I would argue that a just law is one which is enforceable in every case and 
one in which the costs of enforcement do not exceed what is acceptable, are
not  worse than the crime, the cost/benefit argument.

Most Libertarians would say the laws against smoking marijuana are bad on 
both counts.  Only a fraction of smokers can be apprehended, which makes 
enforcement arbitrary and capricious.  And the cost of enforcement, home  invasions
by SWAT teams, illegal searches, etc., plus maintaining prisons and  breaking
up families and foregoing the productive output of the convicted  person, etc.
etc. exceeds any social benefit from having a smoker use tobacco  instead of
weed.

Something like half, possibly two thirds, of fertilized eggs (people, to  the
pro-lifers) spontaneously abort or fail to implant or die early in the 
gestation.  In most cases, the mother doesn't even know.  However, if  abortion is
homicide, then every lifeless zygote should be treated as a dead  human. 
First, it must be found.  All tampons and sanitary napkins  must be turned in to
the county medical examine to determine if a fertilized egg  is present and, if
so, to issue a death certificate.  Then the grand jury  (a bunch of ignorant
and bigoted clods who don't have the wit to be excused from  jury duty) must
determine whether the death was "natural" or "murder".   (How are they supposed
to determine that?)  Then, of course, there must be  a proper burial or
cremation of the corpse, including, in most states, a coffin  and a designated
cemetery.  It the death of the zygote was not "natural",  perhaps a third of the
cases, both the mother and the doctor are guilty of  pre-meditated murder, and
subject, in most states, to the death penalty.   Jailing or executing two
adults is very expensive, and their children become  wards of the state, and their
student loans are defaulted on, and they don't pay  taxes, and...   It there
is anything less than 100 per cent  prosecution and severe penalties for
feticide, then we are making a mockery of  the law and depriving other murderers,
like drive-by shooters, of the equal  protection (or neglect) of the law.  What
is it about "murder" you don't  understand, Ms. Juror?

Additional questions: Suppose a teen age girl has a late period and doesn't 
tell anyone, flushing her tampon down the toilet?  Can she be prosecuted  for
abuse of a corpse?  Tampering with evidence?   Does she have  an excuse of
"accidental death" because she miscounted her birth control pills,  took too few
and then too many, resulting in a accidental conception and an  accidental
abortion?  What if she claims it was God's way of giving  her a second chance,
because she was genuinely contrite about letting  Johnny do that thing?

Then there is the Terry Schiavo problem.  If two doctors determine  that an
adult has no functioning brain, the adult can be declared "brain dead"  and
deprived of further life support.  What if a pregnant woman goes  to two doctors
who pronounce her blastocyst "brainless" (no neural tube formed  yet), can
life support be withdrawn?   If not, why the double  standard?

Extending the logic of an embryo of a human is a human, then an embryo of a 
pine tree is a pine tree.  If I burn a pine cone, I have burned a whole 
forest!  that should be good for several years in  jail.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



ForumWebSiteAt  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian



YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS




Reply via email to