70ad3bbb
XPost: alt.politics.radical-left, alt.politics.socialism, alt.po
itics.libertarian
XPost: talk.politics.libertarian
From: fred@fredwilliams.ca
On Sunday 08 June 2008 00:25, Aardvark wrote:
> On Jun 7, 6:18 pm, Ron Peterson wrote:
>> On May 28, 8:38 pm, Aardvark wrote:
>>
>> > also, i've still to get any socialist to take me up on the offer to
>> > donate $100 to the charity of their choice if they can name just
>> > *one* real right that a socialist would believe in that a
>> > libertarian would not.
>>
>> Bob Barr the Libertarian candidate for President is still opposed to
>> a woman's right to have an abortion.
>>
>> Ron Paul has also stated his opposition to abortion rights.
>>
>> The LP platform says:
>> "Recognizing that abortion is a sensitive issue and that people can
>> hold good-faith views on all sides, we believe that government should
>> be kept out of the matter, leaving the question to each person for
>> their conscientious consideration."
>
>
>
>> I am sure that some socialists are opposed to abortion rights, but
>> many socialist governments have provided the abortions free to women,
>> which is something that Libertarians are opposed to.
>>
>> Now paying for the needs of individuals is considered an affirmative
>> right which is not a limitation on government powers (real right).
>
> paying for someone else's abortion with money extorted from me (by
> implied threat of force - as all government actions are) could never
> be considered a right. you may call it an "affirmative right",
> whatever the hell that is, if you so choose. call it "ham & cheese on
> rye" if it gives you your jollies. your answer to the challenge fails
> the test in many very obvious ways. you are just no good at this. you
> don't believe in freedom and you can't sell (just like fred does) an
> ideal of slavery in an honest fashion to the masses.
>
I didn't bother with this challenge because I knew it would never be
honoured from the start. The right to an abortion is very valid.
Here's another, (not expecting anything to be honoured either), the
right to health care, oh and another the right to an education. If you
read my paper on "The Secret of Money" there is also the right to issue
money! although you could make a case for socialists not going for
that one either... yet.
> what is, still is. we libertarians believe in many rights that you
> socialists could never believe in, while socialists can not name one
> *real* right that a libertarian such as myself would not believe in.
>
Libertarian rights are rights for the rich slave owners, not rights for
the people. It was a French philosopher who said, "The law in it's
magnanimity forbids the rich as well as the poor from begging in the
streets, stealing a loaf of bread, and sleeping under bridges."
The right to life is the most fundamental human right and therefore the
right to the necessities of life; food, clothing, shelter, and a basic
respect, must naturally flow from this fundamental right. Found
anything you don't support yet?
> let's also not forget that an abortion (whether you believe it should
> be legal or not) still violates the right of the baby to live.
>
And not recognising the mother's right to an abortion violates her
right. I don't favour abortions in the third trimester, except to save
the life of the mother or something similar. Aborting the life of a
foetus before it even knows it's alive, is of little consequence. If
abortion was available on demand, then far more abortions would be in
the first trimester.
> whether the child has a say (it doesn't) in it's own demise is beside
> the point. someone still ends it's life.
>
Considering the world it would be brought into, that may be an act of
kindness.
--
Peace,
Fred
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
