Badnarik on the Road to Damascus?
Badnarik’s website used to have an"issues" section which included, inter alia, a position statement on abortion. In it, Badnarik said that, after much wrestling with the issue, he was inclined to view abortion as a rights-violation. I can't remember whether he said explicitly that it should be illegal, but that would seem a plausible inference.
Shortly after he won the nomination, the"issues" section abruptly vanished from the Badnarik website. When the"issues" section reappeared a few weeks later, there was no longer any mention of abortion. (And there still isn’t -- I just checked.)
But today I notice that AOL's candidate information page carries a new position statement on abortion. Badnarik now says that"the decision to abort must remain the sole province of the mother, the father, and their own consciences," and is"not an issue for government intrusion."
That's a move in the right direction as far as I’m concerned. But I wonder what the story is.
comments powered by Disqus
Roderick T. Long - 7/30/2004
I don't think Keith Halderman is quite right here. There's dispute about whether the early fetus is a person, but there's hardly any dispute about whether the later fetus is a person. The argument instead turns on whether aborting the fetus count as illegitimate violation of its libertarian rights or as legitimate libertarian self-defense against an unwanted use of one's body by an intruder. The abortion debate has never been merely about personhood, inside or outside of the libertarian camp. (In philosophy, the two most famous abortion arguments -- Thomson's pro-choice argument and Marquis' pro-life argument -- both agree that the question of personhood is not decisive.)
Keith Halderman - 7/29/2004
Abortion is an issue that can not be solved with the logic that libertarians usually apply. This is because argument is essentially about whether one person or two people are involved. The number of people that anyone individual sees in the situation is, I believe, largely a matter of religious faith. If you see two people than libertarian principles call for one course of action, however,if you see one person then those same principles call for different action.
Pat Lynch - 7/29/2004
My understanding is that the LP has never been particularly clear on abortion, and frankly that's been an attraction for me. I had thought that the party did not stake out a position because libertarians on both sides seem to find powerful arguments supporting libertarian positions
- Rubio Surges Into Second In New Hampshire
- Branstad Says Cruz Ran ‘Unethical’ Campaign
- Christie Highlights Santorum’s Endorsement of Rubio
- Portman Comes Out Against Trade Deal
- Megyn Kelly Gets a Book Deal
- A Big List of the Bad Things Clinton Has Done
- An Unambiguous Sign Sanders Won Last Night’s Debate
- Still Friends at the End
- Quote of the Day
- Trump Still Leads as Clinton Slips
- Clinton Can’t Shake Image as Wall Street’s Friend
- Maddow Doesn’t See Sanders Winning
- Why Does the Media Still Shield Chelsea Clinton?
- Bush Jokes His Mother May Have Abused Him
- Rubio Closes the Gap in New Hampshire
- Humans Hard-Wired to Teach, Anthropologist Says
- Parents outraged after students shown ‘white guilt’ cartoon for Black History Month
- Maryland is once again considering retiring its state song
- One of the last remaining Nazis goes on trial in Germany
- Inside story finally told of the young US diplomat who cracked the case of the murder of 4 nuns in El Salvador in 1980
- A historian’s advice to students thinking of getting a PhD in a tough economic climate
- German historian Heinz Richter cleared of charges
- English professor uses literature to help cure historical amnesia
- WSJ features an article by a conservative calling for the abolition of Black History Month
- Mary Beard, herself a bestselling author, wonders why more women historians aren't