--- In [email protected], Deus Ex Machina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Paul [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > 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? > > both. the current system already doesnt give you rights to your own dna.
Oh, so you're saying you're not a libertarian. That's all you had to say. Anyone that denies that we own our own DNA, and that we have sole dominion over ourselves (and the organisms within ourselves) is not a libertarian. Nor would any libertarian on earth say that one person would have any claim to the body of another. > > > Do you deny that gravity exists or do you deny that we own ourselves? > > you can measure gravity, how do you measure natural law? Gravity IS a natural law and you just stated that you could measure it. Natural rights are a subset of natural law, and rights can't be measured, but the violation of rights can be measured. The ability to measure something is not a requirement for its existance. Can you measure love? Do you deny that love exists? > > > 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. > > even your position is not self consistent if you claim a person as > dominion over there own body then an unborn child should have dominion > over its own body, just because it gets food from the mother means > nothing. > > Vic Wrong. My position is 100% consistent at all times. An "unborn child" has no rights because there is no such thing as an unborn child. Until the moment it leaves the body of the host, it is a biological parasite. And as I said, nothing inside my body has any rights because I alone own my body and all of its contents. I have sole dominion over my body and make all life and death decisions for the organisms within the body and even for my body. Nobody else on earth has any claim to my body, including the organisms within my body. The combined population of the planet earth minus me has no legitimate say what-so-ever in what I do or don't do with my body or the organisms within. ALL LIBERTARIANS....I repeat....ALL LIBERTARIANS believe in complete self-ownership of our body and everything inside of our body. ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/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/
