Personal Opinions

[wolvenone]

I happen to agree with Philosopher's like John Locke on most points. For example, I believe that human beings have a divine right to carry out justice, and I believe Government is merely a tool human beings established to better administer justice. Because this is the primary duty of any Government, the moment it is incapable of doing this I feel

Comments

[kris_schnee]

Good point early on: as an American it makes sense to be a supporter of liberty first, and America itself second. It so happens that they've mostly been on the same side, but that won't necessarily always be true.

On abortion, the whole point of the dispute is that we don't all agree that a fetus is a "person." If a fertilized egg instantly counts as a "person" with an equal right to live, then our infant mortality rate is way higher than reported because of the high rate of natural abortions due to various genetic problems. Why is no one calling that a crisis?

On environmentalism, I think it's logically possible to be a libertarian but still support some form of environmental law, on the theory that pollution is an "externality" that causes physical harm to people but isn't prevented by the free market. Banning the dumping of chemicals into the river is a substitute for waiting for someone to do it, then suing them after people die.

Oh, and a pet peeve -- there's no reason to pluralize nouns by using apostrophes.

[wolvenone]

Yeah, I can see how people could come to a different conclusion on Abortion. Namely I just felt a need to outline how I came to the conclusion that I did on the subject.

And you're right that being a conservationist or an environmentalist does not automatically dis-qualify you from being a libertarian. I mean, I agree with the political philosophy first and foremost, that does not mean I'm not going to be pragmatic and take care of problems when I see them.

[wolvenone]

Well, the law before Roe vs Wade wasn't that people couldn't get abortions, it was that there had to be a medical basis for it. In other words, if the life of the mother or child was in danger, if the pregnancy was the result of incest, or rape

[wolvenone]

well, the enforcement mechanism is already in place. There are already surgical procedures which are not legal, and in the case where those procedures are done, it's my understanding that the Doctor that operates simply losses his license.

Otherwise, I'd agree. If we didn't already have a method for enforcement, I wouldn't want to give the government another method.