I know. I tried to refrain for as long as I could.ArcticFox wrote:BOOM. Godwin.Sstavix wrote:The Nazis did it to millions.
(Not that I disagree, I just like to watch for Godwins almost as if it were a drinking game.)
That seems like a fairly accurate assessment. My approach is twofold - 1) I don't like government involvement over the individual (of course) and 2) I don't really want to see the return to back-alley abortions.ArcticFox wrote:I can understand the Libertarian approach to keeping the Government back. This is one of those issues though, that divides the Libertarian crowd. I too regard myself as Libertarian and I'm pro-life. I think the two separate Libertarian approaches are these: (Correct me if I misrepresent your stance, Brozilla.)
Pro-choice Libertarians regard restrictions as Government control and thus to be avoided as much as possible. Any spiritual implications are between the individual woman and her deity when applicable.
Pro-life Libertarians regard abortion as the unjust killing of a human being, which is murder and therefore should be illegal. (Exceptions are, of course, acknowledged, such as medical necessity.)
If I understand correctly, Brozilla is the former type while I am the latter.
However, at the same time, I don't think the government should be paying for abortions (or any form of birth control or, on the flip side, birth aids either, like Viagra), because the majority of the taxpayers in this nation are opposed to it. Lack of government involvement works both ways and puts more of the burden on the individual - where it belongs.