|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Thu Nov 11, 2004 9:51 am
my father and I are both libertarians, and agree with almost all of the principles, except one.
Are all libertarians pro choice?
I don't see it as a choice, i see it as killing a baby, just like when a woman has a miscarriage she sees it as a baby dying, not a fetus or a bunch of cells. Am I alone in thinking like this?
This would make supporting them very hard, but at least Nolan wants to leave things like that to the state.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 11, 2004 4:12 pm
I'm circumstantially pro-choice, but either view is acceptable and fits with libertarian ideals, usually the case is as follows: if you're pro-choice, then you support the woman's right to her body, if you're pro-life, you support the baby's right to live. Both of those sound like a libertarian to me. You might want to check out Libertarians for Life(.org). For the other side of the spectrum: Pro-choice Libertarians(.net). Maybe it's just because I take the moderate stance in the issue, but I think the Libertarian party should continue to be neutral on the issue. The official Libertarian Party Platform Issue #20 reads: LP.ORG Women's Rights and Abortion Individual rights should not be denied or abridged on the basis of sex. Recognizing that abortion is a very sensitive issue and that people, including libertarians, can hold good-faith views on both sides, we believe the government should be kept out of the question. Michael Badnarik I believe that giving the government control of this issue could lead to more abortions rather than less, because the left-right pendulum of power swings back and forth. This shift could place the power to set policy in the hands of those who demand strict population control. The government that can ban abortion can just as easily mandate abortion, as is currently the case in China. Also, many libertarians would support eliminating regulations and restrictions to "streamline the adoption process, getting government out of the way of the best solution to unwanted pregnancy... oppose tax funding for abortion... (and) oppose federal mandates that require companies provide abortion as a health care benefit" (Badnarik). Sorry if I overquoted. ^-^
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 11, 2004 4:36 pm
you didn't smile You answered my question perfectly, thankyou. Considering he did get the nomination, I suppose he's the best person to quote when it comes to fully understanding libertarian ideals.
Thankyou very much smile
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 11, 2004 4:44 pm
my pleasure. biggrin To clarify my position- I would feel like I can live with government control on abortion past the third trimester, but I think the money spent on enforcing that would be better spent on some small scale protected-sex encouragement. (I know, I know, sounds liberal, but just at least introduce the idea to all the kids.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 11, 2004 5:12 pm
wouldnt seem like it would cost alot of extra money, It'd just be penciled under murder or malpractice and people will be punished if caught. I can almost understand first trimester abortions being legal, but during the second trimester fetuses become thinking creatures. (my brother played with my mom when he was 5-6 months in the womb)
I think it would solve alot if people understood what the morning after pill was (that it's not an abortion pill, it takes 2-3 days for the egg to be fertilized and the morning after pill prevents this proccess from occuring) if that was better understood i think there would be less teen pregnancies(which im sure make up for most abortions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 11, 2004 5:12 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 11, 2004 6:50 pm
haha, nah, I'm just not creative enough to be an a*****e. As for when the baby or (group of) cell(s) receives a soul, tough call. Some think that when the last toe of the baby exits the mother, it's a person. For others it's when it simply "looks like a baby" (can get pretty grey). While still others think the rite of passage into humanhood happens the absolute second the sperm hits the egg. Still some think the sperm and egg are both parts of the baby (probably the same crowd who follows the anti-masturbation guidelines in the Bible). The Bible spells out that God knew you before you were born, but until Jesus comes down a second time and declares the moment souls are assigned to people, I think there will always be debate on this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 11, 2004 9:13 pm
well..im not a religious person, so i dont give a sh*t about souls. I figure when a baby can feel pain, you're not allowed to hurt them wink
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 12, 2004 7:30 am
Hm. Yes, I am new to this guild, just accepted, actually, and I myself am pro-life. I agree with most of your points Libertarian2008, and appreciate Sinew taking a neutral side to the whole thing. 'Tis what I try to do most the time, even if I'm with one side or another. Hm...probably shouldn't even be sticking my nose into things like this yet. xd
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 12, 2004 7:36 am
Starlight_the_Wanderer Hm. Yes, I am new to this guild, just accepted, actually, and I myself am pro-life. I agree with most of your points Libertarian2008, and appreciate Sinew taking a neutral side to the whole thing. 'Tis what I try to do most the time, even if I'm with one side or another. Hm...probably shouldn't even be sticking my nose into things like this yet. xd why not? thats the point of being in a political guild...to discuss things, and to learn, right?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 12, 2004 8:01 am
Hm...point. I am just uncomfortable jumping into discussions within the first hour of being accepted. And greetings all, by the way.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 12, 2004 8:20 am
lol thats what i did wink i got excepted and replied to every topic on the first page lol
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 12, 2004 2:50 pm
Welcome aboard, Starlight.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Nov 14, 2004 5:12 pm
Sinew Welcome aboard, Starlight. Yes Welcome to the Libertarian Guild. I'm somewhat pro-choice. I'm not pro-abortion per say and I'm not saying everyone should go out and get one, but I'm pro-choice. Abortion is the one of the few areas in our society where I happy with the the status quo. I say when the baby realizes its being murdered should be a cut off, but if it's just a mass of living/non-thinking tissue, I don't have a problem with it. If abortion was outlawed by the government, I honestly don't think it would cut down on the # of abortions. It will cut down on the number of safe abortions, but not on the number of abortions. Back-alley and self abortions would increase by sugnificant amount, and in most of the those cases the mother dies. I don't think I have a right to judge these mothers and what they've had to go throught. Another reason I'm pro-choice is because of instances of rape. I don't want criminal's love seeds spreading around. I'm not saying getting one is either right or wrong, but it's the mothers body, and she should be able to choose. I have no problem in people convincing others to not to get an abortion, but I don't think the government should step in and outlaw it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Nov 14, 2004 8:18 pm
VashZero5 Sinew Welcome aboard, Starlight. Yes Welcome to the Libertarian Guild. I'm somewhat pro-choice. I'm not pro-abortion per say and I'm not saying everyone should go out and get one, but I'm pro-choice. Abortion is the one of the few areas in our society where I happy with the the status quo. I say when the baby realizes its being murdered should be a cut off, but if it's just a mass of living/non-thinking tissue, I don't have a problem with it. If abortion was outlawed by the government, I honestly don't think it would cut down on the # of abortions. It will cut down on the number of safe abortions, but not on the number of abortions. Back-alley and self abortions would increase by sugnificant amount, and in most of the those cases the mother dies. I don't think I have a right to judge these mothers and what they've had to go throught. Another reason I'm pro-choice is because of instances of rape. I don't want criminal's love seeds spreading around. I'm not saying getting one is either right or wrong, but it's the mothers body, and she should be able to choose. I have no problem in people convincing others to not to get an abortion, but I don't think the government should step in and outlaw it. True. Back when there was a prohibiton of it of sorts, there were still illegal ones, but back then, (early 20th century) it was pretty risky to get one compared to today, so the situation was rare when it would actually increase the mother's chance for survival. I should prolly research it a little sometime, and see how long ago it really was invented. I can agree that the baby shouldn't be killed when it gains consciousness, but sometimes the mother's life is endangered, or the baby's life is doomed.. I can't think of a clear-cut/black-and-white law I'll be satisfied with. And I'd hate for taxpayer money to go to a commission/judge for deciding all of them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
![[.Hottie09.]'s avatar](https://a1cdn.gaiaonline.com/dress-up/avatar/ava/2a/a1/6645011f10a12a_flip.png?t=1240191221_6.00_00)
Reply
