Quote:
Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Club's conception of individual rights -- as least as regards a woman's bodily autonomy -- is a pretty weak one. Woman who act irresponsibly in his book -- e.g., choosing to have non-incestuous sex -- are not deemed to have any real cognizable interests relating to the pregnancy that follows.
In contrast, we all know that club has a very different conception of property rights. He believes in strong property rights. People who use their property irresponsibly aren't subjected higher taxes, or takings, and so on.
I'm not saying that his views on the latter subject are inconsistent with his views on the former subject. I just think the contrast is edifying. Who knows, maybe he can articulate some principled way of tying it all together. Not that I'm holding my breath or anything.
|
Dude you are being ridiculous in your characterization of my position. This is not just a question or an individual's rights. There are at least 2 individuals involved. Hence, I'm going to accuse you of what you accuse "us" of doing all the time - trying to simplify a very complex question.
Threaded Mode