 | | Re: What am I missing here?
|
|
(...) All right, what's the deal? Lar made a general call for forbearance on The Abortion Debate (a good call, since no one is going to be swayed one way or the other) and there have subsequently been more posts than before Lar's request. Even I, (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
Maggie Cambron wrote: Thank you Maggie..:-) (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
Thanks James, You kinda scare me when you start off with the word Simple... none of this has seemed simple yet, and if it's so simple to someone else, I question whether they have given it enough thought. However, thats a pretty good point that I (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What am I missing here?
|
|
(...) You are right, but I was the one laughing again at that times of history...:-) Selçuk (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) There are some interesting things to explore here. I agree that a "viability" test is certainly part of the rights based calculus which should be used to evaluate these things. One way to examine the issue is that the unborn baby only has the (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) How about thinking about how many child do you want for your entire life, and just compare it with the number of times you supposed to make sex with your partner..:-) Selçuk (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) That should be self-evident, and if it is not, then no amount of rational discourse will aid your understanding. (...) My "wisecrack," as you call it, was an appropriately glib response to the original glib post. Dave! (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Spot Pole - Is Gore Just a Bad Loser?
|
|
(...) Not quite yet no. Actually I think Bush is out of bounds at the moment in going to court to seek an injunction to stop the manual recounts. I think he would be better off picking 4 predominantly Republican county's in Florida and asking for a (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) So, knowing that there is no 100% sure method other than vastectomy (sp?) or its equivalent for women, then either lay down on operation table, or "if you don't want to have child, do not make sex ever" right? sorry Tim but: Hehehehehehehehe. (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rights, Who needs them? (was Re: Abortion...
|
|
(...) ROFL. This guy came runner-up in the LP man of the century! You using him for justification, is like Lenin using Marx (Not Groucho) to justify communism. You really are a critical thinker Larry, I am in awe. Argue your point with me Larry, be (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Parental strategies? (was: Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne)
|
|
(...) Six (and three months). (...) Are you asking why he would put it in those words? He wouldn't. Or are you asking where he would get the idea that when dad says "go to your room" he must? If the latter, most children get that idea based on the (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) I'll take you up on this one John D. Simple. If the child is born at 16 weeks (4 months), it will NOT be viable. Therefore, I see no problem with it. I think that up until around that point (consider premie babies, they die mostly at under 24 (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rights, Who needs them? (was Re: Abortion...
|
|
(...) Ah. A libertarian economist. Just what is your level of "satisfaction"? (...) If this is so, how can a collective of parents do any better? (...) Hardly objective Larry, you can do better than this. Answer all my points. Scott A (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rights, Who needs them? (was Re: Abortion...
|
|
So you accept all the other points I rasied then? And what about all those you snipped in you last reply to me? You are squirming Larry. Scott A (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Spot Pole - Is Gore Just a Bad Loser?
|
|
(...) I like it. I've seen the version you get in the US (BBC World?), and it is pretty poor as it copies the repetitive CNN world service. Because of the way BBC is it just reports the news. It does not really hype up non-news when there is no news (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rights, Who needs them? (was Re: Abortion...
|
|
(...) You're a scholar (who won't say what his PhD is in, which is what I was asking) or so you claim... read some Hayek. (URL) demonstrates to my satisfaction, that no planning board can outplan the market. No planning board can predict needs, (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Spot Pole - Is Gore Just a Bad Loser?
|
|
you must be watching BBC (big buncha crap). Vice-Presidents who run for President of the USA and fail don't get a second chance, so if Gore loses he won't be back. But I don't blame him at all for using whatever resources he has available to him to (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
Maggie, I don't want to be harsh or insulting, but this basically sounds like what I have been hearing for years from the pro-choice people, and it hasn't put a dent in my way of thinking in all those years. I can empathize with you not wanting (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Spot Pole - Is Gore Just a Bad Loser?
|
|
Spot Pole - Is Gore Just a Bad Loser? I can't decide. To a certain extend, I can see his point. But if I were cynical, I would say that he is just going to go on wanting re-counts until he gets the results he wants. Perhaps there really are (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
"Christopher Weeks" <clweeks@eclipse.net> wrote in message news:G3x13L.8HB@lugnet.com... (...) father. (...) the (...) to. We (...) decent (...) it (...) right (...) the (...) exist (...) that (...) I wonder if the human rights abuses of women in (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rights, Who needs them? (was Re: Abortion...
|
|
(...) You or I can only hope to assist our kids in the education path which they choose. They can only make a choice from what is available. Educational planners are there to predict the needs of your country. At a low level, below are the aims of (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
"Christopher Weeks" <clweeks@eclipse.net> wrote in message news:G3wwz0.M4v@lugnet.com... (...) possesion of (...) fact (...) fetuses? (...) Who's to say plants aren't sentient? (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) I'm not sure I'd give them cable OR net access. I don't support the way prisoners are treated in the US (or for that matter, the way prisons are organized and funded)... but don't confuse that with support for putting someone to death in order (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Treacleheads
|
|
(...) Okay. The decision in advance that "a usage is wrong" is subjective (and legitimately so) from the relativist viewpoint. And you're right, it will only appeal to people sharing those cultural norms of grammar and aesthetics (hence the (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.loc.au, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) Yes. (...) Yes, assuming they will work, they need to be properly fed so they can perform as much work as possible, now if they chose not to work (or chose to be so uncontrollable that they can not safely be put to work), well, then they (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) This little description brings to mind some thoughts: 1. Yes, male humans are aggressive boogers, even all the way down to how their sperm accomplish their half of the act of conception... 2. the last stanza in a fun little poem (Prehistoric (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) Well, I never really came out and said that I was pro death penalty. But if I were, I would be *damned* sure that the convicted party was indeed the perp. All I am saying is that our current system leaves a lot to be desired. What I suggested (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rights, Who needs them? (was Re: Abortion...
|
|
(...) Scott, think this through, and give an answer: what superior power of decision making does the government (which is a collection of people) have that any other collection of people could have? What makes the legislatures and other government (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) just (...) that (...) equipment, (...) How do you deal with the first innocent person you murder??? Does that answer your question? As I stated before, I can think of 2 cases in Canada (and several in the US) off my head that would have lead (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
Okay, you are responding to opinions of two people mixed below, but I will just cut to the chase, Chris. You say killing mass murderers and repeat child molesters is evil. How would you deal with them? Simply incarcerate them so that they may enjoy (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) Thank you, John , for a well thought out response to my post. You have swayed my viewpoint, as did Larry's referral to the poll of Libertarians on their opinions on the matter of choice. It was naive of me to assume that because one is a (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Parental strategies? (was: Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne)
|
|
(...) Hmm. Interesting, Chris. I'm curious about some things. First, how old is your son? And why would he think that you might "own" him, or that he is your "slave"? (I assume you mean that you don't "own him" in the sense that he is your (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rights, Who needs them? (was Re: Abortion...
|
|
(...) PhD ... (...) Yes you are correct. Even though I have a lot of respect for TL, I don't think he is correct all the time. No big deal really. If it were TL could change the T&C. (...) If you mean I don't agree with you, you are correct. (...) (...) (24 years ago, 12-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
OK, I am taking on the somewhat daunting task of responding to this huge note. (...) Me too, I guess that's why I read and respond to this stuff. (...) How much damage has to be included in the threat to the woman's body before it's OK for her to (...) (24 years ago, 12-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) So, exactly how little do you wish to have the right to do as you please? Would you be OK with it if your government decided that sales via online auction houses were illegal because they were funnelling money out of the UK and into the US, (...) (24 years ago, 12-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rights, Who needs them? (was Re: Abortion...
|
|
(...) From the definition of "critical" (1) (and I am surprised that I have to explain this to a Doctor, actually. What kind of doctor are you, again?) ... You are "critical" in the sense of 2 a : inclined to criticize severely and unfavorably (...) (24 years ago, 12-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) Honestly, I could see it going either way. My grandfather-in-law was really sick and stocked up on poison with which to end his life. I knew that was going to happen. I never once considered intervening. If my son, as an adolescent, seems (...) (24 years ago, 12-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) case (...) But that doesn't make it right, or actually just. (...) But still evil. (...) Well, if you're a member of said society, and being forced to fund their evil practices, I think you ahve every right to explain that they are wrong. (...) (24 years ago, 12-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) From Merriam-Webster's (URL) , the essense of objective is something "having reality independent of the mind." So two rational people examining the evidence, will come to the same conclusion about objective matters. The very fact that I (...) (24 years ago, 12-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | (canceled)
|
|
|
| |
| | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) If this came from anyone else, I'd say it stank of arrogance. (...) ROTFL. If only you knew me Larry. (...) It is my job as a parent to protect my family from drugs. Having the police help me is a good thing, in my own opinion. Scott A (...) (24 years ago, 12-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) The organism stays the same species the whole time just like the human does. And do you think that the betterfly really changes more than the human does? I'd say less. There is a little wormy thing with legs and then it grows some wings and (...) (24 years ago, 12-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rights, Who needs them? (was Re: Abortion...
|
|
(...) I was not trying to hide that Larry. And I did alert any readers to that fact - which is what you chose not to answer my questions. That aside, looking at the tone of some of the LP aims, I feel that they do not care too much for the rights of (...) (24 years ago, 12-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) I have had people in face to face discussions, refuse to ever talk to me again because I supported ideas like this. (Or that sexual encounters between adults and children are not necessarily unhealthy, or that cannibalism isn't evil.) But the (...) (24 years ago, 12-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | (canceled)
|
|
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) I think this is already clear, but just in case, me too. (...) Yup. I agree. (...) Yup. I agree. (...) John's response discusses the implied contract between the mother and father. I agree with him that these contracts should be written and (...) (24 years ago, 12-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) Perhaps I didn't phrase my sentiments clearly. Perhaps I should have said that some actions are inherently just and some are inherently unjust. I believe that Justice is the embodiment of certain moral principles that are objectively true, and (...) (24 years ago, 12-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Rights, Who needs them? (was Re: Abortion...
|
|
(...) Scott, of course, snipped the subordinate clause I put on there, the clause showing a balance of rights so that all rights are respected. As is his wont. Snip away what might disagree with your point or show that the other side is reasonable. (...) (24 years ago, 12-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) There are tons of sentients (not people) who are excluded from the possesion of rights. When this is justified, the arguments are typically based on the fact that they're dumber than us, religious dictate, or something seemingly undefinable (...) (24 years ago, 12-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) Wow. And this is probably where the discuss ends, because we in America value *FREEDOM* and *LIBERTY*. It is the basis for our existence, and why further debate is pointless. You welcome government telling you what you can and cannot do. We (...) (24 years ago, 12-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What am I missing here?
|
|
(...) No problem. Usually I only have to be beaten over the head for a few minutes before I get the point. (...) Heh--my bad; I was jokingly trying to start up another farcical debate. Obviously W himself didn't have his hand in every ballot box (I (...) (24 years ago, 12-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) Humans generally don't, but caterpillars and butterflies do. There is no one particular moment that a caterpillar becomes a butterfly; the transformation happens gradually. Similarly, when a human dies, there's usually not any one paricular (...) (24 years ago, 12-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
"James Simpson" <mitchjacko@cs.com> wrote in message news:G3vtI2.BtK@lugnet.com... (...) most (...) of (...) help (...) believe (...) What do you mean justice exists? Thats preposterous. Justice doesn't exist. If it did there wouldn't be the words (...) (24 years ago, 12-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
"Frank Filz" <ffilz@mindspring.com> wrote in message news:3A0DB4A3.2F33B6...ing.com... (...) that the (...) the (...) Right, I brought this up here last year, while debating Larry, who was much more steadfast and aware of his stance on the abortion (...) (24 years ago, 12-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) Since I received several error messages when trying to open dictionary.com, I will quote you one of the definitions of "objective" from The American Heritage Dictionary Second College Edition: "2) Having actual existence or reality." I meant (...) (24 years ago, 11-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | 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)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) I know Larry has called for sitting out this one, but I've got an interesting comment here... One does have to be a bit carefull about protecting the "potential" of human life. I read a short story once which took this idea to an extreme. In (...) (24 years ago, 10-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Right To Exploit (WAS: Concerns regarding Brick-o-Lizer User Agreement)
|
|
(...) Especially when the "spirit" of the LMBOLUA is part of the ambiguity. We don't know what TLC is trying to accomplish via the terms they laid out. All we know is they put together a number of somewhat bizarre legalish terms. Now, if we had a (...) (24 years ago, 10-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What am I missing here?
|
|
(...) Hopefully, Larry will figure out a new phrase, because he is constantly plowing the same ground with the "plowed ground" phrase! :-) Or has someone else complained, and thus this is plo....no, I won't say it. :-O (...) When I was a kid, I (...) (24 years ago, 10-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) Your term may indeed be accurate, but I think that it does not do full justice to the inherent and latent qualities of the tissue structure. When confronting the abortion issue from either angle, the issue of potential *cannot* be avoided. My (...) (24 years ago, 10-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What am I missing here?
|
|
(...) Cool! I've never been a Usual Suspect(tm) before! (...) A rare (in ot.debate) appeal to good sense which, even more rarely, has worked on me. I'll quit venting. (...) Okay, I'll quit that pointless debate. But I'm still so mad about George (...) (24 years ago, 10-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What am I missing here?
|
|
(...) Larry, It is not a good debate unless someone storms out of the room and slams the door. In other words we need someone to leave LUGNET for the debate to be complete. ;-) Now you can understand why I am not in the thick of it. I do not recall (...) (24 years ago, 10-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What am I missing here?
|
|
I second the motion. I think that, while I have become one of the Usual Suspects recently, I have chosen to bite my tongue on this matter, since I've argued it so many times in the past I know there will be no agreement, and only frustration in the (...) (24 years ago, 10-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What am I missing here?
|
|
(...) Hey the only way not to set off the standard debate is to not chime in. Which is why I havn't and won't. (...) I would agree. No one is going to get anywhere debating the issue because for most people there is only one side to the issue. Why (...) (24 years ago, 10-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) Not to mention accurate. (...) So non-sentient tissue has rights, too? Do these rights supercede the rights of the sentient mother? Why? On what grounds? (...) Timing is the essence of the matter. (...) Nonsense. You are stating outright that (...) (24 years ago, 10-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | What am I missing here?
|
|
I think someone made one offhand remark about abortion in a thread. That was followed by several people all chiming in (me included) all saying they didn't want to set off the standard debate. Now we have all the Usual Suspects(tm) posting the usual (...) (24 years ago, 10-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) Nice term "non-sentient tissue structure". Merely because the fetus has yet to develop sentiency doesn't mean that it won't-- aborting it robs it of its right to do so. I think timing is irrelevant. I think that's why IUDs were such a bad (...) (24 years ago, 10-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) I kind of screwed up my wording, as you and Tim have both correctly pointed out. I addressed my actual meaning in my reply to his post, stating, in essence, that the evolutionary purpose for sex is reproduction, but reproduction can no longer (...) (24 years ago, 10-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) I didn't state that very clearly, and I apologize. I meant that the sole purpose of sex cannot be identified as reproduction, at least not among species able to choose when they want to copulate. (...) Let me be clear--the fact that it is (...) (24 years ago, 10-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) Perhaps you should try listening to "Unplugged" by Spirit of the West, for a view of it :) Some of us think that it is NOT up to the government to make a decision on the matter. It is a _personal_ choice, and one that if you are wise, you (...) (24 years ago, 10-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) So you're stating that sex is an end to itself, and pregnancy is an occasional accident? So basically...we accidentally have a population of some 6 billion. I can't agree. Though sex has its own individual merits, the obvious natural purpose (...) (24 years ago, 10-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) That was a good one to bring up. From what I have read of the issue with the siamese twins, I am in fact happy with the decision. I am satisfied that a rights based examination of the situation was made. In the case of abortion, it is equally (...) (24 years ago, 10-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance?
|
|
(...) Just as a note, in case anyone didn't go look at the ref, this was an unscientific poll, self selected participants, and the quotes were, I suspect, selected to show the diversity of opinions on the issue. Tim chose to pick one quote that he (...) (24 years ago, 10-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) So it seems you Libertarians are a microcosm of the rest of our society on this issue! (Well, maybe if the rest of society were polled, there might be substantially more than 8.8% in the indecisive or confusing category! :-) ) I must say I am (...) (24 years ago, 10-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) Dave!: I'm curious as to what your presuppostions are in this matter (Curious - not Attacking.) From a purely evolutionary perspective, sex is meant to result in pregnancey and thus the transfer of genetic material to insure species survival. (...) (24 years ago, 10-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) With all due respect to Kyle, whose credentials on the subject of sex's "purpose" I have yet to read, this quote proposes a rather arbitrary view. Who is Kyle to say what "sex is supposed to result" in? Sex is supposed to result in sex, and (...) (24 years ago, 10-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Reality == fiction?
|
|
(...) If you'll go back to my original post (URL) , you'll see that I was reacting to Larry's statement: (...) Since satire and irony are such powerful, long-standing staples of our cultural dialogue, I rejected Larry's statement, and asked him to (...) (24 years ago, 10-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) I like this quote from the page: The Libertarian Party should be explicitly, and proudly, pro-life. As Libertarians, we are the party of individual freedom and responsibility. Intelligent Libertarians know that sex is supposed to result in (...) (24 years ago, 10-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) If a given group of people reach a democratic decision after am informed, educated and objective debate - who am I to argue against they are "wrong"? I may disagree, but I can only respect their opinion. This issue aside, at times (...) (24 years ago, 10-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) I respect that, and I aknowledge that you may be correct. Personally, I (...) Nor could I, but execution is not in cold blood. Cold blood is murder, which is unjustified and therefore always Wrong. The (...) offered on their behalf, and until (...) (24 years ago, 10-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) Well, not what "unjustified" means to *me*, but to what society says. In the case of capital punishment, society may say that *that* is justice; therefore executions are justified in the eyes of that society. If you mean to agree to disagree (...) (24 years ago, 10-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
