I think most of those who are Pro Choice actually identify with that label, I personally think they have chosen to isolate a very small aspect of the issue and too often emphasise collectivist arguments and, finally, tend to be too timid (here I am not referring to anyone on this forum, but rather to where decisions are actually made). Pro Choicers are much more honest that Pro Lifers in grneral. But, there are Pro Lifers who do state that their position is based on religion and the gives them the virtue of honesty. They are still wrong though.
Again, who is this girl you are referring to and how many are "multiple"? And why does it even matter to you? As long as she is having the abortion bevause she wants them, she is de facto taking control over her own life.
No, science has a very clear line when it becomes a fetus and that is before that happens. Exactly. And a pregnancy is 36 weeks which means it is not true that it becomes a fetus "by the end of the pregnancy". How about potential baby?
Aren't you the one who said women should be kept in barns and forced to gestate?(maybe not your exact words, but that's basically what you have said Thank you for teaching me your little game
No, you are the one who ignores that one cannot give up a pregnancy for adoption. A woman has to endure 9 months of physical pain, emotional stress and psychological hardship before she can do that. Sometimes even with the risk of death. It is simply not right to force that upon anyone. I completely disagree with this. Grandparents have no duty to raise their grandchildren. Abortion does not kill a baby. Who? Would you sign up?
I am not sure if it was him, but one poster seriously suggest to put up an Orwellian surveillence program where women who do not want babies are put on a list so that they can be tracked and punished if they do get pregnant.
Yeah, that is just totalitarian insanity that opens up the possibility for government to apply that same policy on other areas. As I mentioned, my coumtry tried something like that up umtil the 60's -- They had a special "abortion committee" that took applications and looked at every case independently before giving permission and the only thing it resulted in was forcing unwillingly pregnant women to wait up until the middle of the second trimestre before getting their abortion. Very bad idea.
I have been a babysitter for smaller members of my family ("my own flesh and blood") and as much as I love them, I would not accept to become their legal caretaker. Simply because right here and now I am not ready for such massive responsibility and I would probably not even be able to do a good job anyways, so it would be irrational and even immoral for me to take on that role simply because someone, somewhere said it is a duty. I would be a bad person if I took on that responsibility despite knowing I am not fit for it. Babysitting is fun, you get to do all the fun stuff like playing and enjoying yourself. Adoption (parenthood), at least to me, seems like a great pain in the butt. At least at this moment of my life. I cannot even imagine what pregnancy is like and I have gone through quite some trauma at the hospital bed throughout my life. I am not sure exactly how adoption works and if contemporary legislation makes it too difficult. I have not looked into that issue to give a comment, but as FoxHastings has pointed out, this not a sub-forum for discussion on adoption (even though the words are similar). It is a separate issue that can be discussed elsewhere. All I have to add to this is that I would be fine with an unwillingly pregnant woman choosing to give birth (then she would not really be unwillingly pregnant anymore though) and then hand the baby over to someone else if that was truly what she wanted (surrogates are already common). I do not know how common this is and have a hard time imaging there are many women who would rationally and independently choose that. I think that it is legal though and I don't think it is wrong, so not sure why you are even botjering to ask the question. I am not a female, neither are you. We will never be able to know what it is like to be pregnant or how it feels when you get unwillingly pregnant. I do, however, believe that most women actually struggle a lot when they find themselves in that position. I do not think they just deal with it with a "lol" or regard an unwanted pregnancy as a success. If a female family member, female friend or a female I "knocked up" was in that position and came to me, I would support her. I would not spit in her face and say; "Your fault, slut. Now you have to give birth or else you are a murderer." Would you?
Um... isn't government already applying that to other areas? Let's come back to this in 30 years, when government has slid even further down the slope of totalitarianism, and discuss regulating abortion then. By then it will be obviously totally inconsistent to control everything else but not abortion. Until I see [abortion] pro-choicers in large numbers hopping aboard the Libertarian boat, I'm going to call hypocrisy and BS.
They have no grandchild until it has been born and they have no right to make decisions for their adult daughters.
Yes, so let's not increase that power of theirs any further. Hopefully, we won't get to that point. But, regulating abortion now would accelerate that shift.
That's still irrelevant to the point we were talking about. They're not making the decision. It's just their decision could take away one of the strong reasons the daughter is using to justify her decision.
She can ask anyone she wants for support and guidance. Hopefully, she has - at least - someone she trusts enough for that. Ultimately, the decision is hers and hers only.
Depends. I think Rothbard made a case for abortion, but other prominent names like Block, Ron Paul and Hoppe have argued against it. Libertarianism is very wishy-washy on more complex and philosophical matters and only sufficient for analysing politics (economics).
You do realize pro-lifers disagree with that Of course, even pro-lifers agree she should have some choice in some of those situations.
Yes, because they hate life and fear freedom. They are completely second-handed to the Bible and have very perverted, OCD-tendencies.
Abortion and immigration are the two pressing issues that split the Libertarian party into its conservative and liberal wings. If both sides could compromise somehow and come together, maybe the Libertarians would have more of a chance on the national stage. But people aren't good at compromising.
