The Daily Paul has been archived. Please see the continuation of the Daily Paul at Popular

Thank you for a great ride, and for 8 years of support!

Comment: Abortion and rights

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: I am not sure what you mean ... (see in situ)

Abortion and rights

1. What I meant by saying that the idea of natrual rights is naturally wrong: Rights Are Santa Claus.

2. The question of abortion's justification is a moral issue, depending on when a fetus is believed to become an independent human being with "rights" which must be respected. Different moral systems have different answers to that question. The moral system of statism evidently holds that human beings only acquire true rights (i.e. not to be injured by some State Authority,) when they hold some State office. Abortion is therefore allowable, until some State Authority sees fit to proscribe it.

Other moral systems have tougher problems of conscience on the abortion issue, and even libertarians are not in agreement. Personally, I would say abortion is certainly justified if it prevents injury -- to the mother. I suppose it might also be justified if it were known that a fetus was badly deformed or mentally damaged, and might never become an independent human being. But your question, as to whether abortion could be justified to avoid the injury of being made helpless (a basic principle of common law torts) -- I wouldn't consider that a justification myself, but that's a moral position others may not share. Let the mommas decide for themselves.

Recommended reading: The Most Dangerous Superstition by Larken Rose