No Treason

I was always pro-choice. Until I ran into Ron Paul. Then I reconsidered my previous position, and realized there may be merit to a pro-life stance. Recently on the Mises forums, I was schooled in the position that women have no positive obligations to a fetus. So now I am conflicted, that women aren’t obligated to a fetus, and yet as potentially a living creature, morally it would probably be right to perform an abortion (where possible) that gives the fetus a chance to survive.

Pro-choicers and pro-lifers look at everything as so cut and dried. Kill it, keep it. I’m blessed to not be that ignorant any longer.

It surprising how many on the left, or the pro-choice side of the abortion debate, will use the argument that a woman has the right to decide over her body. While libertarians will generally agree with this, the left liberal pro-choice crowd doesn’t extend self-ownership of a woman’s body to other areas.

Like prostitution.

While the right can be hyper-moralizing, the left tends to have populist morals of convenience. Neither is based on a philosophical background that can be identified as pro-liberty.

Even on the Mises forums, there are people who will argue that one set of values is libertarian and another is not. As long as the NAP is not being violated, people are able in a free society to do all sorts of silly and ignorant things. The difference between a free society and one under a state is that they have to live with the consequences of their actions. They can’t socialize the costs of their mistakes or prejudices.