Roe vs Wade Overturned

You can’t have individual rights without individuals. So, yes, you can be libertarian and pro-life.
You can be pro-life but not really pro govt regulation

Yes. I’m not the one making a positive claim. You are saying these rights exist, so please show me where they exist.
Are you unfamiliar with natural rights? They can exist without govt. Actually they should exist outside govt and any good govt should recognize them
 
Yes. I’m not the one making a positive claim. You are saying these rights exist, so please show me where they exist.

I can't show you where. But you can't show me any evidence of a government granting basic human rights either.
 
You can be pro-life but not really pro govt regulation


Are you unfamiliar with natural rights? They can exist without govt. Actually they should exist outside govt and any good govt should recognize them
Sure you can. Libertarians aren’t anarchist. There is a growing trend in the movement that is borderline anarchy, but that isn’t the party at its core.
 
Are you unfamiliar with natural rights? They can exist without govt. Actually they should exist outside govt and any good govt should recognize them
Familiar with them? yes, as a concept. Do I think they hold up? Only in the sense if we are speaking about some universal human worth like what Aquinas described. If you get into Lockeian ideas it gets a little tricky to support. That’s where Jefferson borrowed much of his work for the DOI.
 
So they're now in favor of govt laws limiting individual freedoms? Interesting shift
Only if you look at through that lens. Life is the basic, fundamental, property of individualism. Impossible to separate the two. How can you have true liberty if you are in danger of having your future wiped out before you exit the protective confines of your Mother?? Kind of pulls the rug out on that, no?
 
It's the woman's right to choose what she does with her body. It's not your choice or mine.

Yet women can't sell body parts for money, neither can men. Anyways, define a woman. The baby sure didn't have a choice to get their brains sucked out. What did that baby do?
 
So they're now in favor of govt laws limiting individual freedoms? Interesting shift
Do you see laws against murder as the same shift? The premise that being against killing a life is some how contradictory to anti gov is asinine.

If you view the baby as an individual, which scientifically it is, then protecting his or her life is the first moral test. I'm not libertarian but I don't see the contradiction.
 
Do you see laws against murder as the same shift? The premise that being against killing a life is some how contradictory to anti gov is asinine.

If you view the baby as an individual, which scientifically it is, then protecting his or her life is the first moral test. I'm not libertarian but I don't see the contradiction.

The concept of individuality is a value-based judgment. Science does not deal in value-based judgements.
 
The concept of individuality is a value-based judgment. Science does not deal in value-based judgements.
Being an individual is attained by having your own DNA making you your own being. The turtle inside the egg is an individual. When it hatches, it is still an individual. There's nothing value based about it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary
Being an individual is attained by having your own DNA making you your own being. The turtle inside the egg is an individual. When it hatches, it is still an individual. There's nothing value based about it.

Regardless of however you feel about what constitutes "individuality", it is your own philosophical value judgment. It is not a scientific one as science does not and cannot make those judgements.
 
Regardless of however you feel about what constitutes "individuality", it is your own philosophical value judgment. It is not a scientific one as science does not and cannot make those judgements.

Science can absolutely state those are two separate life forms. Which seems to be the going definition of individual. A separate human life
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary
Science can absolutely state those are two separate life forms. Which seems to be the going definition of individual. A separate human life

Science cannot do that. What constitutes "two separate life forms" is a philosophical value judgement.

Science can only design falsifiable experiments to test whether a specific criteria is present within a previously delineated philosophical framework.
 
Science cannot do that. What constitutes "two separate life forms" is a philosophical value judgement.

Science can only design falsifiable experiments to test whether a specific criteria is present within a previously delineated philosophical framework.

It seems scientist make the distinction between life and none life, and distinguish one life form from another constantly. So I’m not sure I’m following
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary

VN Store



Back
Top