As you aptly describe in your meme, Brian, abortion comes down to a single issue: Where do you draw the line where a cell/chromosome cluster is a part of a woman's body, and when it is becomes a fetus, with consciousness, self-identity and therefore, rights (superseding those rights of the mother over her body)
I have ceased to take a position in this because its a no-win situation. I highly doubt there will ever be consensus on where that line is. Instead, i worry about the economy, civil liberties and education - where everyone agrees we are doing really bad. Also - I would like to ask Brian - An email within the libertarian forums suggested that Guiliani is surrounding himself with libertarian advisors....any truth to this? --- "Thomas L. Knapp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Quoth Brian Holtz: > > > This opportunity is so unique that I'll pay that $200 bounty > > for a position that ANY of these five parties could take (but hasn't > > yet) where both 60% of their members and 60% of Americans support it > > and it is not already staked out by any of the other four parties.I > > don't think any other such position exists in American politics. You > > get my $200 if you can give a counter-example. > > That's a pretty loose set of definitions so I'm not really sure what > to make of it. > > At least two parties (the LP and the Green Party) support medical > marijuana, as do somewhere upwards of 60% of Americans (see > http://norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=3392 for a list of polls -- 60% is > the BOTTOM of the positive response). > > The Green Party specifically mentions medical marijuana in its > platform (http://www.gp.org/platform/2004/socjustice.html#999378), the > LP does not. > > On the other hand, it can't really be said that the Green Party has > "staked out" a position in favor of medical marijuana in the sense > that one "stakes" a claim and is identified with it. I've never heard > anyone include medical marijuana when asked to describe what the Green > Party stands for, where the LP is highly identified with the issue, in > part due to the LP affiliations of prominent medical marijuana > activists like (the late) Peter McWilliams and Steve Kubby and in part > because the LP has always been identified as heavily ideologically > invested in drug policy. > > So, probably not good for $200 ... but an interesting proposition. > > As for abortion, you make an interesting case philosophically and > naturally I think the LP should determine what the right position is > and take it BECAUSE it's the right position ... but politically it's a > dead end. The 60% of voters who aren't "pro-life, period" or > "pro-choice, period" aren't either of those, for the most part, > because they just don't care that much about the issue, and certainly > not enough to abandon major parties they're otherwise happy with over > it. People abandon major parties and go to third parties over a single > issue because they are king-hell obsessed with that issue, and > obsession is a feature of the polar opposite minority positions. > > Regards, > Tom Knapp > > ____________________________________________________________________________________ Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping
