Civilized Man May Soon Revile Abortion as it Does Slavery

[TerryMiller]

Not my thoughts, but Neil Boortz’s (paraphrased): remember, about 90+% of the babies that are aborted are of Democrats that would grow up to be Democrat voters.

I used to really agree with this comment, but it is still wrong in my view. Besides, even Democrats have a right to be able to change their minds and become more conservative. While many will think that YouTube is a waste of time, there is a lot of interest there, particularly a "movement" called #walkaway, in which a lot of liberals have learned their lessons and are leaving that philosophy. Each of them is encouraged to do a #walkaway video explaining what they have done and why.

It is surprising the number of those that are now saying that Republicans are more tolerant then Democrats. Interestingly, a good number of them are blacks, Hispanics, and gays.

 

[Annie]

We are all entitled to our own opinion, guys. I'm not trying to change anyone's mind -- just stating my opinion. I'm a staunch libertarian -- government should not be involved in what is a very personal decision such as this.

Government shouldn't be involved in a LOT of things it is involved but it is ... I figure in another hundred years we will be exactly like Venezuela if things keep on the path it's on now. Not a damn thing I can do about it. Oh, if I ruled the world ...

 

[Ethan N]

No, I was not saying you were trying and failing, but I guess I misread and/or misunderstood your point (I was looking for the trees and missed the forest). Lets take this a step sideways though. What gives us the right to life? Does that right extend to animals that have lesser brain function, say cows, chickens, etc? Now lets apply that to humans who have little to no brain function. Why do we, as humans get a pass while animals are culled on a daily basis for overpopulation, food, etc?

Now this is where it gets interesting. It was never argued classically, as far as I’m aware, that rational thought is the thing that distinguishes man from beast, and I don’t think it’s a compelling argument. There’s a clear gulf between the minds of humans and the minds of all animals, but there’s a broad range of mental and emotional capabilities among animals, some of which, while not as sophisticated as humans, can be described as rational thought. That doesn’t give them rights.

The philosophy of natural rights, including their origin, is a topic of remarkable depth. I’m looking forward to seeing what others have to say on it, but I’m mostly going to spectate for now because I’ve got a lot of work to get done tonight. But I will point out that in our Declaration of Independence, Jefferson, despite being possibly the most capable man alive at the time to expound on the origin of natural rights, chose to simply note that they are a self-evident truth. Much has been written by people smarter than all of us about the nature of human rights, but they all seemed to agree that, when you take a step back and look at nature, there’s a self-evident distinction between mankind and everything else, and it is the simple fact of being human that confers our rights. That’s not necessarily what it all comes down to, as much more has been written on the subject, but it’s a common line of thinking among 17th and 18th century philosophers. Most of them described this difference in terms of God creating mankind as separate and distinct from the rest of creation, but I don’t think that belief in God as the creator of all things is necessary to recognize the difference in nature between man and beast.

 

[Ethan N]

We are all entitled to our own opinion, guys. I'm not trying to change anyone's mind -- just stating my opinion. I'm a staunch libertarian -- government should not be involved in what is a very personal decision such as this.

Government shouldn't be involved in a LOT of things it is involved but it is ... I figure in another hundred years we will be exactly like Venezuela if things keep on the path it's on now. Not a damn thing I can do about it. Oh, if I ruled the world ...

Well, this is something that most libertarians misunderstand about libertarianism. I am also a libertarian. Most libertarians lean on a privacy and/or personal liberty argument, even though they would not accept either as a justification for any other murder. The liberty of all is threatened when there is no recourse for violations of the most essential right. A woman’s right to bodily control without coercion is subject to the higher-order right of the person in her body to continue living. The adage comes to mind – your liberty to swing your fist ends where my nose begins. I fully support a woman’s right to end a pregnancy so long as doing so brings no harm to the fetus.

 

[Ethan N]

Not my thoughts, but Neil Boortz’s (paraphrased): remember, about 90+% of the babies that are aborted are of Democrats that would grow up to be Democrat voters.

Even Democrats have the right to live, let alone a child who might grow up to vote Democrat.

 

[Annie]

Well, this is something that most libertarians misunderstand about libertarianism. I am also a libertarian. Most libertarians lean on a privacy and/or personal liberty argument, even though they would not accept either as a justification for any other murder. The liberty of all is threatened when there is no recourse for violations of the most essential right. A woman’s right to bodily control without coercion is subject to the higher-order right of the person in her body to continue living. The adage comes to mind – your liberty to swing your first ends where my nose begins. I fully support a woman’s right to end a pregnancy so long as doing so brings no harm to the fetus.

And once again, I believe this is one of the many intrusions into our private lives the government should not be allowed to make. It is as simple as that.

 

[Ethan N]

And once again, I believe this is one of the many intrusions into our private lives the government should not be allowed to make. It is as simple as that.

Please let me make sure I’m understanding your position. Do you believe the government should not make a law against murder or punish those who murder?

 

[Annie]

Please let me make sure I’m understanding your position. Do you believe the government should not make a law against murder or punish those who murder?

I am saying that whether or not to terminate a pregnancy is a very personal decision that the government should not be involved in at all.

 

[Ethan N]

I am saying that whether or not to terminate a pregnancy is a very personal decision that the government should not be involved in at all.

I understand the desire for it to be as simple as that, but it’s not. I believe you’re being disingenuous in suggesting that it is and avoiding answering a very simple question that would clarify your views. You aren’t obligated to be candid about your opinions, of course, and you certainly have a right to them, whatever they are. But not all opinions are equal, and the ones you’ve expressed here so opaquely are very weak.

 

[Annie]

I understand the desire for it to be as simple as that, but it’s not. I believe you’re being disingenuous in suggesting that it is and avoiding answering a very simple question that would clarify your views. You aren’t obligated to be candid about your opinions, of course, and you certainly have a right to them, whatever they are. But not all opinions are equal, and the ones you’ve expressed here so opaquely are very weak.

Well, it IS just that simple -- especially if you truly believe as I do that the government should not be in the business of dictating morality. Whether you like it or not, not everyone holds the same views on pregnancy you do. I am NOT advocating for abortion, though you seem hellbent on seeing it that way. I am, quite simply, against government intrusion into the very personal lives of it's citizens. I am also a staunch advocate for the right to die with dignity movement, and self-determination. These decisions should never be the purview of a government, as far as I am concerned.

Have a good evening, sir.