Ejection from the Womb is Pure Violent Aggression Against Them

Among libertarians, there are abortion-rights defenders, and pro-lifers. Murray Rothbard is sometimes called the “father of libertarianism”, and was full on “pro-choice”, as abortion defenders like to call it. He framed it in terms of the non-aggression principle I think.

Walter Block was mentored by Rothbard, but Block recognizes at least that the baby in the womb is a human being. He advocates “evictionism” not only as a middle ground but the solution to the issue on the grounds that the woman has a right to be free from the “aggression” of the baby inside, (I don’t remember whether he used that word), as juxtaposed against the same right of the baby’s.

But let’s go back to Rothbard, who also observed that the demands from the Left for “equality” everywhere was really a fight against nature itself.

In light of that I ask the reader to consider whether a mother killing her own baby inside the womb, or ejecting it (eviction) is ever an act compatible with “nature”? Is this so natural? It would be interesting as either a thought experiment or a statistical study to figure out a reasonable figure, among the women who get an abortion, how many would have gotten one if they had been encouraged by the men in their lives to have the baby? What if the father of that baby was someone who promised to take care of both of them the rest of their lives?

Michael Roseff has written a lot on the subject, some fine points get lost in the multitude of words, but one point he made was to point to the principle of homesteading as one way for a person to establish ownership.

And speaking of natural and non-aggression. Consider the ultrasound films of babies in the womb who are fighting for their lives against being “evicted” from the womb?

Those two or three seconds in the movie “Unplanned” are the few seconds that force that question on each member of the audience. It certainly flipped the manager of the Planned Parenthood abortion “clinic” manger Abby Johnson in one moment.

Why do we put up with the fraud that Planned Parenthood perpetrates in its very own name? They changed the name from the more honest “Birth Control League”, a eugenicist advocacy group founded by eugenicist race-purifier Margaret Sanger, literally theobject of admiration by the German National Socialist Party in the 1930s, and invited to speak at least once by the Ku Klux Klan. This is the woman who said the best thing parents in a poor family can do for their children is to kill them.

Why haven’t the statue destroyers yet demanded that Planned “Parenthood” centers get rid of the ubiquitous picture of that race purifying eugenicist Margaret Sanger.

Her legacy lives on in what should be called the Planned Barrenhood Foundation.

So now here come the loud infanticide advocates crying “racist” on pro-lifers, when the fact is that black babies in America are way out of proportion the victims of this senseless holocaust.


%d bloggers like this: