Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: trisham

Totally consistent libertarians are not. However many say that sense the child is a separate person, they have the rights that all individuals have including the right to life.

But a strict libertarian is not pro life, for it means limiting the choice of the mother.


60 posted on 08/07/2014 9:27:18 AM PDT by redgolum ("God is dead" -- Nietzsche. "Nietzsche is dead" -- God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies ]


To: redgolum

Yes, that seems to be so.


61 posted on 08/07/2014 9:28:57 AM PDT by trisham (Zen is not easy. It takes effort to attain nothingness. And then what do you have? Bupkis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies ]

To: redgolum; P-Marlowe; wagglebee
for it means limiting the choice of the mother.

1. The mother is not the child.

2. If the child weren't a living being, they wouldn't have to kill him/her.

3. The avenue of birth is a long-standing, long-used, recognized right of way. It is an non-possessary easement of right of use. In fact, it's an easement that the mother in question has herself used, thereby relinquishing any objection to herself abiding by the same right-of-use easement.

203 posted on 08/07/2014 2:57:03 PM PDT by xzins ( Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who truly support our troops pray for victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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