He’s as “libertarian” as most people who identify as libertarian—which is to say, not at all.
The hypocrisy is easy to spot; for example: any Republican claiming to be a libertarian but who opposes women’s rights to self-determination over their own bodies is no libertarian. And that’s basically all of them.
The abortion argument definitely presents an issue regarding the NAP: are you violating the NAP by terminating the pregnancy, or is the fetus violating the NAP by existing in the mother's uterus without her "permission". I think ultimately it depends on how one views a fetus. Many (most?) libertarians think that a woman doesn't owe a fetus the right to exist in her womb.
But there are some (specifically the Libertarians for Life[0]) who attempt to justify the act of abortion as a violation of the NAP. If I understand correctly, their reasoning is that human offspring are human beings regardless of their stage of development and thus terminating a pregnancy is literally killing an innocent person.
Personally, I think saying "You aren't pro-choice so you aren't a libertarian," isn't so cut and dry.
2 comments
[ 176 ms ] story [ 1105 ms ] threadThe hypocrisy is easy to spot; for example: any Republican claiming to be a libertarian but who opposes women’s rights to self-determination over their own bodies is no libertarian. And that’s basically all of them.
But there are some (specifically the Libertarians for Life[0]) who attempt to justify the act of abortion as a violation of the NAP. If I understand correctly, their reasoning is that human offspring are human beings regardless of their stage of development and thus terminating a pregnancy is literally killing an innocent person.
Personally, I think saying "You aren't pro-choice so you aren't a libertarian," isn't so cut and dry.
[0] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarians_for_Life