The libertarian worldview is quite clear: you have a right to do anything you want so long as you do not harm, defraud, coerce, or otherwise violate the rights of others. Such a simplistic political philosophy fails to address the most difficult and important questions facing man and society. In the case of abortion, libertarian philosophy is at an utter loss in being able to provide answers to the question of when life begins or at what point does an individual have rights. Libertarianism takes from granted that these questions have answers, and hence cannot itself answer them.
To answer these questions you have to draw upon some philosiphical or religous system to which libertarianism is extraneous. That's why libertarians cannot and will never come to a consensus on the matter.
The abortion debate was one of many things that made me realize how bankrupt a philosophy libertarianism is.
I find libertarian philosophy adequate to answer any question of government clearly. For example, with abortion, it is completely clear to me that once a human life has begun, it deserves the same respect as any other human life. We all started off as a bunch of cells - that's how human life starts - it's what we are. If rights are a property inherent in a human being (the very basis of libertarianism), then a human being has those rights once it is an individual human being. The presence of a unique set of human DNA proves the presence of a discrete individual human. I don't need to appeal to God's wisdom in order to make this an open and shut case.
It seems the number of actual libertarians, the ones committed to the cause of human freedom above all else, are very few. 'exodus' also understands the fundamentals, but I cannot say that for certain about any other poster to this thread. From what I have seen in this discussion, he and I are the only ones committed to holding the freedom of humanity above all other causes.
The best way to truly understand what libertarianism is, is to read Leviathan, written 1660 by Thomas Hobbes in London. It is the derivation - from precise definition - of the rights of man. I trust you will find it most interesting.
To: thoughtomator
That's also the view of Republicans and Democrats. It's just that drug-warriors and flower-sniffers (was that un-PC? So sorry) have different ideas of what "harm" is.
To the drug warrior conservative type, any use of party supplies other than alcohol is "harmful" to morals, society in general, and even the world, in that it encourages "crime" everywhere, and our insistence that morality not be used to determine what gets printed encourages pornography, also destroying our kids and promoting the rape of helpless women; but that's not as dangerous as our insistence on "free thinking," and challenging society's declared morals, endangering children and probably conspiring to commit treason with nations that also want to destroy American values.
To the flower-sniffing liberal types, talking out loud without editing our un-PC thoughts, walking past a "disadvantaged" person without opening a wallet, fighting against "necessary" government programs, not feeling guilty about the "horrible" crimes historically committed only by white men, and turning and looking at a pretty girl, treating her like a sex object and thus promoting the rape of helpless women; all that is "harmful" to society, but not as dangerous to society as our insistence on thinking for ourselves, which harms all those folks we ignore because of our selfish focus on our own issues. On top of that, for some reason we just can't understand the benefits of world government.
Yes, I'm playing, but as you can see, there's a lot of truth in what I just said.
To: thoughtomator
So Republicans have the answer to the abortion question?
The Republican Party officially oppose abortion, but we have a Republican President in office, and both his mother and his wife have said that they favor Choice, many Republicans nationwide are pro-choice, and many Freepers who claim to be Republican have said that they support that "right," too.
The Democrat Party officially approves of abortion, but many members of the Democratic Party are strongly against abortion, so they are no closer to an "answer" than the Republicans.
The search for an answer to this problem isn't a uniquely libertarian dilemma.
To: thoughtomator; JohnGalt; tpaine
I am a Christian, and libertarianism is a philosophy, not a party. I oppose abortion. Other libertarians on this very thread favor that "right."
There's lots of Christians in the Republican Party who favor choice. There's a lot of Christians in the Democratic Party who oppose choice. There's lots of atheists in both those political parties who are equally undecisive on the atheistic answer to the question.
It seems religion has very little to do with anyone's view on abortion, other than as a justification for holding the opinion they've decided upon.