Take the political compass test and post your results, dammit.

[TrailHiker]

True conservatives support womens rights.

True conservatives shouldn't recognize womens rights, minority rights, gay rights...It's bullshit. All men are created equal and they (are all) endowed by their Creater with certain inalienable rights.

[AlbertJ]

True conservatives do support women's rights.

Thank you.

True conservatives also don't call abortion a "right."

Because they don't have to.

[neutrino78x]

There are many libertarians who disagree, in fact it seems that increasingly more libertarians are recognizing that it goes against libertarian principles to deny the most basic right- the right to life, of an innocent baby in the womb.

Well, what about the right of the woman to make that decision? If she is against abortions, she doesn't have to have one.

Also, what punishment do you think should befall a woman who has an abortion? 20 years in prison? For exercising sovereignty over her own body.

Plus, a fertilized egg, which is what is usually being killed in an abortion, is not a "baby"; at most it is potentially a human being. Presently, it is a small collection of cells.

I think a more accurate way to describe the abortion issue is to relate it to the separation between church and state. Either you think religious views should dictate secular law, or you do not.

Not everyone agrees with the religious view that abortion is wrong, therefore it should be up to the individual to make the decision.

I think it is morally wrong to sleep with your best friend's wife if it is not ok with your best friend, but I don't want it to be illegal to do so.

[neutrino78x]

Furthermore, with regard to my last post, making abortion illegal in the case of rape gives the rapist more rights than the rape victim. The rapist can choose that the woman is going to have a baby, but the woman cannot decide she is not going to carry it.

And what about incest, in which case the potential baby has increased risk of birth defects?

[lily]

Well, what about the right of the woman to make that decision? If she is against abortions, she doesn't have to have one.

You haven't debated this topic much, have you? It all hinges on whether or not the preborn is a human being, because if the answer is yes, then abortion is homicide. Prolifers say the answer is yes, of course the baby is a human being. THAT is where the debate is at. There is no "right" to kill an innocent human being.

Also, what punishment do you think should befall a woman who has an abortion? 20 years in prison? For exercising sovereignty over her own body.

I think many young women who have abortions don't even realize what they're doing. Many have been lied to by Planned Parenthood, not shown a sonogram, not informed about any other options, it's a business, the abortionists make money and they don't care about the moral/ethical side of it. The doctors are the ones who know they are taking a human life, but do it anyway, because they are hard-hearted and just want the money.

Plus, a fertilized egg, which is what is usually being killed in an abortion, is not a "baby"; at most it is potentially a human being. Presently, it is a small collection of cells.

That is a flat out lie. Unless you are talking only about the morning after pill. You obviously didn't read this post.

I think a more accurate way to describe the abortion issue is to relate it to the separation between church and state. Either you think religious views should dictate secular law, or you do not.

Another ignorant statement. This is not about religion. Unless you think the issue of murder is SOLEY a religious issue, which is silly because obviously atheists, agnostics, pretty much everyone knows that murder is wrong.

Not everyone agrees with the religious view that abortion is wrong, therefore it should be up to the individual to make the decision.

I think it is morally wrong to sleep with your best friend's wife if it is not ok with your best friend, but I don't want it to be illegal to do so.

LOL, your ignorance is showing again. It's not about religion, it's about the most basic human right that we all have - the right to life. There are lots of prolifers who are not religious, there are agnostic and atheist prolifers (we have one on this site, i'm pretty sure that TLG is an atheist) but nice try!

[Dick Tator]

If Satan had a baby about to be born to some 'whore mother' and this baby was to become the Antichrist... Should we abort it, or does this Hell's Spawn have a right to life?

[lily]

If Satan had a baby about to be born to some 'whore mother' and this baby was to become the Antichrist... Should we abort it, or does this Hell's Spawn have a right to life?

Oh, Dick, Dick, Dick... You have a very vivid imagination. Did you ask questions like this in high school? I'm sure the teachers loved you.

[optimus]

If Bill Clinton roofied your drink and later impregnated you against your will what would you do?

The question sounds trollish but it's actually a legitimate question.

[AlbertJ]

If Satan had a baby about to be born to some 'whore mother' and this baby was to become the Antichrist...

Satan would certainly be proud of his baby anti-christ as he would be of the childs whore mother.

Should we abort it, or does this Hell's Spawn have a right to life?

You would never be able to abort it.

She would never spread her legs long enough for someone as beautiful as you.

[86Dùde]

Your political compass
Economic Left/Right: -4.12
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.10

This doesn't make any sense. There is no way someone like you is that close to someone like me. I call BS on this program!

[Mister E.]

This doesn't make any sense. There is no way someone like you is that close to someone like me. I call BS on this program!

Keep f**king that chicken.

[86Dùde]

That's a terrible thing to call your mom.

[neutrino78x]

That's a terrible thing to call your mom.

LMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[BooRadley]

That's a terrible thing to call your mom.

Okay, that was funny.

[86Dùde]

Like the sign says.

[neutrino78x]

You haven't debated this topic much, have you?

Yes, I have. Although I am from a libertarian/moderate liberal area (Silicon Valley (as opposed to the communist area to the north, San Francisco)), where most would support abortion rights.

It all hinges on whether or not the preborn is a human being, because if the answer is yes, then abortion is homicide.

So, all killing is automatically homicide? There is no involuntary manslaughter, etc.? Then you must be against all military actions, such as going into Afghanistan after Al Qaida? Doing that involves killing people. Actual people with adult consciousness.

In any case, there are clearly two issues involved: the right of the mother, and the right of the potential human being.

I think many young women who have abortions don't even realize what they're doing. Many have been lied to by Planned Parenthood, not shown a sonogram, not informed about any other options, it's a business, the abortionists make money and they don't care about the moral/ethical side of it.

You have not answered the question: how long should a woman be in prison for choosing to exercise sovereignty over her body?

The doctors are the ones who know they are taking a human life, but do it anyway, because they are hard-hearted and just want the money.

Actually I think a doctor who performs an abortion would say that he does not see it as a human being. But, very well: what fate do you wish to befall a doctor who performs an abortion? Also, if abortion is murder, then ordering the murder would also be a felony.

That is a flat out lie. Unless you are talking only about the morning after pill. You obviously didn't read this post.

What makes us human, and when the life of a human being begins, are metaphysical and philosophical and religious questions, especially in the early weeks of pregnancy. Hence, making abortion illegal falls under the category of "legislating morality"; it is so ambiguous that it should be left up to the woman to decide if she thinks it is wrong or not.

Another ignorant statement. This is not about religion. Unless you think the issue of murder is SOLEY a religious issue, which is silly because obviously atheists, agnostics, pretty much everyone knows that murder is wrong.

Ah yes, but do we "know murder is wrong" or do we "know that a human being has a right not to be murdered"?

For purposes of the law, at least among the Free Republics (USA, Japan, Europe, Canada, Britain), it must be the latter, because the former is a philosophical/religious statement.

It is an issue of people who wish to inflict their personal morality or religious beliefs on others.

--Brian

[lily]

So, all killing is automatically homicide? There is no involuntary manslaughter, etc.? Then you must be against all military actions, such as going into Afghanistan after Al Qaida? Doing that involves killing people. Actual people with adult consciousness.

Let's make this really simple. One human being intentionally killing an innocent human being is wrong. And you don't get much more innocent than a preborn baby. We're already way off topic, so I don't want to get lured into a side-debate on different types of killing. But no, not all killing is immoral, but intentionally killing an innocent person is.

In any case, there are clearly two issues involved: the right of the mother, and the right of the potential human being.

A preborn is not a "potential" human being. We're already talking about a human being, just in a different stage of life than you and I.

And yes, the rights of BOTH should be protected.

You have not answered the question: how long should a woman be in prison for choosing to exercise sovereignty over her body?

As with any killing, there are things to be taken into consideration, the person's intent, mindset, etc. So it depends on the case, I can't give you a one-size-fits-all specific answer, and besides none of this is relevant to the debate on whether or not abortion is justified.

But since you brought up the misleading phrase "sovereignty over her body", let me ask you this. And this is important, so listen please. If a woman is 9 months pregnant, and just 2 days away from delivery, and she suddenly decides she doesn't want to be a mom, do you think it's right for her to kill her 9 months along preborn baby, no different than a newborn except it is on the other side of the birth canal? So if she took a baseball bat and slammed it repeatedly into her belly until she caused the death of her baby, do you think that is ok, or no?

Actually I think a doctor who performs an abortion would say that he does not see it as a human being. But, very well: what fate do you wish to befall a doctor who performs an abortion? Also, if abortion is murder, then ordering the murder would also be a felony.

There are former abortionists and former abortion clinic workers who are on record speaking about what went on, and it is clear from reading the quotes that not only was there a lot of intentional dishonesty to the patients, but many of them KNEW it was a baby, but were hard-hearted enough to do what they did for a time. Until their conscience finally got to them. I can post the quotes if you want.

As for specific numbers, I'll leave that to the judge. How much time did Scott Peterson get for killing his unborn child? Should he have been charged with 2 murders or just one?

What makes us human, and when the life of a human being begins, are metaphysical and philosophical and religious questions, especially in the early weeks of pregnancy. Hence, making abortion illegal falls under the category of "legislating morality"; it is so ambiguous that it should be left up to the woman to decide if she thinks it is wrong or not.

No, it's a scientific question when life begins. Go to this site and read the articles here, if your mind is even remotely open to learning something new, then you will read the site. Here's where you can start.

Ah yes, but do we "know murder is wrong" or do we "know that a human being has a right not to be murdered"?

For purposes of the law, at least among the Free Republics (USA, Japan, Europe, Canada, Britain), it must be the latter, because the former is a philosophical/religious statement.

It is an issue of people who wish to inflict their personal morality or religious beliefs on others.

--Brian

I think you're playing with semantics. Correct me if I'm wrong, but you're saying that a human being has a right to not be murdered.... (and that is something you think is universal) but you're saying that murder is not necessarily wrong? If murder is NOT wrong, then where are you pulling out this "right" to not be murdered?

[optimus]

What about my question lily?

[lily]

What about my question lily?

I didn't answer because it's like me asking you what would happen if you married Rush Limbaugh, or if monkeys flew out your butt, it's silly.

But in the unlikely event that someone drugged my coca-cola (I don't drink) and impregnated me against my will, I would give the baby up for adoption. Or, if possible, (the technology on this is growing) I would donate the embryo to a couple dealing with infertility who desperately want a baby.

That way I would be giving someone else the gift of life, and something bad would be turned into something good.

[BooRadley]

But it's still about your religiously-fueled opinion that a fertilized egg is a human being. Not everyone shares that opinion, and you're asking the government to force people to. That's the farthest thing from libertarian.