Nostr Web Client

It's not all about one issue though, at least not for me. I don't like big government or government spending and regulations. But I believe everyone has the right to do whatever they want with their body and marry whoever they want to marry.

StackSats.IO 2y ago

Yeah me too Derek.

I have gay friends, one who is quite close, I DGAF. He’s happy, his boyfriend is happy, I don’t have any desire to stop them living the lives they want to live. I care when people try to indoctrinate children about anything, for my life that’s mostly been statism (under the banner of nationalism) but recently it’s this weird LGBTQIA+ stuff with the emphasis on TQIA+. Let kids be kids, what adults wanna do is up to them. Think those are easy lines to draw.

Used to be unthinkingly pro-choice. Nowadays honestly I’m not sure and don’t have a firm opinion. I’d be devastated if my girlfriend had an abortion, but I acknowledge I would be just as devastated if she was raped and had to carry it. The only answer for me is to keep the State out of ALL healthcare so there is no finger on the scale, let people decide what is right for them and their circumstances.

Right-libertarianism isn’t some binary, it’s more that economics is the focus and keeping governments away should be the priority. Let people be economically free and they’ll thrive, let the State dictate choices and they won’t be.

It’s the difference between the welfare state and being able to find a doctor to perform an abortion if needed. One system creates subjects, the other maybe has more friction but still allows individuals to make choices however awful they may be.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

unclebobmartin 2y ago

From: stacksatsio<-Dere... at 07/08 11:02

...

> Used to be unthinkingly pro-choice. Nowadays honestly I’m not sure and don’t have a firm opinion.

> I’d be devastated if my girlfriend had an abortion, but I acknowledge I would be just as devastated if

> she was raped and had to carry it. The only answer for me is to keep the State out of ALL healthcare so

> there is no finger on the scale, let people decide what is right for them and their circumstances.

The problem with that view is that we have not figured out when human rights are conferred upon an unborn child; and the state has a definite responsibility to protect those rights. It is absurd to suggest that those rights are conferred at the moment of birth since birth is not an instantaneous moment but a rather long process. Does it make sense to say that there are no rights prior to the chord cut but all rights exist thereafter?

Personally, I think ~16 weeks ought to be the cutoff. After that rights are assumed to be provisional and you should have to get several doctors, a judge, and both parents (if possible) involved in the decision to abridge those rights.

I'd put a second cutoff at ~25 weeks as a proxy for viability. Once "viable" rights are assumed to be fully conferred.

...

CC: #[4]

CC: #[5]

CC: #[6]

CC: #[7]