 | | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
Please note in the following discussion that my own feelings on when if ever abortion is appropriate are very undecided. The following is a thought exercise. Don't assume that just because I make a statement below that it equates to how I really (...) (24 years ago, 11-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) Sounds selfish to me. I happy to live in a society where, no matter what my circumstances, I have the right to education, healthcare and housing. I also happy that the state meddles in my affairs and invades my privacy to make sure I am giving (...) (24 years ago, 11-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
Chirs, there are tons of people who don't agree with or understand "rights-based calculus" but we don't exclude them from their rights. "Christopher Weeks" <clweeks@eclipse.net> wrote in message news:G3v0Fx.GMC@lugnet.com... (...) begin (...) (...) (24 years ago, 11-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) Right. And even from an evolutionary argument perspective, to argue that sex is for procreation and procreation only, is to miss how subtle evolution actually is. Humans, and many other higher animals as well, have sex a lot more than is (...) (24 years ago, 11-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) I'd agree... Assuming of course that the person is of sound mind, and that the rights of others are not being violated in doing so. Clear cut example, I don't have the right to fill up a truck with explosives and then drive to your house and (...) (24 years ago, 11-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) So if knew a pesron was about to take their own life, you'd let them on the basis that you consider they should have the right to do so?! I'd tend to try to stop them. Scott A (...) (24 years ago, 11-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) In general, yes. (...) It has certainly been known to happen. (...) Yes! (...) Why not? It seems rather obvious to me. If not, then what guiding force do you attribute it to? (...) There is no such thing as natural purpose. Intelligences are (...) (24 years ago, 11-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) Yup. (...) So? This does have, and should have, NOTHING to do with our law. From the same reasoning, we evolved for the sole 'purpose' of concentrating resources most effectively. As Neal Stephenson has put it, we are the "ultimate badass." So (...) (24 years ago, 11-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) Not this one. Suicide should be a right. Chris (24 years ago, 11-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) Agreed, but what are they? There is a clear incongruity in the US, in that the father has _no_ say in whether the child is aborted -- it all rests with the mother, and yet the father is financially burdened with no recourse. (...) What about (...) (24 years ago, 11-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) Hah! I could kill in cold blood. If I was in a rage, or if I simply had to eat, I think I could manage. OTOH, I think the concept that state-sponsored execution is somehow not killing in cold-blood is laugable. Killing when you have a choice (...) (24 years ago, 11-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) Some, like me. (...) Absolutely. Society has invested oodles and gobs of resources into the adult, while the fetus costs virtually nothing to lose. (...) This is your second use of "objectively." I think you'll find that it means something (...) (24 years ago, 11-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) You are absolutely correct. I believe the one word answer is 'hypocracy.' The deal, I think, is that people have an easy time getting righteous warm fuzzy feelings in the depths of their mind for protecting babies. It is much harder to get (...) (24 years ago, 11-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) Meaningful way? It sounds like you're defining something other than life. Evidence includes the fact that carrots are alive and never have brain function. (...) I don't get the whole life befins argument. Isn't it obvious that life never (...) (24 years ago, 11-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
Holy Cow! I'm away for a couple days and this happened... (...) OK, so the woman doesn't have the right to destroy another human's body. I understand and generally agree so far. (...) Waitnowholdonaminit! Now it sounds like you're saying that the (...) (24 years ago, 11-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) Why should we EXPECT government to get involved with a choice over our own lives, if it does not affect others? That's just plain WRONG. -- Tom Stangl ***(URL) Visual FAQ home ***(URL) Bay Area DSMs (24 years ago, 11-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
Hi Maggie, This is debate, so that's what we'll do. "Maggie Cambron" <mcambron@pacbell.net> wrote in message... (...) I'm (...) clarification. I disagree. I don't believe anyone's viewpoint will be swayed if we all keep our opinions to ourselves. I (...) (24 years ago, 11-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
Thanks James "James Simpson" <jsimpson@rice.edu> wrote in message news:G3tuoG.CBD@lugnet.com... (...) woman (...) justice (...) confronting (...) intelligence (...) has (...) emergence (...) a (...) base (...) emerges (...) womb (...) matter (...) (...) (24 years ago, 11-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) Yes, this can get a little crazy. When I say potential, I mean the potential of an *already* fertilized egg which has a specific genetic code in place. I think I can safely argue the potentiality of a fertilized egg without having to consider (...) (24 years ago, 10-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What am I missing here?
|
|
(...) Thanks! (...) Why be mad about that? Small time stuff. Heck, be like me and be mad about the whole shouting match. The duopoly we have stinketh, and the minor illegalities(1) pale beside how the law itself is rigged. 1 - not that they should (...) (24 years ago, 10-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
