Libertarian pro-life: As per objectivist creed, "I will not ask another to die for me, nor would I die for another."
But you can’t be pro-life AND libertarian. The Libertarian Party says so. You also can’t be a Republican who supports gay marriage or marijuana legalization.
WHY DOES YOUR URL IDENTIFY YOU AS LIBERTARIAN IF YOUR ANTI-CHOICE? READ THE PARTY PLATFORM YO.
What intellectual or individual credibility would I have, if I followed libertarian party platform word for word?
WHY DO YOU PEOPLE CARE ABOUT MY OPINIONS
For a woman, you say consent to sex is consent to pregnancy. For a man, then, is consent to sex also consent to taking responsibility for the result of any pregnancy that may occur? If that's the case, I could see your point, but otherwise your argument is unbelievably sexist.
Hey, I'm sorry if you answered this already, but what about if someone consents to safe sex and then becomes accidentally pregnant? (The condom breaks, hormonal birth control fails, etc.?)
It’s an assumed risk when one undertakes the activity that contraception will fail. Contraception does not guarantee anything. It only changes the risk factors involved.
you seem very smart. Is there any career you wish to chase someday?
I hope to become an economist, of some sort! I plan on getting a Masters, and probably Ph.D. in the field. Maybe I’ll teach.
>No uterus no opinion. Ad hominem fallacy: Attacking the person rather than the argument. In addition, arguments are genderfluid; You wouldn't saying anything a prolife female hasn't already said. In addition, fetuses develop their uterus during pregnancy. So if this was a matter of no uterus, no opinion, therefore they would factor that those with uteruses matter most. Therefore, doesn't an unborn child with a uterus also deserve an opinion? No wait, kill it before it can.
No, stop being logical. Your cis white male opinion doesn’t have value here.
"CONSENT TO SEX IS CONSENT TO PREGNANCY" no it's not??? That's why we have birth control, you fucking idiot???
I argue that consent to sex is consent to pregnancy, and pro-choicers argue that contraceptives always work.
I argue that an abortion is wrong, and pro-choicers argue that contraceptives frequently fail.
So consent to eating food is also consent to food poisoning?