Well, I'm not advancing an argument here. I wanted specific sourcing from you on a claim you made. So you say. Those concerned with the rights of the unborn disagree, which is why this was left out.
replying to: The unborn has no agency (yet) and is consequently not a factor in any actually rational calculation of this type. Kant is pretty fundamental to the ontological premises that libertarians treat as gospel and you were the one that attached the liberal concept of "freedom" to the unborn. You're free to argue that unborn have rights, but couching those rights in terms of "freedom" inevitably returns us to Kant and/or Locke. So once again... Do you have a source for your claim or not? I'm genuinely curious.
Credits & Style Info
Talk Politics. A place to discuss politics without egomaniacal mods
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 30/3/13 01:37 (UTC)So you say. Those concerned with the rights of the unborn disagree, which is why this was left out.
replying to:
The unborn has no agency (yet) and is consequently not a factor in any actually rational calculation of this type.
Kant is pretty fundamental to the ontological premises that libertarians treat as gospel and you were the one that attached the liberal concept of "freedom" to the unborn. You're free to argue that unborn have rights, but couching those rights in terms of "freedom" inevitably returns us to Kant and/or Locke. So once again... Do you have a source for your claim or not? I'm genuinely curious.