If a State is violating someone's rights, then it's easy to see the value in a system where the federal government can overrule a State government. But what if it's the federal government which is violating someone's rights (as is the case most of the time)? Then it's easy to see why the States should be able to nullify federal law. But we have to choose one: either a decentralized system which allows for State tyranny or a centralized system which allows for federal tyranny. And the libertarian or classical liberal position is to prefer the former: since at least one can more easily escape State tyranny than federal tyranny. Not only can one actually leave a State to escape its tyranny, but the knowledge on the part of State governments that this is a possibility checks the tyrannical ambitions of State governments. Hence, I'm of the opinion that power should be decentralized as much as possible. The federal government should do nothing whatsoever except what the States absolutely cannot do: i.e. resolve disputes between the States, and provide collective defense against foreign threats.
So I say leave abortion to the States. Ron Paul agrees.
"Alas! I believe in the virtue of birds. And it only takes a feather for me to die laughing."
Want DP delivered to your inbox daily? Subscribe here:
Content of posts and comments on the Daily Paul represent the opinions of the original posters, and are not endorsed, approved, or otherwise representative of the opinions of the Daily Paul, its own