Replies

'As medical techniques advance, viability could change; -- then insurers would have the ethical dilemma of paying for heroic measures to keep accident victims normally unviable babies alive. [...] Are you willing to pay this cost in ~your~ premiums?' -tpaine

Am I 'willing'? Sure. Can I afford it? That is a more difficult question...

Am I 'willing' to send my children to private school [instead of public school]? Am I willing to donate to charity [rather than to welfare]? Am I 'willing' to save for my retirement [rather than depending on social security]?

There are lots of things that I am 'willing' to do...But I don't have many options after 35% of my income is confiscated from my paycheck...After paying for all of these wonderful 'free' services that the state provides [most of which I will probably never use] there is only enough cash to pay for rent, food and transportation.

I apologize if this answer seems like a 'dodge'. I don't pretend to have all the answers. That is why I am a FReeper [lookin' for answers].

The point that I am trying to make is that there are many solutions to these problems. However, our options are quite limited when we try to apply them to the [statist/collectivist] real world. I am sure that I don't have to remind most libertarians and conservatives that the state is the root of many of these problems and that sometimes I feel like a 'dog chasing my own tail' trying to solve this stuff [socialism] with half-ass solutions [socialism-lite] rather than real solutions [true individual liberty].

in response to the original question posted, it seems that a liberitarian would face the same challenge as anyone else, when does life begin. many libs take the stance that you are not truly a functional being until you have the capablitly of abstract reasoning ( the ability to compare nontangibles, ideas etc.) but as many of us know, there are a massive amount of adults lacking this ability who are guaranteed rights and services based on their age alone. i believe a liberitarian might answer that all conscious being are guaranteed a "bubble" of personal freedom around them, which still leaves the question is the fetus a being of its own , on its own, with its own thoughts and capabilities. no political philosophy stance can answer te abortion question because they rely on hard science and facts for their empirical proofs. and to date the science on this issue is muddled at best. too many special intrest groups on ither side seem to have attempted to polarize the issue instead of taking an honest look at it. which leaves the rest of us with what we have learned from others and our own gut reaction.

As medical techniques advance, viability could change; -- then insurers would have the ethical dilemma of paying for heroic measures to keep accident victims normally unviable babies alive. [...] Are you willing to pay this cost in ~your~ premiums?' -tpaine

Am I 'willing'? Sure.

Fine, if kept to private insurance schemes.. -- Yet we all know that private/government boundries have virtually ceased to exist in medical insurance. - Thus in effect you admit that socialistic means are OK if used to 'good' ends..

but, Can I afford it? That is a more difficult question... Am I 'willing' to send my children to private school [instead of public school]? Am I willing to donate to charity [rather than to welfare]? Am I 'willing' to save for my retirement [rather than depending on social security]? There are lots of things that I am 'willing' to do...But I don't have many options after 35% of my income is confiscated from my paycheck...After paying for all of these wonderful 'free' services that the state provides [most of which I will probably never use] there is only enough cash to pay for rent, food and transportation.

I apologize if this answer seems like a 'dodge'.

Seems? -- It is.
Quite a long effort too..
- I think you realise what a socialistic hole you've dug, and are trying to rationalize it with volume..

I don't pretend to have all the answers. That is why I am a FReeper [lookin' for answers]. The point that I am trying to make is that there are many solutions to these problems. However, our options are quite limited when we try to apply them to the [statist/collectivist] real world.

Yep - Sure thing.. Yet you want to add to the "[statist/collectivist]" laws in this country by prohibiting abortion... Counterintuitive.

I am sure that I don't have to remind most libertarians and conservatives that the state is the root of many of these problems and that sometimes I feel like a 'dog chasing my own tail' trying to solve this stuff [socialism] with half-ass solutions [socialism-lite] rather than real solutions [true individual liberty].

Well at least you see some of the dichotomy in your own reasoning.
The "real solutions [to] [true individual liberty]", are to be found by restoring respect for our constitutional basics..
Not by advocating abortion 'law'.