We Are The Future Rally - live updates and discussion thread

MelissaWV said:
None of that actually addresses who would pay for it.

The answer, most likely, is that charities would spring up to save babies along these lines. They would work with adoption agencies to get the children placed. Where it actually gets complicated is when there is a baby "surplus"; who takes care of those children until maturity?

All of this is an argument for another day, and it was stupid to bring it up at Ron's rally.
Click to expand...

Who would pay for it? Anyone who wants the procedure done. That's the easiest freaking question in the world. Charities, mothers, family, adoption agencies, etc.
 
ZENemy said:
LOL! I never wanted to believe that stuff happens on purpose, getting involved in the Ron Paul movement changed my mind. We live in a hollywood movie!
Click to expand...

I know, it is so in our face anymore. SMH
 
I know now why I like Blues Traveler!

Edit: I thought he was from NH. He isn't.
 
Last edited:
Indy Vidual said:
The Blues Traveler guy is one of us! :D
Click to expand...
chick_dance.gif
 
Austrian Econ Disciple said:
Well if you are ignorant of medical technology that's fine, at least you asked. C-sections for one. Now-a-days, with current technology practices babies can survive at 6-7 months, and I wouldn't be surprised if in the future they could incubate the fetus (so at any time the woman could evict the baby). The mother and doctor still would take the risk if the child was harmed in the process, so it isn't like it's a scott-free type of thing.

Now, where it gets hairy is the question whether the mother of the baby has a responsibility for the babies welfare. That's a tangential subject and probably one that would result in a lot more....let's just say passionate argument. I also presume such an argument would be frought with fallacies and emotions so for the average person it would devolve quite quickly, since even a lot of so-called libertarians can't grasp that a right is by itself neither right or wrong, but is. Right or wrong is then up to your personal beliefs (for instance take freedom of speech. It's my right to tell everyone I ever meet to fuck off douche, but that doesn't mean it's right). E.g., the mother is not responsible for the child's welfare, but I would say it's wrong not to do so.

Yeah, probably not the right avenue for the speech (non-academic setting) as well as there are a lot other important things going on that dwarf abortion.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure it was necessary to get a dig at me for being "ignorant of medical technology" as you said, but -- to put it another way, I am not a doctor.

That said, what if the mother doesn't want to wait until the 6th month of pregnancy to "evict" the baby? Who gets to decide the timing of that?

Consider those rhetorical questions if you like...I'm enjoying the rally and don't really feel like debating abortion today.
 
I think the reason they're all picking on Rick Santorum is obvious...he was the candidate who was most contentious to Ron Paul during the debates.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Occam's Banana
With JD Vance and Elon Musk, suddenly ideas are back in this campaign
Replies
2
Views
4K
Occam's Banana
Occam's Banana
PAF
Voting: The Seen and the Unseen
Replies
2
Views
61
TheTexan
TheTexan
Occam's Banana
Mises University 2025
2 3
Replies
45
Views
365
Occam's Banana
Occam's Banana
Z
Thomas Massie to Moderate Open Presidential Debate
Replies
12
Views
3K
Brian4Liberty
Brian4Liberty
J
The End Fruit of the Israeli Attack on America on 9/11 is Here, Gen. Wes Clark, "...And Finishing off, Iran." Well Played, Khazars
Replies
4
Views
75
James_Madison_Lives
J
Back
Top