Unshockingly, yet another person claiming to be a libertarian is actually the exact opposite. Imagine if when people lied they got struck dead by lightning. Bam, every political problem the world has ever known is fixed almost overnight.
Libertarians are pretty split on abortion, it really depends on if they think the fetus has the right to protection.
No. Philosophically, abortion is a litmus test for libertarianism, where bodily autonomy reigns supreme. The idea that a government can force you to give birth is logically incoherent.
Again, even if you believed that a fetus is an actual person, that person cannot live in someone else’s body against their will. Libertarian philosophers would find that utterly preposterous.
If a fetus is a person then consent happened at the time of sex. You cant invite a person for a 9 month journey, and then kill them. That is why its split.
So, let’s go over a hypothetical.
You’re in a situation where someone needs to be connected to you with tubes to live. You agree to this, and the tubes are connected. How long are you required to stay connected?
If you want to leave in a week, are you unable to? A month? Two? Nine? A year?
The moment you disconnect those tubes, the person dies. Are you now locked into being connected to this person forever?
Or do you have the right to walk away, because you’re also a human who is making a decision about your own body.
Now add some detriments to the situation. The longer you’re connected, the sicker you feel. The more nutrients they leech, the harder it gets for your body to move. Add in a death rate for fun.
You’re telling me that you are not permitted to make a choice about your body any longer, because at one time you consented to it? (Completely ignoring the fact that this may have been done without consent.)
“If a fetus is a person then consent happened at the time of sex.” Your hypothetical is not relevant to the argument if the person doesnt give consent.
Rape doesn’t exist now?
And you’re completely ignoring my comment, to cherry pick the very last line.
Did you really want to go to the edge cases?
Your hypothetical is not relevant!!!
Lol. You know damn well that it is, and you just don’t have a good response.
Under libertarian morality, you can choose to expel them from your property and stop providing them with sustenance though.
According to some libertarians, not all libertarians.
Well of course, most libertarians don’t have consistent views anyway. It’s a bad ideology.
What an insane take.
-
Consenting to sex is NOT consenting to pregnancy
-
Consenting to pregnancy does NOT mean consent cannot be revoked
-
No person has the right to use another person’s body without their consent
Anyone calling themselves a libertarian should have these 3 points tattooed on their forehead.
If the union of sperm and egg is a person, and if that person has the right to bodily autonomy, then yes having sex is consenting to making a person with the right to protection. and you cant kill them.
Putting aside that your first “if” statement is only believed by religious extremists, if sex is consenting to making a person, then does that mean that those who are raped are also “consenting”?
Rape is not consent to sex, and its a completely different discussion.
-
🤡
When you look at it, the moral authority for most of the libertarians I know is ayn rand. If any of them shift to biblical scripture, they should realize the Bible beaters try to take all or nothing, and its all is incompatible with rand. I despise how she looked at the world in many ways, but she described preventing abortion as the most evil thing she could think of.
Any Rand is not considered a philosopher by most scholars. You might as well cite Donald Trump.
I understand that. All of the people I know in person who call themselves libertarians do not. I was explaining how they contradict themselves.
Libertarians in action lol
He’s far-right authoritarian which is both the oposite of liberal and libertarian
Far right authoritarian is very much compatible with liberalism.
deleted by creator
Far-right is extreme defence of the status quo. Liberalism is… moderate defense of the status quo? Except when push comes to shove, all liberals resort to very extreme measures to defend “how things are” and their position in society.
My exact point. Right-libertarians are just fascists in disguise. Scratch a liberal yada yada yada
I love how “libertarians” have turned into religious nationalists
The ‘ol conservative “I can’t fix the problem with administrating basic government services (like having a stable currency.) So I’m going to distract you with red meat culture war bullshit.”
You see he’s deliberately shooting up the inflation so that soon enough no one will be able to afford an abortion
Abortion and all health care in general is completely free
How?
All Major economic newsletters consultants predicted extremely high values, like iprofesional, they were aiming for December inflation number to be 50%. El crónista, 35 % and up. Many banks going from BBVA to Santander, 40% and up.
Having 25.5% on December is actually amazingly good results with the car wreck the guy got.
Then it got down to 20.6% on January.
Now on February it’s around 15%
How is that shooting inflation?
