A Libertarian case for supporting abortion rights even if you believe that "life

[Mechaman]

While I personally go with the evictionism argument, I certainly wouldn't hold it against a pro-life libertarian if they thought differently. I find economics and foreign policy to be much greater threats to our liberties than either side of the abortion debate.

Exactomundo.
With the crises we face with the ever exploding deficit that threatens to turn us all into slaves in the future, the abortion issue is the least of my worries.

[Mechaman]

I am making a point about the helpless.  Even in the real world, charities and adoption without "stolen" tax money could not take care of them all, and many would die. One might draw a distinction between the coercion of writing a check to the state, and having to carry a fetus to term, but other than that to me there is no difference. And who would want to adopt a severely handicapped kid with huge attendant expense and time, etc.?  Very few. Heck, it is hard to find homes for a lot of black kids now, or it used to be. They go to orphanages supported by the state.

We are assuming here in this hypothetical discussion that a fetus is every bit as human as an actually born kid.

Huge difference, Torie. One is taking a money slice out of voluntary transactions: if you don't want to be taxed, then don't transact. The other is making a direct physical demand on the individual's body and time. It's like conscription, only more intimate.

That's why the government can't say that Torie, for example, must give his kidney to save the life of some other person. That's far more intrusive than a tax.

It is different, and than the issue is what weight to give to those differences, which is subjective. Both all the examples come under the category of coercion, since a lot of the "voluntary" transactions, like making a living and securing an income, and buying essential stuff to consume, are taxed.

That's true enough.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You can be reasonably certain about viability during the time period where well more than 9 out of 10 abortions are performed... the first trimester or within one month of it. You can also be reasonably certain at the very end stages of a pregnancy. There is only a window of some weeks where you are unsure. According to this line of reasoning, there would be nothing wrong with testing viability by removing the fetus from the womb.

I am not trying to hold self identified libertarians to some kind of pro choice standard... you can be a libertarian and still be 100% pro life. All I am saying is that the original pro choice argument has a very libertarian genesis, and many people today seem to be forgetting this. Judging by how this thread has progressed, I am partially right.

Exactly.
The abortion debate wouldn't be such a big deal if prolife "libertarians" wouldn't make such a big deal out of their way being the only "libertarian" way. That is why I (and others) are calling them out on this.