What is your position on abortion?

[The Free Hornet]

The pro-life advocate in the debate does a great job of arguing his case, by getting down to the scientific and philosophical ramifications of what an abortion actually is. This is a must-see for all members here:

Why? I don't support Traditional Conservative's pro-abortion policies. I voted specifically to "get the government out of our lives".

What you need is a video showing successful government interventions into our lives. You need to defend the AMA and state licensing which is all anti-abortion laws were ever intended to accomplish. In 200 years, it hasn't done jack squat about abortions because that was never the intent, but reducing competition was.

I understand and appreciate your distaste with a medical procedure (or murder dressed up as one). However, I am here to oppose the power structures that have led to loss of liberty in this nation.

Defending our lives and liberty is our job, not the local police! When a scalpel is inches away, the police are miles away!!! It is the values and principles - including the defense of life - of the liberty movement that need to be expanded, not the police state.

If ever you are serious about fetal murder, then you need to support prosecution of the mother for murder. You cannot, like Traditional Conservative, give 100% exemptions to the mothers who finance and order the abortion!* To do otherwise is to doom your drug-war style interventions. Do you real think the mother cares if the doctor/pharmacist might go to jail? Nobody drives down the street thinking, "I better not speed, somebody else might get a ticket!".


*When a state/municipality decides to not prosecute users of a particular drug, it is seen as being pro-drug. However, when neocons decide not to prosecute users of abortion services, it is seen being against abortion! Or is it bowing to political reality. You can't prosecute woman because that would actually affect abortion rates. Twenty weeks is selected in Texas because 98.5% abortions occur before then and this will encourage the stragglers to get it done sooner. Looking at charts, even a 6-week ban may only affect 50% of abortions.

 

[Theocrat]

It's Not About "Getting the Government Out of Our Lives"

Why? I don't support Traditional Conservative's pro-abortion policies. I voted specifically to "get the government out of our lives".

What you need is a video showing successful government interventions into our lives. You need to defend the AMA and state licensing which is all anti-abortion laws were ever intended to accomplish. In 200 years, it hasn't done jack squat about abortions because that was never the intent, but reducing competition was.

I understand and appreciate your distaste with a medical procedure (or murder dressed up as one). However, I am here to oppose the power structures that have led to loss of liberty in this nation.

Defending our lives and liberty is our job, not the local police! When a scalpel is inches away, the police are miles away!!! It is the values and principles - including the defense of life - of the liberty movement that need to be expanded, not the police state.

If ever you are serious about fetal murder, then you need to support prosecution of the mother for murder. You cannot, like Traditional Conservative, give 100% exemptions to the mothers who finance and order the abortion!* To do otherwise is to doom your drug-war style interventions. Do you real think the mother cares if the doctor/pharmacist might go to jail? Nobody drives down the street thinking, "I better not speed, somebody else might get a ticket!".


*When a state/municipality decides to not prosecute users of a particular drug, it is seen as being pro-drug. However, when neocons decide not to prosecute users of abortion services, it is seen being against abortion! Or is it bowing to political reality. You can't prosecute woman because that would actually affect abortion rates. Twenty weeks is selected in Texas because 98.5% abortions occur before then and this will encourage the stragglers to get it done sooner. Looking at charts, even a 6-week ban may only affect 50% of abortions.

Abortion is not a political problem, primarily. It is an ethical issue that transcends the civil government, and it comes down to the question of whether the unborn fetus is a human being or not. Once that question is answered, then we can answer other questions about whether the government should be involved, whether a person can destroy the unborn, etc.

 

[The Free Hornet]

Abortion is not a political problem, primarily. It is an ethical issue that transcends the civil government, and it comes down to the question of whether the unborn fetus is a human being or not. Once that question is answered, then we can answer other questions about whether the government should be involved, whether a person can destroy the unborn, etc.

Of course it is a human being. Did you think it was a cow?

World English Dictionary
human being

—n
a member of any of the races of Homo sapiens; person; man, woman, or child

You or society's concern for a toddler doesn't give you the right to barge into a home without due cause. "Once that question is answered", we are in the same spot we are now.

Now I agree the problem is societal but the issue is entirely political. The so-called pro-life movement (really a pro murder and pro state movement) has as its 'raison d'être' the abolition of choice specifically by

a) state licensing medical professions
b) monitoring the doctor-patient relationship
c) outlawing every alternative

Anybody who isn't a part of the medical establishment, big pharma, or their "insurance" "products" (like we got a fucking choice) is basically just a useful idiot for them to exploit.

 

[Brett85]

Of course it is a human being. Did you think it was a cow?

So you admit that an unborn fetus is a human being, but yet you still believe that the mass murder of these human beings should be legal? That simply defies logic.

 

[The Free Hornet]

So you admit that an unborn fetus is a human being, but yet you still believe that the mass murder of these human beings should be legal? That simply defies logic.

WHERE THE FUCK DID I SAY IT SHOULD BE LEGAL!?

Do not reference your own stupid poll with retarded/'Fuck you Frank style' choices which are your words, not mine. I gave you my words but not enough times to stick in whatever pea-sized brain your creator gave you: GET THE GOVERNMENT OUT OF OUR LIVES!

 

[Brett85]

Defending our lives and liberty is our job, not the local police!

And how exactly is an unborn baby supposed to defend itself again? You should really stop and think before you post this kind of nonsense.

 

[Brett85]

WHERE THE FUCK DID I SAY IT SHOULD BE LEGAL!?

Do not reference your own stupid poll with retarded/'Fuck you Frank style' choices which are your words, not mine. I gave you my words but not enough times to stick in whatever pea-sized brain your creator gave you: GET THE GOVERNMENT OUT OF OUR LIVES!

You spend 95% of your time on these forums arguing that abortion should be legal. It's apparently the only issue you even care about.

 

[Theocrat]

Take a Chill Pill

WHERE THE FUCK DID I SAY IT SHOULD BE LEGAL!?

Do not reference your own stupid poll with retarded/'Fuck you Frank style' choices which are your words, not mine. I gave you my words but not enough times to stick in whatever pea-sized brain your creator gave you: GET THE GOVERNMENT OUT OF OUR LIVES!

Dude, you need to calm down.

 

[Christian Liberty]

And how exactly is an unborn baby supposed to defend itself again? You should really stop and think before you post this kind of nonsense.

If he were in favor of pardoning anti-abortion vigilantes, I might actually take his point seriously.

Otherwise the "Less government" in this case is really just codeword for "Well, I don't like killing babies but I'm not going to stop you..."

I sometimes flirt with my anarchist streak but even I acknowledge that you need laws to punish those who try to harm the unborn.

I do not, however, believe in laws that "Protect" the unborn. Trying to protect people through the force of the law leads to a police state. The only thing the law should do, as Laurence Vance points out, about abortion is to criminalize it and deal with it exactly like you would any other kind of murder.

 

[Christian Liberty]

You spend 95% of your time on these forums arguing that abortion should be legal. It's apparently the only issue you even care about.

I thought it was more often than that

 

[The Free Hornet]

So you admit that an unborn fetus is a human being, but yet you still believe that the mass murder of these human beings should be legal? That simply defies logic.

And another thing, if there is an applicable law against murder, I want it to apply to the actual murderers. Not,

a) the gun manufacturers (the issue is murder, not medical procedures)
b) the bossman, not just the hitman (prosecute the mother just as you would a wife who hires a hitman)

You have repeatedly and without an ounce of ideological justification continued to excuse the mothers* who are at the forefront of what you call "MASS MURDER".

Is this the "Christian" view of woman?:

How do you write women so well? I think of a man and I take away reason and accountability.
~ John Updike

Millions of dead and you give the whole damn group a god-damn pass. What the fuck, man!

You're not going to touch the demand side of the equation because that would mess with your game just like the drug warriors. Our culture worships celebrity drug use and they're mostly untouchable unless they get behind the wheel. The drug worship is necessary because to do otherwise might affect demand and the prison industry.

The idea of killing a child has zero appeal to me. More so, I know of nobody who has done so. No doubt, some in my life must have, but they kept that information from me or I blocked it out.


* I thought of a good reason why you might actually be able to excuse the mothers, but it has two drawbacks. One, it applies to any doctors/providers as well. Two, it might be beyond your comprehension.

 

[Christian Liberty]

And another thing, if there is an applicable law against murder, I want it to apply to the actual murderers. Not,

a) the gun manufacturers (the issue is murder, not medical procedures)
b) the bossman, not just the hitman (prosecute the mother just as you would a wife who hires a hitman)

You have repeatedly and without an ounce of ideological justification continued to excuse the mothers* who are at the forefront of what you call "MASS MURDER".

Is this the "Christian" view of woman?:



Millions of dead and you give the whole damn group a god-damn pass. What the fuck, man!

You're not going to touch the demand side of the equation because that would mess with your game just like the drug warriors. Our culture worships celebrity drug use and they're mostly untouchable unless they get behind the wheel. The drug worship is necessary because to do otherwise might affect demand and the prison industry.

The idea of killing a child has zero appeal to me. More so, I know of nobody who has done so. No doubt, some in my life must have, but they kept that information from me or I blocked it out.


* I thought of a good reason why you might actually be able to excuse the mothers, but it has two drawbacks. One, it applies to any doctors/providers as well. Two, it might be beyond your comprehension.

I fail to see why he excuses the mothers. And I fail to see why you excuse the mothers AND the doctors. Both should be prosecuted.

 

[The Free Hornet]

I fail to see why he excuses the mothers. And I fail to see why you excuse the mothers AND the doctors. Both should be prosecuted.

WHERE DID I EXCUSE THE MOTHERS OR THE DOCTORS? You can't be this stupid. Naive, yes. Stupid, no.

In a manner of speaking, I'd like to promote a unified defense of life and liberty here. What TC is promoting is piecemeal statism. It doesn't attack the system, but what the system has resulted in.

 

[Christian Liberty]

WHERE DID I EXCUSE THE MOTHERS OR THE DOCTORS? You can't be this stupid. Naive, yes. Stupid, no.

In a manner of speaking, I'd like to promote a unified defense of life and liberty here. What TC is promoting is piecemeal statism. It doesn't attack the system, but what the system has resulted in.

Well, you're not in favor of charging them with murder and punishing them accordingly, so I question your sincerity here. Would we be having this debate if infanticide was the issue at hand? Or would we all agree that both the person paying the killer, AND the physical killer, should be charged?

This nonsense about breaking into people's homes without cause is besides the point, and would not be tolerated in a libertarian society anyway. Some people will get away with murder, but that's not an excuse for legalizing murder.

 

[The Free Hornet]

If he were in favor of pardoning anti-abortion vigilantes, I might actually take his point seriously.

I'm not quite sure if you're fucked in the head with your promotion of vigilantes. I suspect it is something you'll out grow, but judging someone for not promoting your fucked up beliefs is redonkulous. AFAIK, I haven't taken a position on the issue beyond this:

No one has the right to murder an innocent human being.

You don't have the right to take my money to stop her. Man up and do it yourself if it matters so much to you. If you're lucky, the real men will excuse your meddling.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showth...-on-abortion&p=5138033&viewfull=1#post5138033

I.e., I present a neutral position on the idea but maybe my tone forecasts that I think it is a bad idea but with a possibility that such actions might be excused. Encouraged, no. Excused, maybe.

Otherwise the "Less government" in this case is really just codeword for "Well, I don't like killing babies but I'm not going to stop you..."

Since, I've been (Aug 2011), find somebody else who has ripped on the AMA more than I.

I sometimes flirt with my anarchist streak but even I acknowledge that you need laws to punish those who try to harm the unborn.

These laws exist but the exclude the mother. How can you claim to care about the unborn and not know this?

I do not, however, believe in laws that "Protect" the unborn. Trying to protect people through the force of the law leads to a police state. The only thing the law should do, as Laurence Vance points out, about abortion is to criminalize it and deal with it exactly like you would any other kind of murder.

And there are some key differentiators here. If some octo-mom type started putting sonograms on youtube and saying she would abort an 8-month baby/fetus if she doesn't get (or the baby doesn't get) a million dollars to pay for care, feeding, clothing, schooling, housing, etc., then I would see that as a textbook example of a murder prosecution presuming she went through with the deed (and people were smart enough not to pay her). I cannot reconcile that yet with an anarchist perspective but it is a clear case where the mother, primarily, ought to be prosecuted if we are classifying this act as murder.

 

[Brett85]

I fail to see why he excuses the mothers. And I fail to see why you excuse the mothers AND the doctors. Both should be prosecuted.

I don't want to kill the pro life movement by taking the incredibly unpopular position of prosecuting women who get abortions, so I think it's wise for pro life groups to advocate laws that focus on punishing doctors who perform abortions. The Free Hornet brings up this issue because he wants the pro life movement to fail, and he knows that the pro life movement will fail if they take the position that women should be prosecuted for getting abortions, since most people are scared off by that position.

 

[Brett85]

And another thing, if there is an applicable law against murder, I want it to apply to the actual murderers. Not,

a) the gun manufacturers (the issue is murder, not medical procedures)
b) the bossman, not just the hitman (prosecute the mother just as you would a wife who hires a hitman)

You have repeatedly and without an ounce of ideological justification continued to excuse the mothers* who are at the forefront of what you call "MASS MURDER".

FreedomFanatic's criticism of my position on this issue is valid since he supports prosecuting both the doctor and the mother who gets the abortion. Since you don't support prosecuting either the woman or the doctor who performs the abortion, your criticism of my position is completely without merit.

 

[The Free Hornet]

Well, you're not in favor of charging them with murder and punishing them accordingly...

Point of fact, I and very very very few others have been at the forefront of that opinion here from the 'equal justice' perspective. Before promoting or favoring what you discuss, I would like to see some sample legislation of what exactly it is you're talking about.

The 'personhood' amendment is close but it leaves some loose threads to suggest that states might not treat us as equal under the law. Such that a boyfriend who buys RU486 will get sent to jail but the girlfriend who swallows it (the RU486) willingly, will not.

I've posted several times the video of protestors who don't want punishments for the mothers - and I would love to see more examples of politicians beyond that Tim Pawlenty quote I've used twice.

The thing is - I'm a taxpayer (big time). So you can push laws and vigilante squads but I have to consider the effects of paying for your opinion.

Also, where many focus on rape/incest/life-of-the-mother, I would focus on the health of the baby. Can the state or a judgement mechanism prove that there was a healthy, viable fetus??? Where/what is exhibit A? I'm sure you know that conception is frought with peril and uncertainty. So the miscarriage issue ways extremely heavy on me and these laws. When somebody dies, there is an expectation that a 'cause of death' be documented. Often, not always, as laws will vary.

So I wonder about the wisdom of attaching "personhood" without a name and with only a 50:50 chance of survival. This would be before the detectable heartbeat stage.

Since you will be leading the vigilante squads, perhaps you can educate me on the issue!

 

[The Free Hornet]

Since you don't support prosecuting either the woman or the doctor who performs the abortion, your criticism of my position is completely without merit.

WHERE THE FUCK DID I SAY THAT?

Closer to the truth is this, if you're not going to prosecute the mother, I will not even begin to humor your fool's errand.

 

[Brett85]

WHERE THE FUCK DID I SAY THAT?

Closer to the truth is this, if you're not going to prosecute the mother, I will not even begin to humor your fool's errand.

Where did you ever say that there should be any laws against abortion? You've constantly argued here that abortion should be legal. You've made it clear that you're personally opposed to it, but that it shouldn't be against the law. That's the position that most pro choice people have.