There is no child to aggress against. A fetus is alive in the same
way a tumor is alive. Both have human dna cells. Both have the same
amount of human life....NONE.
--- In [email protected], "uncoolrabbit" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
>
> The other day I remembered why I was drawn to Libertarianism. A
> friend, who is republican, said that there needs to be a dress code
> in schools. (He is a teacher). I asked why, he said the other day a
> kid came in wearing a shirt that said 'buck fuddy'. I asked him
> what that means, and he went on a tiraid of cliches rather than
> explaining why he felt that there should be a dress code, and asked
> me why I 'took the kids side.' I said I haven't taken a side, but
> the default should always be that people have there own personal
> freedoms.
>
> There is alot of room in Libertarianism for logic, a person can do
> anything that does not hurt anouther. I believe a real philosophical
> victory would come from adhering to a policy on defending liberty
> within the confines of not injuring others. There is alot to be said
> on both sides here, so we must, to achieve a 'philosophical triumph'
> hold to our philosophical values, as you Terry said to me, what was
> it, something to the effect of if you do not stand for something you
> stand for nothing? Back to the point, a principle that many here, I
> think even Paul, have claimed to support is tracing initiation of
> force to its source in determing who is the agressor, or where the
> agression is comming from.
>
> In the case of Abortion, were is the agression comming from, is it
> comming from the child? Not hardly, the child did not exhist prior
> to conception and had no conscious part in it. It was actions taken
> by the parents that are responsible for its very being. This is an
> important to mention, responsible, as the are responsible for this
> life.
>
> The fetus, for Paul who enjoys the term, is alive, and abortion
> terminates that life, it kills the fetus, who is not responsible for
> the condition of the mother. The agression is the act of the
> responsible party, terminating the very exhistance of the 2nd party
> to avoid there own responsibilities and consequences of there
> actions. Nothing could be to me, more unlibertarian.
>
> I however, do understand that not every one thinks like me, and
> believe there should not be a federal law banning abortion.
>
> Also, I just want to say, if I haven't before, that I love hearing
> from you on the board Thomas.
>
>
> --- In [email protected], "Thomas L. Knapp"
> <thomaslknapp@> wrote:
> >
> > Quoth Boyd:
> >
> > > It may be a philosophical victory
> >
> > It would be neither philosophical nor a victory.
> >
> > In order for it to be "philosophical," it would have to incorporate
> > reasoned argument rather than simply bluster and attempted
> > authoritative personal ukase.
> >
> > In order for it to be a "victory," it would have to elicit a
> reaction
> > from its audience to the effect that it _is_ reasoned argument
> rather
> > than bluster and ukase.
> >
> > Tom Knapp
> >
>
ForumWebSiteAt http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
- Visit your group "Libertarian" on the web.
- To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
