This is going around the internet. Any thoughts?
Best, Michael
[ Attachment content not displayed ]
Derek,
I'm not clear how A would have the wherewithal to evict B. Exactly how would A evict B?
Best, Michael
Derek Jensen wrote:
I'm familiar with the argument some Libertarians, particularly anarchist
Libertarians, put forth regarding abortion that a woman as owner of her
body
has a right to evict the unwanted fetus.
There�s no single clear libertarian position on abortion.
Libertarianism is all about individual rights, so it depends on the
individuality of the fetus, which is far from a clearly-resolved issue.
People of some religions believe that the fetus is a full human individual
person at conception, and that therefore the fetus has equal human rights
with the mother. In that case, abortion is only acceptable if the
alternative is that both mother and child would otherwise die.
Others believe that until the child is actually born, it isn�t a person,
and therefore abortion is acceptable at any time.
I think that that point of view is much rarer than the media would have us
believe, though; abortion rights activists hold to a hard line because a
nuanced debate is nearly impossible to have on the issue. Most people,
off the record and in personal conversation, believe something in between.
At some point � and we�re not sure where that point is yet � a fetus
becomes a person. At that point, abortion is considerably less attractive
as a personal choice option, and should be reserved for medical
emergencies.
The recent study about the ability of the fetus to feel pain was
interesting, but the implication is that a brain-damaged person is also OK
to kill. Personally, I prefer to look at the viability of the fetus,
though this keeps getting pushed back, and at some point we�ll have
artificial wombs.
But a more important overarching point is that no one � or hardly anyone �
actually *likes* abortion. Pro-choice activists prefer to keep it as a
legal option, since they will happen anyway under less safe conditions,
just like drug usage does. As libertarians, we can work towards a world
without abortion by working for a more prosperous and free world, where
people have better educations (if they want them), women are fully equal
(if they want to be), and medical technology ensures that every child is
wanted, healthy, and economically supportable.
~Chris
[ Attachment content not displayed ]
[ Attachment content not displayed ]
How much of their brain do they share? (some conjoined twined have varying degrees of fused brains)
I ask this question to suggest that it's brains and not the rest of the bodies that are of interest to most people. And in the case of a fetus, a brain the size of a small lizard or chicken doesn't count for much from that perspective. There is the potentiality argument but that's a pretty slippery slope on either side, so it's a bit of a wash as far as I can see. For example, one couple may *potentially* produce a million descendants over several generations. Does killing then them amount to the murder of a million individuals? Then again, they may potentially kill someone else tomorrow. Does killing them then amount to heroism?
All that said, it seems to me it's primarily abstract empathy instincts and the intention of social control through taboo memes (in this case reenforced via legal means) that are the real basis of the pro-life position.
-- Steve