong.

 

[Gawain]

LIST OF JUST SOME OF THE REASONS LIBERTARIANS WANT GOVERNMENT OUT OF THE ABORTION ISSUE

The fetus is not a human being with rights until it is born (based on a number of rationales) and/or only the mother confers rights on the fetus; even if the fetus has rights, and abortion is murder, the rights of the mother to evict trespassers -- for whatever reasons -- through abortion are greater (based on a number of rationales); the government is the problem, not the solution, including in this issue; it's my body and the government should keep its laws off it; people can decide this issue in their private, contractual communities; only voluntary means of convincing a woman to have a child are libertarian; the decision on whether it is murder is based on political power and adult women have more power; it is wrong to force a deformed baby or unwanted child to come into the world; OTHER???

Pro-Choice Libertarians

Says who? Not most libertarians thats for sure. There is no doubt that it is a human being at conception. Since its wrong to bring an unwanted baby into the world is it ok to kill an unwanted child? Lets have abortion on demand as long as the parasites live with you. The first and most important right we all have is the right to life. Pro choice is simply the right to choose murder.

Too bad this guy wasnt aborted. He was a classic case

 

[JayDubya]

No, its a woman's body and her right to chose what to do with it, the night watchman is to protect her rights as well, or in your opinion are women lesser as I have seen from some posters on the forum.

No, you don't have the right to kill other human beings; making this sort of killing illegal and enforcing those laws violate no ones rights. There is no right to "choose" to kill your kid; people are able to perform awful violations of the rights of others, and government's duty is to arrest and detain those people.

Also, you have a pro-life libertarian whom I greatly admire in your avatar. Irony++.

 

[Spriggs05]

Am I the only Pro Choice Libertarian on this forum?

 

[Medusa]

Am I the only Pro Choice Libertarian on this forum?

turtle is one of them as far as l know

 

[Spriggs05]

No, you don't have the right to kill other human beings; making this sort of killing illegal and enforcing those laws violate no ones rights. There is no right to "choose" to kill your kid; people are able to perform awful violations of the rights of others, and government's duty is to arrest and detain those people.

1) Are you talking human being as from conception or the third trimester/etc?
2) Women may not be able to support the baby financially and may be a burden on her if she is not able to abort it, and if she did in an abortion free country it would be a dangerous, dirty backstreet abortion where the risk of her dying is higher than giving birth to the child, if she wants an abortion give it to her in a safe and clean environment with the presence of a doctor.
3) To be honest, I doubt if we will ever know if those in the foetal form are conscious or not, it is impossible to tell what some other being is feeling without expressions, which you cannot see from an ultrasound, if the foetus has a blank face (no emotions shown) then I doubt it is conscious.

Also, you have a pro-life libertarian whom I greatly admire in your avatar. Irony ++.

I admire him as well, but true that. :lol:

 

[Spriggs05]

turtle is one of them as far as l know

Yay Turtle! :mrgreen:

 

[Gawain]

Am I the only Pro Choice Libertarian on this forum?

Your a rare breed thats for sure. Most libertarians lean right. We dont support socialism or murder.:lol: