you "obviously are trying to" strip the human atrribute from a human
organism, just as the slaver or the fascist before you. :)
--- In [email protected], "Paul" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> To claim someone else's opinion matters is to say that we do not
own
> our own bodies or the organisms within our own body. Do deny that
we
> have sole dominion over our own body and the organisms within it?
You
> obviously are trying to attribute human life onto an organism that
> doesn't have it. And eveyr single time you compare abortion to the
> holocaust or racism, you're only making your own argument look more
> and more stupid and pointless. There is no parallel whatsoever.
>
> You failed to address the fact that a fetus has no human life. You
> claim it does, but that is merely YOUR opinion which is worthless.
> The only opinion that matters from a LIBERTARIAN perspective is
that of the pregnant woman.
>
> You have NOTHING to back your point of view, while mine is 100%
> compatable with libertarian philosophy.
>
> So I say, "a brick has no human life", and you say, "the germans
> thought the jews had no human life". I say "We own ourselves and
> nobody else's opinion matters when it comes to our own body or the
> organisms within that body" you reply with "The Nazis thought their
> opinion was the only one that matters". Nothing you've said
refutes
> anything I've said. If I say, "a dog has no human life", you'll
say
> "the KKK doesn't think black people are human". What does that
have
> to do with the conversation?
>
> So the question is clear. It's a yes or no question. If you're
> intellectually honest, you won't answer it with anything other
than a
> yes or no.
>
> Do you believe that we have sole dominion over our own body and the
> organisms within that body?
>
> Yes or No?
>
>
>
>
>
> --- In [email protected], "uncoolrabbit" <uncoolrabbit@>
> wrote:
> >
> > And no ones opinions matter Accept the PURE germans, and no ones
> > opinions matter accept the superior WHITES. Your a perfect
paralel
> > Paul. I am not here to discuss what your not willing to discuss.
> > Rather, what place the discussion should have and why.
> >
> > --- In [email protected], "Paul" <ptireland@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Yes, everyone has an opinion and none of the opinions matter
but
> > the
> > > pregnant woman. Not yours, not mine, and not the American
> > people's.
> > > No position other than full support for the right of women to
have
> > an
> > > abortion at any state of pregnancy from conception to birth is
a
> > > libertarian one. No claims that a fetus has human rights have
any
> > > more merit than claiming a tapeworm or a tumor has human
rights.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In [email protected], "uncoolrabbit"
<uncoolrabbit@>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Opinions are worthless Paul, every one has atleast a few.
You
> > gave
> > > > me your opinion, legislation written on opinion rather than
> > factual
> > > > logic is no diferent than the conservative right's
imposition of
> > > > morale laws, or the lefts imposiiton of rob from the rich
steal
> > from
> > > > the poor and is in every way shape and form the tool of a
> > statist.
> > > >
> > > > --- In [email protected], "Paul" <ptireland@>
wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > In the case of abortion, there is no aggression directed
at a
> > > > child.
> > > > > 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"
> > <uncoolrabbit@>
> > > > > 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
SPONSORED LINKS
| Libertarian | English language | Political parties |
| Online dictionary | American politics |
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.
