nigger? A brick has no more or less human life than a fetus. Calling
abortion irresponsible is laughable. It's often the MOST responsible
things someone can do and a difficult decision to make. It's a
decision that belongs SOLELY to the pregnant woman. Also there hasn't
been a single baby in the history of the world ever killed by an
abortion. There have been fetuses destroyed before they attained
human life which is the moral equivalent of having a tooth, tumor, or
tapeworm removed.
--- In [email protected], "uncoolrabbit" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> And in every one of those, at one time one could say, and you are
> talking about the kikes and niggers, that did not make them right
> then and it does not make you right now. This is not cut and dry,
> this is one of those things that happen so often when there is the
> agressor and the passive victim. The individual that kills to avoid
> responsibility, and the inoccent victim who is helplessly victimized.
>
> --- In [email protected], "Paul" <ptireland@> wrote:
> >
> > In every example you mentioned, you were discussing those who were
> > born. The women, Jews, blacks, etc. all had birth in common.
> This is
> > the moment they became human beings and obtained rights and not a
> > second before.
> >
> > Your idiotic comparison between my opinion that a fetus has no
> human
> > life to the persecution of Jews, blacks, or women in the middle-
> east
> > is worthless and holds no validity. It's no different than me
> > smashing bricks and you comparing it to the holocaust.
> >
> > If I say a brick has no human life, are you going to compare it to
> > blacks, Jews, and women? Why not? How about if I said dogs have
> no
> > human life? Would you mention blacks, Jews, and women then? Why
> not?
> >
> > Bricks and dogs have every bit as much human life as a fetus;
> which is
> > to say they have none.
> >
> > Making our platform defend abortion is not meddling in the lives of
> > anyone. Making a Constitutional amendment protecting the right to
> > unrestricted abortions without any permission or notification of
> > anyone would not interfere or meddle in the lives of anyone. It
> would
> > be a legitimate and libertarian use of the government to defend the
> > RIGHT to have an abortion. Government is here to defend the
> rights we
> > are BORN with, and these rights including having abortions and
> having
> > SOLE DOMINION over our own bodies and all organisms within those
> > bodies without any oversight by the government, or permission or
> > notification of anyone.
> >
> > To make a firm, clear, and unwavering stand in favor of completely
> > unrestricted abortion would be a huge philosophical victory for
> > libertarians, and for human rights. Nobody would be prevented from
> > being wronged, because abortion doesn't wrong anyone.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In [email protected], "uncoolrabbit" <uncoolrabbit@>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > In the Taliban book anything but a burka is obscene for a woman
> to
> > > wear in public. In the NAZI book jews were inferior parasites
> with
> > > no right to live. In the book of Jim Crow laws blacks were less
> than
> > > second class citizens. Thank Liberty that one mans book does not
> > > always prevail in forcing his dementions on all the world.
> > >
> > > The fact of the matter is that some view a Fetus as inhuman,
> and
> > > others do not, just as some viewed thouse of african decent and
> > > inhuman and others never did.
> > >
> > > I want no federal law banning abortion, but I also want no
> federal
> > > law defending it, especialy not unconditionaly. The federal
> > > goverment has no place medling in peoples lives Paul, and the
> only
> > > federal law I could support dealing with Abortion is one that is
> > > strichtly limited to dealing with discrepencies between state
> laws
> > > regaurding abortions.
> > >
> > > To make a firm stand infavor of unrestrichted abortion would be
> a
> > > real philosophical failure for Libertarianism. It would support
> > > deprive a wronged individual from seeking justice, and that
> should
> > > be contrary to libertey in any ones book.
> > >
> > > --- In [email protected], "Paul" <ptireland@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > There is no such thing as an unborn child or an unbaked cake,
> > > however
> > > > there are fetuses and there is dough.
> > > >
> > > > The man has nothing at all to say about the abortion and
> neither
> > > does
> > > > any other person, group of people, or government on earth.
> > > >
> > > > In my book, a fetus has no more human life than a brick.
> You're
> > > free
> > > > to have your own opinion, but neither your opinion, nor mine
> > > matter in
> > > > the slightest. The only person whose opinion matters is the
> > > pregnant
> > > > woman. She has SOLE DOMINION over her body and all organisms
> > > within
> > > > that body. Nobody else on earth has any decision making power
> over
> > > > whether or not she has an abortion, or any legitimate right to
> > > prevent
> > > > or punish her for having one or even to be notified about one
> for
> > > that
> > > > matter.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --- In [email protected], "uncoolrabbit"
> <uncoolrabbit@>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > If a husband has no right to be informed of the contract
> killing
> > > of
> > > > > his unborn child, why should you have any right for
> reperations
> > > if a
> > > > > member of your family is murdered for profit? Or, do you
> believe
> > > > > also that manslaughter and hired hitmen are things that
> should
> > > also
> > > > > be not only legalized, but actualy protected by legislature?
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In [email protected], "Paul" <ptireland@>
> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 1. Cult of the omnipotent state makes us all sound insane
> and
> > > > > we're
> > > > > > not an anarchist organization
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 2. Nobody has a right to be informed if a woman is having
> an
> > > > > > abortion. Not her parents, her husband, her church, or
> any
> > > other
> > > > > > person or group of people on earth except for the doctor
> > > performing
> > > > > > the abortion.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 3. I'd be for eliminating the entire Homeland Security
> > > Department
> > > > > and
> > > > > > all subdepartments within it.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --- In [email protected], "steven linnabary"
> > > > > > <linnabary51@> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > > From: "Paul" <ptireland@>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I also slightly disagree with the party platform on
> > > abortion
> > > > > and
> > > > > > > > immigration. It's not clear enough. It should
> say, "The
> > > > > Libertarian
> > > > > > > > Party supports the right of a woman to have an
> abortion at
> > > any
> > > > > time
> > > > > > > > from conception to birth without any permission,
> > > oversight, or
> > > > > > > > notification of any other person or government"
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I think a husband might have a right to know if his wife
> is
> > > > > getting an
> > > > > > > abortion. And a religious community that the woman is
> part
> > > of
> > > > > might
> > > > > > also
> > > > > > > have the same right (in a contractual sense). Afterall,
> the
> > > > > Roman
> > > > > > Catholic
> > > > > > > Church certainly has the right to excommunicate somebody
> > > that
> > > > > violates a
> > > > > > > major tenet of that faith.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > But no government body has the right or privilege to
> tell
> > > > > somebody
> > > > > > what to
> > > > > > > do with their body (except in an individual contractual
> > > sense,
> > > > > as the
> > > > > > > military might do in wartime).
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > and "The Libertarian
> > > > > > > > Party recognizes that America was built by immigrants
> and
> > > the
> > > > > fact
> > > > > > > > that the founders created America to welcome all
> > > immigrants
> > > > > from all
> > > > > > > > nations, so we support the elimination of all
> immigration
> > > laws
> > > > > and of
> > > > > > > > the INS itself and welcome and unlimited number of
> > > immigrants
> > > > > from any
> > > > > > > > nation on earth to come here to live and work
> peacefully."
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > INS has been abolished...sort of. It was combined with
> > > Customs
> > > > > into ICE
> > > > > > > (Immigration & Customs Enforcement).
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I wouldn't mind eliminating the insane "Cult of the
> > > Omnipotent
> > > > > State"
> > > > > > > > garbage either.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Why should we eliminate what tells the world what we
> stand
> > > for?
> > > > > > Should we
> > > > > > > only resort to wishy-washy verbiage that means less, and
> can
> > > be
> > > > > more
> > > > > > easily
> > > > > > > taken out of context?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > PEACE
> > > > > > > Steven R. Linnabary, Treasurer
> > > > > > > Franklin County Libertarian Party
> > > > > > > (614) 891-8841
> > > > > > > P.O.Box#115; Blacklick, OH 43004-0115
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > "When you make peaceful revolution impossible, you make
> > > violent
> > > > > > revolution
> > > > > > > inevitable" John F. Kennedy
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
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.
