*opens up a can of worms*

[FrankChodorov]

any embryologists text-book will tell you that life begins at conception.

yes, but the salient question is when does this life form containing human dna become a human being worthy of state protection of their rights from that of a potential human being?

[Caleb]

never, Frank.

Because I don't bend the knee to the State, so I would never acknowledge anyone's right to state protection.

[tracysaboe]

Gabo, the problem is that baby was FORCED into being in that position where it needed to stay in the womb for survival. If the Mother and FAther forced the baby into that position it has a responsibility to care for it.

Just like it has a responibility to care for it after it's born.

Two people cannot knowingly carry out the conception of a baby.
The only thing they can do is         , which may or may not lead to conception.

Conception happens separate from sex, and does not fail or succeed depending on what the mother and father want.
Conception occurs on its own, and therefore the mother and father are not responsible for what happens because of it.



If I water my garden every day to care for my plants, should I be responsible for a weed that springs up?
Did I purposefully cause the growth of the weed by watering?  Should I be forced to care for it?
Just as the growth of a weed is not directly caused by watering, the conception of a child is not directly caused by sex.


If you wish to blame someone for unwanted pregnancy, blame the sperm.
They are the ones that directly cause it, yet they bear no burden from it.

Everybody knows that when you               the possibility is conception. And if you don't your a moron. Libertarian believes that people should take responsibility for their actions. So make them be responsible.  Libertarianism doesn't believe in passing laws to protect people from their own moronishness -- or we'd have a nation of morons.

If you don't want a baby -- don't               . Seperating the conception causully from the sex is intelectual dishonesty.

Tracy

[Gabo]

Everybody knows that when you have sex the possibility is conception. And if you don't your a moron. Libertarian believes that people should take responsibility for their actions. So make them be responsible.

Libertarians believe in contracts and that human interaction should be through voluntary means.
When you have sex, you are not agreeing to have and raise a child.  You are agreeing to have sex.

Many people do their best to NOT concept a child when having sex, through protection, condoms, etc.
These people obviously have no intention of having a child and are trying to NOT have a child.  How can you say that they should be forced to care for a child they never wanted, tried not to have, and never agreed to take care of?

You are forcing upon them something which they have not agreed to.

Libertarianism doesn't believe in passing laws to protect people from their own moronishness -- or we'd have a nation of morons.

I'm not the one advocating any coercion, whether it be through laws or other means.
People should definitely be held responsible for what they do, but only for what they do.
Indirect results of what someone does are not their responsibility.

For instance, pretend I love apples and buy tons of them to eat.  My apple fetish indirectly increases the price of apples, because there is a higher overall demand and thus a lower relative supply.  Should I be responsible for the difference I'm making?  Should I have to pay restitution to everyone else who purchases apples because they cost more?

This is the same as forcing people to care for a child they never wanted and never tried to have.  The conception of a child is an indirect and often undesirable effect of having sex.  That effect is NOT a direct result of sex, and is not the responsibility of the participants.

If you don't want a baby -- don't have sex. Seperating the conception causully from the sex is intelectual dishonesty.

If you don't want to pay for my apple consumption, stop buying apples at all!
Your purchasing of apples is driving up the cost of my purchases!

If you don't want to have to pay for my price restitution -- don't buy apples.
Separating the purchasing of apples from the fluctuation of their price is intellectual dishonesty.

[tracysaboe]

These people obviously have no intention of having a child and are trying to NOT have a child.  How can you say that they should be forced to care for a child they never wanted, tried not to have, and never agreed to take care of?

Because, regardless of there best intensions -- they still forced a being into existence that was dependent on them.

Your argument also justifies abandening a 1 or 2 year old out in the street and refusing to take care of it if you're going to be consistant. Are you willing to do that?

If you don't want a baby -- don't have sex. Seperating the conception causully from the sex is intelectual dishonesty.

If you don't want to pay for my apple consumption, stop buying apples at all!
Your purchasing of apples is driving up the cost of my purchases!

If you don't want to have to pay for my price restitution -- don't buy apples.
Separating the purchasing of apples from the fluctuation of their price is intellectual dishonesty.

Complete Red Herring. The metaphore isn't anylagous at all.

Tracy

[KBCraig]

Gabo's argument completely ignores responsibility for the consequences of one's own actions, which is a cornerstone of libertarianism.

If I just want to go target shooting, and don't intend to shoot anyone, am I responsible if I miss my target and shoot my neighbor? According to Gabo, I'm not. According to every rational and moral person, I am, unless I take every possible precaution and the injury is the result of an unforeseeable freak accident. In that case, it's an accident.

But in the case of sex, pregnancy is almost always a foreseeable risk and consequence. Intentions don't matter, but consequences do.

Kevin

[tracysaboe]

unless I take every possible precaution and the injury is the result of an unforeseeable freak accident. In that case, it's an accident.

Even if it is a completely random freak accident, at the very least there'd be some sort of tort lawsuit to help determine that.

AH Here it is!

Legalize Homicide

http://www.anti-state.com/article.php?article_id=380

Tracy

[FrankChodorov]

never, Frank.

Because I don't bend the knee to the State, so I would never acknowledge anyone's right to state protection.

do you agree human beings are "born" with rights?

substitute dispute resolution organization for "state"...

[intergraph19]

The law says abortion is legal in the US now,

Acctually, there is no law making it legal, it was a supreme court decision, NOT a law, that needs to be remebered, the court system is not allowed to make law, that's one of the main problems we are having, a court system that is going way outside it's constitutionaly granted powers.

[intergraph19]

Without getting into the debate, I would like to bring up the point that abortions will happen one way or another. They will either happen in back alleys with black market doctors, or they will happen in legitimate, sterile medical facilities. The former stems from government regulation, the latter stems from freedom of choice and personal responsibility. Regardless of whether or not abortion is murder, I don't think it should be left to government to decide.

Yes, and crime will happen anyway too, should we just make all things legal? 

[Braddogg]

Yes, and crime will happen anyway too, should we just make all things legal? 

Sounds good to me

[Dreepa]

The law says abortion is legal in the US now,

Acctually, there is no law making it legal, it was a supreme court decision, NOT a law,

The SC was deciding on a law.
The laws were made (and still are) at the State level.

[Braddogg]

The law says abortion is legal in the US now,

Acctually, there is no law making it legal, it was a supreme court decision, NOT a law,

The SC was deciding on a law.
The laws were made (and still are) at the State level.

SCOTUS overturned a law restricting abortion and forbid the states from making laws restricting abortion access in the future.  There is no legislation legalizing abortion.  At the same time, "the law" incorporates court decisions as well as legislative action.

[toowm]

I am comfortable saying that life begins at conception. I believe that abortion is murder. I do not believe in criminalizing abortion until viability. Why?

- Miscarriages are extremely common during the first trimester. Part of this is a natural way that God or evolution deals with fetal abnormalities or changes in the mother's condition. How in the world are you ever going to decide fault?
- Even in the second trimester and after viability, miscarriages are not uncommon. Again, how are you going to determine if the mother is at fault? What if she was 100% careful? What if she smokes or drinks? What if she drove down a bumpy road?

My wife's last pregnancy was extremely difficult - preterm labor four times and bed rest for six months. If we had lost a child, we would both have been devastated. I know she would have been blaming herself for every little thing she might have done differently. Would that have been an actionable crime? If in anarchy, should we have been shunned? Thank God, she made it through.

We talk about the founders a fair amount. I wonder how they would feel about abortion. On the one hand, they believed that life was precious. On the other, all of them lost young children to illness and disease. We are told that you didn't give as much attachment to kids in that era, given the high risk of losing them. But we also hear how devastated mothers and fathers actually were.

There is no perfect solution, but in addition to the artificial womb idea, I'm a big believer in raising a society of people who take responsibility for their actions. There is no way that any of my children could be callous about abortion - even if they faced it, they would consider it gravely.

The current abortion debate does not make our society more responsible, more moral, or more free.

[Braddogg]

- Miscarriages are extremely common during the first trimester. Part of this is a natural way that God or evolution deals with fetal abnormalities or changes in the mother's condition. How in the world are you ever going to decide fault?
- Even in the second trimester and after viability, miscarriages are not uncommon. Again, how are you going to determine if the mother is at fault? What if she was 100% careful? What if she smokes or drinks? What if she drove down a bumpy road?

As you reference later, children die from illnesses often without the parents being brought up on charges.  Consider Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS) -- sometimes, as with most of the miscarriages of which you speak, there is no actionable negligence.  It's just a tragedy, nothing more.