Ok, so are you denying that we have sole dominion over our own lives and body (including the organisms within them)? This means you're saying that someone else can have more of a claim on your body than you do. This is the exact opposite of the premise of libertarianism.
Either that or you are denying that natural law exists. Which is it? Do you deny that gravity exists or do you deny that we own ourselves? One can not be a libertarian while denying natural law, natural rights, or sole dominion over our lives and bodies (including the organisms within). If you're not a libertarian, I understand completely. Then it makes sense that you're claiming that some organism living in a person's body has more of a claim on that person's body than they do for themselves, but if you are a libertarian, you know this is bullshit. You either take self-ownership as a fact or you don't. There is no in between. --- In [email protected], Deus Ex Machina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Paul [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > I don't have to know when life begins to know rights begin at birth. > > That is because I have sole dominion over my own body and all things > > within it. Nothing within the body of a human has any rights because > > a human has sole dominion over their body and all things living within > > it. If I have sole dominion, I am the GOD of my body. I decide > > whether any organism within my body, or even my body itself will die > > and nobody else on earth has any say in the matter. Questioning what > > I do with the organisms inside my body is no different than > > questioning the will of "god" when he creates a tsunami killing > > thousands upon thousands of people. > > > > If I can kill anything in my body and nobody else on earth has any say > > in the matter...especially the organism itself, it means it has no > > rights at all. Not even the right to life. It doesn't matter what > > kind of organism it is or what stage of development it is in. NOTHING > > inside my body or the body of any other human has rights until it is > > no longer inside my body. This of course means human rights begin at > > birth and not one second before. > > > > This is not merely my "opinion", it is a fact. To dispute my sole > > dominion over my body and all things inside my body is to violate the > > very premise of Libertarianism. To dispute it is to claim that humans > > don't have rights, which is to dispute natural law. It's no different > > than claiming gravity does not exist. > > you are suffering from the rose coloured glasses syndrome. > > your definitions are not fact. if for arguments sake I define life to begin > at conception and so do rights that is just as much a fact for me as your point > of view that life begins at birth. > > there is nothing whatsoever to support your definition as being more appropriate > then mine. it makes no difference how many time you appeal to "natural > law" or other unverifiables to support your definition. > > Vic > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 1.2 million kids a year are victims of human trafficking. Stop slavery. http://us.click.yahoo.com/WpTY2A/izNLAA/yQLSAA/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/
