"I want the Government off our backs....and into her uterus."

The inherent paradox facing the American Right between their stance on abortion.....and their otherwise libertarian (even anarcho-libertarian) view of Government on other issues.

The same guys who say they want "less regulation because it stifles personal freedom".....want more regulation on abortion.

The same guys who say "Americans want less Government interference in their lives"......want Government to oversee reproduction.

The same guys who say "Government can't do anything right".....believe that that same Government could enforce a ban on abortion.

And so they end up looking not just like hypocrites....but foolish and dishonest.

And thus create yet another obstacle in their desired goal of banning abortion.....because everybody sees that they don't "hate" Government or even "distrust" Government or even "want to reduce Government in your life".....they want a POWERFUL Government....where it concerns the things THEY want to control.

 

LOL @ thread title. Even without reading the thread content, that title was just funny.

 

It's meant to show both the irony....and hypocrisy...of the otherwise supposedly "anti-Gub'mint" Right.

REAL libertarians (or even real and honest theocrats) would not face such a charge of hypocrisy. If you say "I want the Government out of your life...and yes, that means drug de-criminalization and allowing you to marry your boy/girlfriend (of the same gender) and controlling your own reproduction"......you aren't a hypocrite.

Just as an honest theocrat (a rarety, even oxymoronic, most try to hide it) could say "I don't want smaller Government....I want government to control women and enforce my fundamentalist religion as public policy.".....and not be a hypocrite.

But these "I hate Gub'mint" Right who are also the ones who want to ban abortion....are dishonest. They actually think a woman has a "right" to make phony "cancer cures" that don't work and still sell them as such...i.e. no FDA....but has NO right to decide if she wants to remain pregnant.

That she has no right to control her uterus....but she could dump toxic waste (which caused miscarriages) into a local water-table, if her lawyers were smart enough and she could pay off enough "experts" to deny it was pollution.

 

Libertarians are pretty divided on the abortion issue, also immigration. That's one way you can tell the difference between a Conservative Libertarian and a Liberal Libertarian.

Being Pro-Life is not inconsistent with being Libertarian, because Libertarianism seeks to protect the fundamental liberties of all, and that can include the unborn life in the uterus. It's really a special case, abortion, because the rights of two people – two entities – are in potential conflict. So one can approach the dilemma from a Libertarian perspective, but the Libertarian ideology does not really tell you which one to choose.

 

Anders, you cannot claim to be a "libertarian"...at all.

You've endorsed totalitarian/authoritarian Governmental polices from mandatory ultrasounds at airports.....to Government monitoring of what women Google.....to even bio-chipping women to allow the Government to monitor their reproductive status....

all to enforce a national abortion ban you dream of.

A Stalinist or a Taliban would be more "libertarian" than that.

 

Gorny has this backwards. It is the >>>MOD EDIT RULE 2<<< that proclaim, "Stay out of my uterus! .........but pay for my abortions and birth control!"

 

Which law school accepted you ?

Is "feminazi" a legal term ?

 

Social conservatives are big government types.

 

big difference, one the person is deciding, the other the gov is deciding and sending you the bill

 

Libertarians still oppose murder, and support government force to prosecute murderers.

So I believe this has less to do with libertarianism and more to do with where to draw the line when it comes to human life. If you believe that the foetus is equivalent to a full person then restrictions or bans on abortion can be consistent with a libertarian worldview the same way as ban on murder or homicide can be.

 

So you wouldn't try to ban abortion if you "don't have to pay for it"?

(BTW, pointless to ask, I suppose, since Unifier is a "hit and run" poster. )

- - - Updated - - -

Unifier is our "hit and run" guy on this Forum....he rarely sticks around to answer questions.

Especially his bulls*** claim that he was going to law school.

- - - Updated - - -

Given an Abortion Prohibition to be EFFECTIVELY enforced would require a massive police state apparatus....how does a libertarian support banning abortion and not contradict themselves?

 

What if, women had recourse to "tractor beams" and "Tantalus fields"?

 

Seriously....technology will eventually eliminate the "abortion question" (as noted on my other OP). If not more effective and easily accessible contraception....the ability to remove a fetus, intact, and store it for either later implantation by the original woman or an "adoptive" woman.

Of course, we have to rely on evolution of the human mind....to see the misogyny of much of "pro-life'ism" go extinct as well.

 

I agree and "blame the right" for inculcating more of a problem with human sexuality than the moral repugnance to a god, of the abomination of hypocrisy.

 

Sorry, but the "evolution of the human mind" has skipped many humans.....some still believe that if women want rights they are Nazis...

... maybe their "minds" are evolving backwards....

Unfortunately misogyny will never go extinct...there will always be frightened tiny men who can't understand that being born with a penis is not an accomplishment, and in no way makes them superior to those born with a vagina...

Which reminds me of ...... I know about hit and run posters and their claim to start law school .... I was just checking in to see which one he chose

 

I merely point out the hypocrisy who claim they want "Government out of every aspect of your lives"......"except your reproduction, of course."

But in a way ...it's good. That hypocrisy shows that the first part of their ideology...is a LIE. They are just fine with "Big Government"....as long as that Big Government is doing what THEY want it to do.

 

1. Their numbers are much lower than they were. Plus it gets harder for them to go after women's rights....with so many Rightwing women molded into spokespeople for Rightwing ideology.

I always find it funny that the same men who rail against "feminists".....are such big fans of Ann Coulter. Who is now in her 50s, never married, no children, a series of short-term relationships with men, and has only focused on her career.....which is the Right's stereotype of "feminist."

And yet....they adore her.....a few may even believe she's "still a virgin" (While most don't care, and doubly show their hypocrisy when they talk about "sexual immorality in America these days.")

2. Every time Unifier pops in....I'm asking him about how his law school career is going.

 

Common fallacy. Unfortunately, not really very true.

 

Sure it is.....you are FINE with Big Government....if it controls women and their reproduction. We see it everytime we ask a strident "pro-lifer"...who is honest...."HOW EXACTLY would you enforce a ban on abortion?"

And they all become police state totalitarians.


BTW, how are those law school applications coming?

 

Is it any wonder some on the left believe we should just Use capitalism for all of its (net) worth and create open interest in morals testing companies on a for-profit basis, simply because drug testing companies are useless for that.

 

Yes, we hear that all the time.

??????

 

it is just vaporware until the first IPO

 

And all mimsy were the borogoves.

 

You know, Gorn Captain, maybe I'm just really weird, but I was watching an original Star Trek episode, Errand of Mercy, and I came across a dialogue, I know it's a complete coincidence, but it's almost eerie how much it seems to reflect the abortion debate.

Here's the transcript:

Councilman: No one has been killed, captain.

Second Councilman: No one has died here, in uncounted thousands of years.

Klingon Captain: You're liars, you're meddling in things that are none of your business.

Second Councilman: We find interfering in other people's affairs... most disgusting. But you, gentlemen, have given us no choice.

Kirk: Even if you have some power we don't understand, you have no right to dictate to our federation

Klingon Captain (interjecting): &#8212;or our empire&#8212;

Kirk: how to handle their interstellar relations. We have the right!

Councilman: To wage war, captain? To kill millions of innocent people? To destroy life on a planetary scale? Is that what you're defending?

 

Hey....which Star Trek episode is this from? OH! I just saw.....Errand of Mercy.

AboveAlpha