Derek,
Perhaps you mean the mother--not the twin--wishes to evict one of the twins.
She could either keep them both (it would not be a rights' violation), or she could evict them both (it would not be a
rights' violation). Her choice.
The fact that she couldn't evict the unwanted twin and not the other is not a problem of libertarian property rights theory, it's a problem of the primitive state of medical technology.
Best, Michael
[ Attachment content not displayed ]
Derek,
If A wants to live separately, but B is not violating A's rights, then A would be guilty of murder if he acted on his preference.
Sharing the organ is taxing it too much and they will die soon anyways
through organ failure unless separation occurs?
Same as above.
The DNA of the organ shows that but for the Siamese enjoining, it would
be part of A's body
I assume this means the organ is A's property. Consequently, B is trespassing and A has right to evict B.
Best, Michael