Archives for posts with tag: abortion

I am generally down on the idea of government control. The idea of the government stepping in to tell responsible persons what they may and may not do is distasteful. Indeed, I imagine that I come across as anti-government on occasion. There are certain distasteful things that do fall clearly in the realm of government responsibility though.

First to come to mind are the weak and helpless who are trodden on by the strong. The government is here to protect them, and set things right. By this I do not mean welfare and the like. Caring for the needy, and getting them back on their feet as far as they are able,  is the duty of the individual and charitable groups. This is an act of society. No, the government is there to administer justice when someone takes advantage of the weakened state of another.

Following from that line of thought, I come to human life. Here you shall find me horribly unsophisticated, and irritation will likely manifest in a few readers. While others come up with exotic formulae for when it is and is not acceptable to kill a human, I simplify things. Don’t kill a diploid human. No debate as to vegetative state, feeling pain, mental capacity or self-conciousness. Haploid: kill, diploid: don’t kill. The only exception is self-defence, or the defence of others. Otherwise, it is the duty of the government to protect human life.

I then come to the responsibility of the government to hold citizens accountable to not steal from, break contracts with, or otherwise harm one-another. This is fairly uncontroversial even at this late date. People only seem to get confused if the person being stolen from can be dehumanized in some way, such as being wealthier than the culprit, or an owner of stock in a corporation.

Finally, the government is to protect us from outside threats. This, for me, is a bit tricky. Do we ever act in a peremptory fashion? How many of our citizens do we put at risk if we allow Iran to develop a nuclear weapon? In nature, the police state, as seen in multi-cellular organisms, is a very strong higher-order structure. It is able to easily out-compete free-living organisms. Do we disrupt developing police-states in order to safeguard our own liberty? This is perhaps the only significant place where I feel split from Ron Paul. My leanings seem too hawkish for a proper libertarian.

Most other things the government tries to do are usurpations. Yeah, I like the interstate highway system, and I almost can accept it for its significance for national defence. You might talk me into one or two more things, depending on my mood; however, quite a lot that the government does today falls instead in the purview of society.

Advertisements

Here is a post for my “Religion, Politics and other things that make me the life of the party” series. I fully blame this freakish story on “After Birth Abortions” and this more thought-provoking post for my lapse in judgement.

One thing that I appreciate in the author of the second piece is that, despite the first impression, he does attempt to draw a line as to when an abortion should take place. Though he does not (cannot?) specifiy exactly where that line is, I will rashly presume at viability based on the context.

That is the problem. We complicate matters with questions like: when do we declare the foetus viable/self-aware, does the foetus feel pain, was the mother negligent for not using contraceptives? As in the first article, we end up with limits for “abortion” suggested anywhere from conception to toddler.

This mess results in everything relegated to emotional decisions. What is needed is an objective way to determine if an abortion is the right thing to do in a given situation. Might I suggest self-defense.

It has been a fairly constant and accepted rule in society that it is wrong to kill another human unless it is in self-defence. If the mother’s life is in danger, she should have the same right to defend herself as she does if someone is pointing a knife at her.

No more emotional arguments, no more unanswerable questions.

Would that mean that abortion would be illegal in states that deny an individual’s right to defend themselves? What about cases of rape or incest? …