Libertarians and Prenatal Infanticide

I get amused sometimes at the tortured logic invoked in defending prenatal infanticide.

In ANY OTHER CIRCUMSTANCE, libertarian logical conclusions from the Non-Aggression Principle based on any theoretical situation proposed, “causal responsibility” for material harm, for example, requires also “material liability”.

If Mr Smith cause a situation that results in Mr. Jones being totally helpless, then Mr. Smith is liable for all of Mr. Jones needs. Exactly how much liability and exactly to what extent of need is required from Mr. Smith is a matter not specifically covered by the NAP. However, a corollary can be deduced that if Mr. Smith is 100 percent responsible for Mr. Jones’ condition of total helplessness, total dependency, then the absolute minimum of “liability” taken on by Mr. Smith is the basic minimum needs of Mr. Jones for life at a minimum. That is, whatever would be expected by an all-else-being equal case.

The prenatal infant in the womb has the same libertarian rights to be free of murder as the father or mother. To the restitution required by the ones who cause his condition.

Over thousands of years of human history, there have been plenty of cultures where infanticide was –and is– totally accepted. There have also been cultures where it is considered abhorrent. The Hippocratic Oath includes a pledge to never prescribe potions that cause intentional abortions of pregnancy, for which reason many medical schools have eliminated the Oath as a requirement. So there go promises to “Do No Harm” along with it, down the same anti-freedom path Google has taken.

Enforcement in a completely libertarian society would be difficult to say the least in most cases. Protecting the rights of infants in a mother’s womb against coercion to kill them by its father, for example, or the mother, and protection against lies about it, or corruption-inducing propaganda in favor of infant sacrifice, would be very difficult. But the truth is the truth, science is science.

So defenders of babies in the womb mostly must count on simply repeating the truth and provide an antidote to the prenatal infanticide holocaust by calling it out for what it is. Convincing. Truth weaponized for good, so to speak.

And in helping the women who find themselves “unintentionally” pregnant.

We all know that sex involves a “risk” of pregnancy, even when contraceptives are used. You break it, you own it. You caused it, you owe it. This is a bedrock libertarian principle, it is a direct consequence of the NAP.

This is one reason that in almost all cases, women go through post-abortion trauma, and often men too.

It’s not hard. People stop smoking. Many alcoholics go totally abstinent, I’ve known them.

Obama said he didn’t want his daughters “punished” with a baby. just as utilitarian results are caused by following the moral, ethnic, basic principle of respecting freedom from aggression, it helps to realize that babies are NOT punishments, they are a blessing.