The Pro-Choice - Pro-Life debate

My post Anarchist, Libertarian or Voluntarism: Why I Use One Word Over Another was recently published on the ZeroGov.com website. A commenter had this to say," Ken on May 1, 2014 at 20:45 said:When I got to:

“Some will say that certain traits within libertarianism are dangerous to modern life; ………….pro-choice on abortion, ………………..open borders”. I stopped reading. I am a 45 year old lifelong anarchist. I welcome you former state-ists to the party. Libertarians are pro-choice?!?!? Abortion is a tool of the state. It is founded on eugenics, racism, and the force of the state to eliminate undesirables – one child policies. Any pro-abortion “libertarian” is a Progressive stooge for the state. I suggest you go away."

 I wanted to take a second to correct a fallacy that is presented here and also to write out my thoughts on abortion and the pro-life - pro-choice debate.

A common misconception or fallacy is to relate someone who identifies as Pro-Choice as someone who would choose abortion or is an advocate of it. This is false. A defense of life in line with a pro-life stance is to say that all life is precious and that to kill this life at any time is immoral. What isn't included with most pro-life stances is the definition of life. It is seen as somewhat subjective or objective to the individual. In the minds of some it is the beginning of the process of conception, when sperm meets egg and begins the fertilization process. Some would say it is the birth of the being that signifies life while others would argue on times and situations in between these two ends. Myself I see the logical fact that in our world we construct our medical experiences to explain death as the absence of a natural heartbeat (natural heartbeat being defined as the natural or unadulterated heartbeat of a being, medical technological continuation of this process does not qualify as natural), in this definition the logical opposite of this would be used to explain the beginning of life as the occurrence of a natural heartbeat. This takes place somewhere between 15-20 days after conception.

If the idea of conception is used, which is the chemical and biological process of the production and combination of cells, it would be logical to conclude that a human not be considered dead until the production of cells and the biological breakdown of all cells has been completed, or well after the body has been clinically or legally dead by its current definition.

Does this mean that prior to 15-20 days, the entity is not human? No, it is very much human as we decribe the biological makeup of the being as the collection of combined DNA from male and female partners. What this means is that the idea of life is not attached by the fact it is human. The fact that a body is in the ground or in another body does not negate the fact that it is human, but it does not imply it is alive either.

The original intent of this post is to clarify the meaning of Pro-Choice as a philosophical principle. In all cases I believe the individual or individuals involved have the ultimate choice in all matters that affect them. This goes with the ability to abort a fetus. The two individuals involved have the choice whether to complete the pregnancy or to abort it, my personal opinion of whether it be right or wrong is not needed in their case and likewise should remain my opinion and not tried to be put into action against them. The saying, "Public opinion should not impose on personal freedom" goes well here. My opinion or idea of what is right or wrong on this issue can only be applied if I and my partner are currently expecting a child. This is not currently the way our society or the whole of the public thinks of this issue and this is not an attempt to subvert that opinion but rather to give an alternate way of thinking about it.

In any case the choice of the individuals involved should be the only choice that matters. To claim that someone who claims to be pro-choice on the matter of abortion is an advocate of the practice or be in some way accepting of it by others is disingenuous and deceitful.