Replies

"Nobody is pro-abortion, in that sense."

I beg to differ. Planned Parenthood and NOW, fr'instance, has no compunctions about advocating that money be sent to the Chinese government to enforce their utterly immoral population restriction law via abortions. Having encountered many radical feminists and lefties, I can say with all certainty that plenty of them see abortion as objectively neutral act that liberates women, increasing their control over their lives, etc etc. In fact, I bet if you were to dig into the many vocal advocates, you would find that the majority consider it perfectly ok, with just a vague sense of "ickiness" for the details.

That is being pro-abortion, whether they mask it as pro-choice or whatever. It comes from the same sense of false rationality and cruelty that promotes communism and the other variations of collectivism.

On the other hand, there is the view, which I share, that abortion is immoral, wrong, and irresponsible; however, government restriction in this matter, much like with drugs, is a worse evil because it does little to halt the practice while criminalizing a large segment of the populace for what is, after all, within their bodies. Forcing someone to bear children is a greater evil, irrespective of circumstance, than allowing them the choice.
The onus is upon those of us that have been exposed to the harsh truths behind abortion, the photographs, the traumatized ex-mothers, to spread the word, and make it clear that humanity cannot tolerate such behaviour if it is to be civilized and moral. The truth stands on its own, without government coercion.

Hence, Pro-Choice. Anti-Government. Etc. I don't expect you to agree, of course. It is far too much fun for many here at FR to slander libertarians as often as possible, sometimes due to the goofy naivete some of them display, but mostly from some cynical brand of pleasure. So be it; it is not like we do not choose our company. But is it at least possible to see the difference between pro-abortion and pro-choice (or whatever you wish to call it)?

The Chinese eat aborted fetuses by the way. Yuck! And they kicked us off the UN human rights committe? Makes me wonder about that "shrimp and rice" tv dinner I just ate.

On the other hand, there is the view, which I share, that abortion is immoral, wrong, and irresponsible; however, government restriction in this matter, much like with drugs, is a worse evil because it does little to halt the practice while criminalizing a large segment of the populace for what is, after all, within their bodies. Forcing someone to bear children is a greater evil, irrespective of circumstance, than allowing them the choice.

Is forcing someone from killing another person a violation of that great civil right you just mentioned? I would ask you this. Why can't a people be free from drug users if they so please? Why should I have to put up with the cocaine addict next door when he could just move to a state where cocaine was legal and I could live in a state where it was illegal?

If drugs are legalized, should I the taxpayer take up the bill for the rehabilitation of a drug addict who figures out that what he is doing is destroying him? Should the state let people destroy themselves without intervening? I'm not saying that you shouldn't be able to live in a state where drugs are legal, I'm just saying that I should also have the right to live in a state where they are illegal.