Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

To: Phantom Lord
And the LP is chock full of tin-foil wearing Chicken Little Looney-tunes.
40 posted on 09/23/2002 9:57:20 AM PDT by Moby Grape
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies ]


To: Impeach the Boy
Here's some more looney tunes for you...a baby can be evicted by the mother as a trespasser!

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

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

Libertarians are well aware that the “protection of our nation’s children” is an excuse used by politicians to increase their political power. The Drug War, the virtual nationalization of our country’s school systems, welfare systems, Medicaid, anti-obscenity laws, Internet controls – all of these political crusades depend wholly or in part on the sentimental rhetoric of child protection.

The abortion issue is no different. To grant the legal premise that two individual persons with equal rights can exist in the same body lays the foundation for unprecedented government power. There is no ambiguity here. The Libertarian principles of non-initiation of force and property rights - when applied to adult fertile women – direct us to oppose laws which would interfere with women’s freedom of action and support laws which protect women’s rights to do what they choose with their bodies.

Women’s Rights and Abortion (additional language proposal)

We recognize that different moral codes and religions have many different opinions about human intervention in the natural processes of human reproduction, ranging from a total ban on any form of interference -with sometimes severe physical or social punishments for deviations from orthodoxy - to a willing acceptance of any and all scientific and medical techniques and advancements. We therefore make no judgements about whether violations of sexual taboos, birth control, genetic manipulation, abortion, or other forms of reproductive intervention are morally right or wrong. We are concerned only with the consequences of an important legal presumption to the freedom of women.

If an embryo developing inside a pregnant woman is presumed by the law to be a separate person, then the consequences for women's freedom is potential disaster. Such a presumption lays the legal foundation for laws that could subject fertile women to such things as monthly pregnancy testing, strict diet control, involuntary medical treatment, and criminal and civil liability for fetal injury caused by ignorance, accident, negligence, or the purposeful termination of pregnancy, all in the name of protecting the unborn child.

Regarding abortion, we hold that the law must presume that women are competent to make decisions concerning their own reproduction, and that the potential child inside a pregnant woman is not a separate person, but a part of the woman, and, absent some prior contract with the father, her property to do with as she will, until the moment at birth when the umbilical cord is cut and she is no longer providing it with nourishment. We further urge the repeal and prohibition of any and all laws that would restrict a woman's right to determine her own course of nutrition and treatment during pregnancy, to terminate her pregnancy either chemically or surgically, or to transfer her embryo for medical research. Women who are pregnant must be free to judge for themselves whether or not to carry a pregnancy full term, since only they are competent to judge whether or not they and their children will be loved or unloved, cared for or abandoned, free agents or resources for the State.

History shows that the suppression of women's rights to life, liberty and property was tied for centuries to the fact that women had no dependable control over their reproductive cycles. It was only with the technological development of dependable birth control in the mid-twentieth century that women could truly act on their claims to equal political rights with men. As Libertarians, we cannot stand in the way of reproductive freedom, even if that freedom means that some women will decide to end the potential life within them. We should encourage education programs to aid women in determining the best course for their own reproduction.

43 posted on 09/23/2002 10:09:12 AM PDT by Hillary's Lovely Legs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies ]

To: Impeach the Boy
And the LP is chock full of tin-foil wearing Chicken Little Looney-tunes.

FreeRepublic has its fair share of them too. As do all political parties.

71 posted on 09/23/2002 11:07:33 AM PDT by Phantom Lord
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson