Libertarian Fail

Yes.


Edit:
I am not sure what kind of job the fetus/baby will be able to have to make money and survive in this world on his/her own.

 

Like I said, I know that, no politician would ever run with that, shit if I ran for office I would make sure I " pivot" about it.

 

That's a tricky standard (as is any standard applied on the other side of the "birth canal emergence" line, especially as science learns more), as humans in particular (and mammals in general) are massively dependent upon other humans for actual survival for quite some time. We have one of the longest dependent "childhood" of any species.

But if you go by a different standard of "viability", one could argue reasonably convincingly that 'infanticide" covers a significant portion of actual gestation.

 

I am pretty sure that in the short future, we will come out with some medical machines (perhaps they already exist) where we can "grow" a baby with out having to have a mother carry the fetus at all.

So, would that change the morality of it?

 

The whole abortion question is about as Third-Rail as it gets, but I would favor promotion and education of responsible birth control to reduce the chances that women would need to consider an abortion. Obviously it's a complicated issue, but at least in the very early stages of pregnancy you can make a better case for termination than 8 months later, just before she's going to pop. If you've gone that far, give the baby up for adoption.

Of course, all the anti-choice zealots need to support this option and have resources in place for (young) mothers who have no real support system. But those folks are all about The Child until it's born...

 

So shouldn't the cutoff time be somewhat related to when the baby would be viable if it was born premature via natural birth or c-section?

Personally I think the cutoff time for unlimited abortions should be the "quickening," when the mother first begins to feel movement on the part of the fetus, around midway through the pregnancy. There's historical precedent for that as well.

 

OK, maybe so, but I was thinking more of the political angle of many "Evangelicals" who tend to be single issue voters ("It's better to vote for a racist than a baby-killer.") A lot of these people go to great lengths to tout the "sanctity of life," yet are the first ones to advocate cutting any social programs that would help people who chose to keep a baby instead of aborting it.

I agree that the organizations like the one you mention are doing good things to try and make the best of a bad situation. But the real key is preventative education, so we won't have so many teenagers getting pregnant, instead of waiting 10 more years when they can handle it.

 

We're doing pretty damn well at lowering teen pregnancy rates, although how much of the decline is due to fewer teenage marriages, that I do not know.

 

And maybe they're all just jacking off to internet porn now anyway....

 

Relegation?

Oh

 

And pretty ********ing demented.

 

Fewer.

 

In furtherance of my Libertarian education, from what I've seen they appear to be mostly pro-choice

(Wikipedia)

Capitalism Magazine supports the pro-choice position, writing:

A fetus does not have a right to be in the womb of any woman, but is there by her permission. This permission may be revoked by the woman at any time, because her womb is part of her body... There is no such thing as the right to live inside the body of another, i.e., there is no right to enslave... a woman is not a breeding pig owned by the state (or church). Even if a fetus were developed to the point of surviving as an independent being outside the pregnant woman's womb, the fetus would still not have the right to be inside the woman's womb.


Libertarians at the November 12, 1989 pro-choice march in Washington, D.C.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_perspectives_on_abortion

 

That reads like parody.

 

My sense is that is close to 50/50 from a moral perspective, more like 70/30 in favor of "choice" legally. There have been many a long, detailed exchange with principled arguments on both sides. Interestingly, it is one of the few issues in which the reflex to completely "eat one's own" is actually not that prevalent. We'll tear each other apart on issues where there is much more close agreement, any day of the week. Abortion is significantly less fraught.