If they are making an abortion decision before there is life-saving treatment happening, then (a) the abortion is not life-saving, and (b) the service member has time to use their regular leave to travel and get an abortion wherever they want. That cuts against the argument that there needs to be additional leave and funds given to get an abortion. What pro-life people want is to not kill the child unless or until it is necessary to save the life of the mother. I don't understand what this phrase means. [quote[and adds confusion to where the doctors and the mothers don't really even understand exactly what the laws are at any given time so it adds unnecessary complications to the evaluation of risks, and decision making process.[/quote] Laws are published. They aren't kept in secret. Anyone is allowed to read them. This is an easy one. The most basic tenant of libertarianism is the non-aggression principle. One must not harm the person or property of another except in self-defense or defense of others. Killing someone is the ultimate violation of the NAP. Aborting a fetus in utero, unless and until it is threating the life of the mother (for example, via sepsis), would violate this principle. Libertarians are split on the issue of abortion, because it depends on one's view of whether a fetus in utero is a person to whom the NAP applies.
Except you do and many have already. Danger to the patient (life-saving) is based on the doctor’s risk assessment. Doctors can no longer make that assessment without fear of imprisonment in states that have inserted themselves in the middle to decide what is truly considered dangerous. Patients can either sit around and wait to risk their health or seek a state where the government doesn’t insert itself into the equation. That’s the practical reality today in several states, which anti-abortion extremists continue to ignore or don’t care about.
Again we have evidence of the abortion ban in Texas actually affecting the life of a mother. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-65935189 "She was denied an abortion in Texas - then she almost died" As that case and others shows is that the exceptions put in place in Texas still lead to negative outcomes. Also you're talking about a marine on base or in combat. Soldiers in peacetime aren't always confined to bases when even when on duty.
Hahaha... "This is an Easy one" oh but... "Libertarians are split and it depends on one's view" Like you cannot make this up. The whole notion of being a Libertarian is such a sham. You either have principles or you don't. The so-called "libertarians" only use "Libertarian" principles when it benefits them. The only principle I see is just doing whatever is self serving in any scenario.
I do know self-identified Libertarians who are pro-choice and from what I can see the Libertarian Party position is essentially pro-choice. https://www.lp.org/libertarians-on-abortion/ While there are many Pro-Life Libertarians they don't want government involved in the decision.
But nobody has “split views” on killing babies. It’s only about the decision coming down to whether or not the government has any say so on the decision to override the mother and the doctors recommendation. Nobody takes pleasure in killing babies. There’s no split decision on abortion like the right wants to sell to themselves in order to make their hard line fundamentalist stances seem righteous. So there’s really no excuse for a self described Libertarian to selectively pick abortion as an issue they do what big government control over. It violates everything they say they stand for and the fact that most of these so called libertarians almost always side with MAGA autocratic priorities in the end just continues to confirm that it’s a sham political philosophy. Rand Paul, the Freedom Caucus, etc… all of them always fold to whatever helps MAGA power in the end. All big talk with no consistent principles.
That's really to @StupidMoniker about how consistent wanting government to intervene in abortion but he is correct that there are many Libertarians inclduing the Libertarian party that are Pro-Choice.
link Army Chief of Staff General James McConville, the 40th person to hold that position, retired today. Because Senator Tommy Tuberville (R-AL) has put a hold on military promotions for the past 8 months, there is no Senate-confirmed leader to take McConville’s place. There are eight seats on the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the group of the most senior military officers who advise the president, homeland security officials, the secretary of defense, and the National Security Council. Currently, two of those seats are filled by acting officials who have not been confirmed by the Senate. Politico’s defense reporter Paul McLeary wrote that as of today, there are 301 senior military positions filled by temporary replacements as Tuberville refuses to permit nominations to go through the Senate by the usual process. Two more members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff will retire before the end of September. Politico’s Pentagon reporter Lara Seligman illustrated what this personnel crisis means for national security: “U.S. forces are on high alert in the Persian Gulf,” she wrote today. “As Tehran attempts to seize merchant ships in the Strait of Hormuz, the U.S. is sending warships, fighter jets and even considering stationing armed troops aboard civilian vessels to protect mariners. Yet two of the top senior officers overseeing the escalating situation aren’t where they’re supposed to be.” Two days ago, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin wrote in a memo that the “unprecedented, across-the-board hold is having a cascading effect, increasingly hindering the normal operations of this Department and undermining both our military readiness and our national security.” Today he reiterated: “The failure to confirm our superbly qualified senior uniformed leaders undermines our military readiness.” He added, “It undermines our retention of some of our very best officers. And it is upending the lives of far too many of their spouses, children and loved ones.” Tuberville, who did not serve in the military, likes to say "there is no one more military than me.” And yet, thanks to him and the Republican conference that is permitting him to hold the nominations, we are down two chiefs of staff tonight. Meanwhile, on July 26, when soldiers took charge in Niger, a country central to the fight against Islamic terrorists and the security of democracy on the African continent, the U.S. had no ambassador there. Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) was blocking the confirmation of more than 60 State Department officials the same way that Tuberville was blocking the confirmation of military officials. Paul claimed he was blocking State Department confirmations because he wanted access to information about the origins of COVID, but Secretary of State Antony Blinken said the department had “been working extensively” with Paul, providing the documents and other information he had requested. “But unfortunately, he continues to block all our nominees.” Paul complained that he had been only given private access, and wanted to “take those documents out.” As of July 17, the current Senate had confirmed only five State Department nominees. On that day, Blinken wrote to each senator to express “serious concern” about the delays. He told reporters that he respects and values the Senate’s “critical oversight role…ut that’s not what is happening here. No one has questioned the qualifications of these career diplomats. They are being blocked for leverage on other unrelated issues. It’s irresponsible. And it’s doing harm to our national security.” Ambassadors “advance the interests of our country,” he said, and not having confirmed ambassadors “makes us less effective at advancing every one of our policy priorities—from getting more countries to serve as temporary hubs for [immigrant visa] processing, to bringing on more partners for global coalitions like the one we just announced to combat fentanyl, to support competitive bids for U.S. companies to build…critical infrastructure projects around the world.” Our adversaries benefit from these absences, not only because they offer an opening to exploit, but also because “[t]he refusal of the Senate to approve these career public servants also undermines the credibility of our democracy. People abroad see it as a sign of dysfunction, ineffectiveness—inability to put national interests over political ones.” Blinken noted that “n previous administrations, the overwhelming majority of career nominees received swift support to advance through the Senate by unanimous consent. Today, for reasons that have nothing to do with the nominees’ qualifications or abilities, they are being forced to proceed through individual floor votes.” More than a third of the nominees had been waiting for more than a year for their confirmation. Late on July 27, the day after the conflict began in Niger and the day before the senators left for their summer recess, Paul lifted his hold, tweeting that the State Department and the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), an independent agency that administers foreign aid, had agreed to release the documents he wanted. The Senate then confirmed career diplomat Kathleen A. FitzGibbon as ambassador to Niger, as well as ambassadors to other countries including Rwanda, the United Arab Emirates, Georgia, Guyana, Ethiopia, Jordan, Uganda, and Italy. But FitzGibbon did not arrive in Niger before the U.S. government on Wednesday ordered “non-emergency U.S. government personnel” and their families to leave the country out of concerns for their safety.
Why would a political philosophy not have people split on an issue? Both sides of the abortion debate within the libertarian community have principles. The pro-life side holds that the life of the child is paramount. The pro-choice side holds that the child is not a person and doesn't have rights, so the autonomy of the mother is paramount. Neither position is anti-libertarian, it is simply dependent upon one's view of when rights attach. People obviously have very different views on whether or not abortion is killing babies. Most pro-choice people deny that abortion is killing babies. They prefer to view it as removal of a clump of cells or a parasite. I have seen it compared to removing a tumor. Most people that view a child in utero as a baby are anti-abortion. Incorrect. Prohibition against murder is a consistent libertarian position. If you view abortion as the murder of a baby, the correct libertarian position is to oppose it.
I won't waste my time attempting to debate you when your mind is made up. Watch, don't watch, up to you...I like the sensible libertarians rather than the extremist but that's just me.
Tuberville is a damn fool who should never have been elected to the Senate. The Republican Senate leadership could do something about the idiot, they know he's wrong, but they simply don't have the courage to act. Republican madness.
This caucus also has Josh Hawley, Ron Johnson and Ted Cruz who is hated by even many of his Republican colleagues. They aren’t going to be taking action against Tuberville.
As long as people in Alabama vote for him he the republican party will keep him. Unfortunately, people that live in SEC states will vote for football players and coaches. Look how close walker came to winning...
I look at this idiot and wonder how the hell they got elected..................then I remember George Santos and realize the gop doesn't care about who fills the seat as long as they have an r next to their name.......its all about power, who cares if you're a GD idiot or not
I already said that would happen. All of the hand wringing about military readiness and national security was nonsense. There was no world in which they were just not going to have a command structure. I posted this on page 1.
MTG and Boebert are a couple other examples of how people willing to use their big mouths to spread propaganda and lies is the new priority to get GOP endorsements. That, and taking an about face on your previous statements and beliefs about Trump, and sucking up to him and defending him, like Ted Cruz and the rest of those not considered RINOS now.
