Sectorgame

karajorma wrote:... you have to support their right to choose their own manner of death even if it is against your own religious convictions?

what about death penalty? or do you get to choose your kind of termination...

nvm, i think im going to leave this topic be now, this conversation is getting way out of my range...

No death penalty. This safeguards against the possibility that an individual might be wrongfully convicted. You can release anybody from prison, but you can't bring them back from the dead.

Okay. So if the right of the embryo is that important a libertarian has to come down against IVF then surely?

After all you're balancing the rights of the 1 or 2 children who are born against the 8 or 9 who don't get implanted and just waste away in a vat of liquid nitrogen until they are no longer viable.

Goober5000 wrote:Libertarians say that government has no business doing anything other than safeguarding the rights of its citizens. So the tax thing is out on the face of it.

What about the right to life?

karajorma: That's something I hadn't thought of. I guess they'd be against it.

aldo: What do you mean, what about it? It's the same as the stem cell thing - the unborn child is potentially a citizen, so they err on the side of safeguarding its right not to be aborted.

Goober5000 wrote: aldo: What do you mean, what about it? It's the same as the stem cell thing - the unborn child is potentially a citizen, so they err on the side of safeguarding its right not to be aborted.

I mean the right to medical treatment via a nationalised health service.

Goober5000 wrote:karajorma: That's something I hadn't thought of. I guess they'd be against it.

Laughs at the irony of pro-life libertarians having to take the stand against IVF

Not the whole thing. Now that I've thought about it, I think there'd be no problem with IVF as long as you don't waste any embryos. Implant one or two, and see what happens. If neither one works, then try again. But don't fertilize more than you can use.

aldo: I still don't see what you mean, or what that has to do with right-to-life.

Goober5000 wrote: aldo: I still don't see what you mean, or what that has to do with right-to-life.

The right to medical treatment for everyone - even those who can't afford it? Doesn't that contradict not wanting to waste embryos or not? i.e. adopting a policy which will lead to loss of treatment and hence life?

Goober5000 wrote:Not the whole thing. Now that I've thought about it, I think there'd be no problem with IVF as long as you don't waste any embryos. Implant one or two, and see what happens. If neither one works, then try again. But don't fertilize more than you can use.

I thought of that before hand but IVF is problematic in other ways. Very few embryos actually implant. That's why they fertilise so many. If I remember correctly the chance of implantation is around 20% so they always implant several at a time to maximise the chance of success.

If you're saying that life begins at conception surely you must have a problem with any system that creates 4 new lives that almost certainly won't make it in the hope that one of them does?