> While we argue for the ultimate truth, is it not more Libertarian to
> first protect rights and seek the justification to deny them (such
> as a determination that the individual is entitled to recieve rights
> or be deemed a 'person') rather than to first deny these rights then
> demand the justification for there acknowledgement?
A good summation, but you're missing a key point:
In terms of policy, the libertarian prescription is that only those
activities which are an initiation of force may be prohibited/punished.
So far, we've assumed that an adult woman is a "person" with rights --
do you care to argue otherwise?
If an adult woman is a "person" with rights, then anyone wanting to
prohibit/punish any activity in she might choose to engage --
including procuring an abortion -- bears the burden of proof for
establishing that that activity is an initiation of force.
She doesn't have to prove that the fetus is NOT a person -- those
wanting to interfere/punish her for aborting it have to prove that it
IS ... because if it isn't, the whole affair is none of their business.
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.
