Today’s Boulder Weekly published my new article, “Don’t ban or force abortions.”
It begins:
The debate over abortion seems more contentious than ever in America today. Some want to ban all abortions from the moment of conception. Others want to forcibly sterilize people and compel women to get abortions.
But are those two groups really that different? They share fundamentally similar goals. Both would sacrifice the individual to some alleged greater good. Both would use the force of government to squash the rights of individuals. The moral alternative is to consistently uphold the rights of individuals to determine the course of their own lives.
Comments by Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and by President Obama’s “science czar,” John Holdren, have raised concerns about politically promoted or required abortions. …
Following are links to three articles I consulted.
“The ghoulish spirit of Margaret Sanger lives,” by Michelle Malkin
“The Place of Women on the Court,” by Emily Bazelon (New York Times)
“Science fiction czar,” by David Harsanyi (Denver Post)
Isn’t one of the tenets of libertarianism that each of us is free to do what we like so long as nobody else gets hurt? That’s why there are laws against murder.
Why should that tenet only apply to some humans and not others? A person is a person and ought to be protected from violence against him/her regardless of whether he/she lives in or ex utero.
I’m not a libertarian, but that is not an accurate summary of it.
The reason that laws against murder ought not apply to a fertilized egg is that a fertilized egg is not a person. For details, see http://bit.ly/UJeF5