[frogjerk]

I wonder if the true meaning of the entire post was left on the editing room floor, so that someone can make an argument against a straw man?

What the hell is the true meaning of your entire post? I just went back and read it again and I believe you are stating that liberty trumps life. Is this your position? Are you of the belief that the Congress had no right to pass the measure they did?

[edeal]

If you had read it, you will see that I was responding to someone who was criticizing libertarians (notice small "l", Libertarians are nothing more than weed addicts who try to get Democrats elected). In the end, I said I like to err on the side of liberty and that Terry's free will is not being followed because her intent cannot be known.

We are basically taking the word of a man who is as far removed from her as one can be. He has a 9 year old child by another woman (not his wife), if i remember correctly. What bonds could he still possible have with her that qualify as a husbandly?

In any event, I believe that congress should not have HAD to do anything, but also, Congress has the right to defend the right to life. So, they can make pretty much any law they want which prevents one party from inflicting death on another without their consent.

Why can Congress regulate the labels on milk of a small dairy (which they shouldn't be able to do), but cannot act to prevent the state from committing homicide out of convenience.

So in short, you were attacking me for agreeing with you by not reading the conclusion, just a randomly selected phrase.