--- In [email protected], "David Macko" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > We have explored this subject quite thoroughly. Some of us take the only logical scientific position that human life begins at conception and therefore is entitled to the equal rights of all humans. Your side takes a mystical position that human life begins at some other time, arbitrarily set, and therefore can be exterminated. > > For life and liberty, > David Macko
Of course, you would say the exact opposite of the truth. In reality I take the scientific position that a fetus IS a parasite and that it lives within the body of a human being. There is no scientific evidence what-so-ever to back the laughable claim that HUMAN life begins at conception. A zygote is not a human, and only the most foolish of people would claim such. An Acorn is not an oak tree. I don't take the emotion-filled, and mystical argument that claims a fetus has a "soul". That is left to those claiming to be pro-life but who only respect those not yet alive, over those who are already alive. Rather than to believe in mystical nonsense and ludicrous claims like those I've mentioned, I stick to scientific facts and to the libertarian position that we have SOLE DOMINION over our own body and all of the organisms within that body. To claim otherwise is to say a tapeworm has more rights than its host. It's to claim that others are entitled to take that which is ours for thier own percieved needs. So someone is either a scientific realist and a libertarian like myself, you're a socialist believer in mysticism like you. > > > > All government at any level derives its limited powers from the > > consent of the governed, and as such can not have any powers that we > > as individuals don't have to grant to it. If we were on an island > > without a government, neither you, nor me, nor anyone else on the > > island would have any authority to tell a woman whether or not she may > > or may not have an abortion. None of us has any say in what she does > > or doesn't do with her own body or any organisms within that body. It > > doesn't matter if we personally consider a fetus to be a person or > > not. She alone has SOLE DOMINION over everything in her body whether > > it's her own organs, a tapeworm, a germ, or a fetus. Nothing inside > > the body of a human being has any rights regardless of what that > > organism happens to be. > > > > If you consider abortion to be murder, you are free not to get one, > > but neither you, nor the combined population of the planet earth other > > than the pregnant woman, has any legitimate say in whether or not she > > has an abortion or the legitimate authority to punish her for having one. > > > > I don't think you should be forced to pay for anyone's abortion, but > > neither do you have any say in whether or not they have one. The > > position of the LP is that only the pregnant woman, and nobody else, > > decides the appropriateness of having an abortion. In otherwords > > Libertarians are pro-choice. It's not just the platform, it's the > > default position in all libertarian philosophy. > > > > So yes, I do think the state can punish murder. But this has nothing > > to do with abortion. They are not the same thing and they never will > > be. They aren't related in the slightest. And if you "think" > > abortion is murder, that still doesn't give you any authority or right > > to stop them or punish them. Any claims to the contrary are not > > libertarian because they violate the SOLE DOMINION clause of our pledge. > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "David Macko" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >> I agree with you that the fedgov has no Constitutional authority > >> regarding abortion. > >> However, unless you are an anarchist, you should agree that state > >> governments have the authority to punish murder. Some of us think > >> murders should be punished no matter where they occur, including > >> the womb of the victim's mother. > >> > >> For life and liberty, > >> David Macko > >> > >> ----- Original Message ----- > >> From: "Paul" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> To: <[email protected]> > >> Sent: Sunday, October 09, 2005 2:28 PM > >> Subject: [Libertarian] Re: Will Christian Conservatives blow it now? > >> > >> > >> > Abortion is a good issue to use because it displays whether someone > >> > will allow emotion to get in the way of their judgement and their > >> > dedication to the U.S. Constitution and the limitation within it on > >> > the powers of the U.S. Government. The Federal government has > >> > absolutely no say in the matter. In fact, neither do the states. > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > --- In [email protected], [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> >> > >> >> Will Christian Conservatives blow it now? > >> >> > >> >> Justice Sandra Day O'Connor's retirement from the Supreme Court > >> > heightened > >> >> the buzz across America. Every news report in the first two hours > >> > since the > >> >> announcement linked O'Connor's resignation with the Abortion Issue. > >> >> > >> >> Let's keep the bigger picture in focus. Abortion should not be the > >> > only > >> >> legal pivot point in the land of the free. A U. S. Supreme Court > >> > Justice must > >> >> rule on many more cases than an abortion case that may reach the > >> > Court some year. > >> >> > >> >> O'Connor in retrospective has been an influential voice for liberty, > >> > limiting > >> >> the federal government grabbing power. > >> >> > >> >> O'Connor wrote the most quoted dissent in the recent eminent domain > >> > case > >> >> (Kelo v. New London). O'Connor's dissent in the medical marijuana > >> > case, > >> >> empowering the feds' monolithic control of states' medical > >> > decision-making, will be > >> >> quoted in the future. > >> >> > >> >> In the meantime, the media relentlessly reports only that O'Connor > >> > was a > >> >> swing vote on abortion -- and that President Bush now has the chance > >> > to appoint a > >> >> pro-life Justice. No doubt Christian conservatives support that > >> > selective > >> >> search criterion. > >> >> > >> >> But, how many of Christians understand that this is not a case of > >> > being able > >> >> to replace a "bad" Justice with a "good" Justice. The fact is, that > >> > for those > >> >> who believe in limited federal powers and maximum freedom, O'Connor > >> > has been > >> >> a fair and wise Justice. > >> >> > >> >> But, if the abortion issue continues to be the major focus of the > >> >> Liberal-Conservative debate, then we may lose focus on the greater > >> > legal > >> >> issues. This obsession means we may get a Justice far less > >> > liberty-minded, without > >> >> time-tested, core Constitutional convictions, needed to sustain > > debate. > >> >> [Think Harriet Miers.] > >> >> > >> >> So, while obsessing on abortion, Christian conservatives may cut off > >> > their > >> >> noses to spite their proud faces for many years, even decades to > >> > come. They may > >> >> be so pre-occupied with their present, single-issue focus that they > >> > may end up > >> >> sacrificing more than 30 years of hard fought for freedoms in the > >> > culture > >> >> war. > >> >> > >> >> Failure to focus on the long-term timeline now, reminds us of the > >> >> metaphorically foolish mother, who throws the baby out with the bath > >> > water, because she > >> >> is fixated on expediency and wants a clean house, right now. > >> > Forgetting future > >> >> decades would be a supreme (court) irony for those who are > > planning for > >> >> Eternity. > >> >> > >> >> Are Christian conservatives resigning on this issue prematurely? > >> >> > >> >> WRF > >> > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Fair play? Video games influencing politics. Click and talk back! http://us.click.yahoo.com/VpgUKB/pzNLAA/cUmLAA/KlSolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> ForumWebSiteAt http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
