Thread by @StupidRock

I finally listened to the whole of this debate between 2 libertarians on the issue of abortion, specifically on the view of evictionism. It's long, but worth the listen, even if just to add to your own understanding of how/what people think. My thoughts:

1. I think there's one aspect of the pro-life viewpoint they don't accurately portray, which is that we require women to carry to term. However, they clarify at different points this is the "traditional/conservative" pro-life viewpoint. So maybe I'm just not that pro-lifer. 😅

1. cont'd. I have always thought the viewpoint was essentially, Don't kill. Early delivery past viability - why not? Why require a woman to carry to full term?
I do lean toward "evicting" being a morally ok option once a fetus is old enough to survive outside the uterus.

2. Kerry made an interesting point about an area where pro-life people fail, or the traditional pro-life movement fails. I think it is best to quote her here:

"Our society has sort of said, That's it. Like if you have an unwanted pregnancy, it's no good options, or abortion...

... Part of the pro-life argument is that...it's not good enough that a woman doesn't want her pregnancy...They want to change her mind and get her to want her pregnancy. And that doesn't really work. There are many good reasons to not want to be pregnant...

...those aren't illegitimate. So they have a tendency to vilify unwantedness."

Instead of focusing on changing her emotions about the pregnancy or only taking away the option of abortion, she argues we should be maximizing her other options (while yes, still

taking away the option to kill her fetus).

She argues conservative pro-lifers are not doing enough to maximize other options.

I both agree and disagree with her on parts of this particular view, but I just think she makes a very interesting point about essentially emotion-manipulation in the movement.