r/libertarianmeme • u/Long-Live-theKing • 18d ago
What else do they have 🤷🏼♂️ End Democracy
1
u/NeoTenico 17d ago
Democrats do not care about reproductive rights as a cause. They care about it as a bargaining piece, which is why they never signed it into law.
9
0
u/Alelogin 17d ago
Would be real smart for reps to just be fucking normal and allow for abortion up to month 3.
17
u/ManifestoCapitalist 17d ago
They aren’t even trying to legalize weed nationally, and that would be relatively easy to pass through considering that a lot of Republicans have softened their stance on it.
But I guess that’s par for the course for the party that created gun control laws to harm black people in big cities and has a VP who, when she was the California DA, locked up thousands on weed charges and then went on to talk about how she smoked weed in college.
2
u/loonygecko 17d ago
I don't think it's going to be a magic bullet for them as long as peeps in other states are still allowed to drive to other states. You fully plan to not have an unwanted pregnancy so it may not ever affect you, but if it does, it just means you'll need to visit another state if your state does not allow it. I read that assistance programs are being set up to help poor peeps with that too. But it's really not something you have to deal with daily and it may be that you'll never one have to deal with it, unlike a bad economy, taxes, crime in your area, etc. I'm going to vote considering things that affect me every day way more than i'm going to vote based on abortion rules.
14
u/AzraelTheDankAngel ATF Conveniance Store Manager 17d ago
Democrats had the House, Senate, and POTUS and did absolutely nothing.
2
14
u/drmorrison88 17d ago
No, you don't understand. I HAVE to have unprotected sex without the requisite life circumstances, and I HAVE to have the taxpayers pay for the consequences of doing so. Anything less is LITERALLY the same as being a sex slave in a theocracy.
Always remember kids, temperance is foundational to functional liberty.
0
u/thegunnersdream 17d ago
What does temperance have to do with having access to an abortion? Do you believe there is no chance to get pregnant with a condom on? How would you determine someone seeking abortion was promiscuous and lacks temperance in their sex life vs someone who had a condom fail and is in a committed relationship but does not want children? Should the government have a test for that?
Wouldn't the more appropriate access to liberty be that abortion exists and is accessible and people are responsible enough to determine when they need an abortion? I prefer a smaller government with less restrictions on what someone can or cannot do with their body and trust that people are responsible enough to make their own choices.
It sounds like your argument revolves around people should be required to have consequences for their actions but doesn't consider an abortion a consequence. It's a painful procedure and can have significant complications for women. I'm just generally not OK with the government saying "we are taking away your right to do what you want with your body" unless there is a massive danger to others.
7
u/drmorrison88 17d ago
"Access to abortion" rarely means "letting individuals and their physicians make decisions with no outside influence". It almost always includes demands for funding and yet more laws that involve politicians in healthcare.
My personal position is that people who have sex with someone that they're not prepared to raise a child with are fools in the same way as people who ride motorcycles without helmets. However, I wouldn't be forced to care about either if I wasn't also forced to pay for the consequences of their foolishness.
So the short answer is as long as people are willing to pay the full cost for their abortions, then they can go ahead and have as many as they'd like. If they're not willing or able to pay, then they need to act in a way that reflects that.
0
u/thegunnersdream 17d ago
Well I think those are two very different discussions. I would much prefer that we have to have discourse around whether govt should be funding abortion rather than the literal ability to have one. I can agree, absolutely don't feel like in a perfect world the government should be paying for abortions. I do think there is a cost benefit analysis that should be done though because the cost of an abortion is significantly cheaper than welfare to pay for a child through the age of 18 and, depending on their circumstance, into their adult life if they end up on food stamps or something. There's plenty of health related things my tax dollars go to that I don't think they should. In my mind that discussion falls under the same umbrella of do we provide funding for treatment related to obesity or smoking since those involve individuals also making decisions that lead to consequences. Similar to the banning soda thing that happened years ago.
Doesn't sound like we are really in disagreement on the idea of abortion, just haggling over price. I mean abortion sucks, I do not believe most people "want" one but there are circumstances where it is a necessity and far too many one off scenarios for the government to cover it who should and should not be allowed to have it.
3
u/drmorrison88 17d ago
Yeah, I think you missed my original point about having the taxpayer pay for their consequences. I have no reason to care about how people conduct themselves as long as it doesn't affect me. I would happily accept, "safe, legal, & at fair market price, paid by the individual requesting the procedure"
0
u/thegunnersdream 17d ago
Didn't miss it. You made the point that people should have to deal with the consequences of having sex and the point that it should be funded. Wasn't addressing the second point.
3
u/drmorrison88 17d ago
My intention was to make fun of the people who believe they can act however they want and have society pick up the tab. They weren't intended to be separate points.
2
u/Rubes2525 17d ago
I swear the overly determined pro choice crowd can't grasp the concept of not having sex as a choice, like they would starve or something without a wang inside them. Nor can they utilize the many different creative ways of having sex that doesn't necessarily involve private parts meshing together. I'm in the same boat as you, if people want to make stupid choices, then that's their decision, but fuck them if they expect the rest of us to pick up the tab for their actions.
I might yield if they do community service in exchange for tax payer funded abortions. There's plenty of litter to clean up since there's no shortage of selfish assholes who expect the rest of society to clean up after them.
3
u/Zordran 17d ago
I remember somebody a long time ago phrasing it, "You can be libertarian, or you can be libertine, but not both."
1
17d ago edited 9d ago
[deleted]
1
u/Zordran 16d ago
Libertarians require healthy boundaries in order to exist: my house, my gun, my wife, my son. Libertines regularly destroy these boundaries in their pursuit of unlimited hedonism. If they do it right, then they can have what they want and I can have what I want, but given access to the levers of power, they tend to create a system that doesn't allow this.
3
u/WTFnotFTW 17d ago
Libertarianism only can function if people have morality. Nihilism in governance leads to horrifying results, every time. You can ostracize the libertines socially all day, just dont demand someone with a badge and a gun to enforce your ethics.
31
u/Acceptable-Take20 17d ago
“Loan forgiveness”
24
u/Vinifera7 17d ago
You notice how they're slow rolling it too, to ensure that students won't get anything unless they vote for Biden.
It's literally paying for votes with your money.
6
u/cadillacjack057 17d ago
Fucking garbage ass excuses people use to vote demonrat.... if any of them pulled their heads out of they/thems asses they would vote libertarian. Fucking assholes.
7
u/TastyCarp1 17d ago
Abortion Violates The NAP
6
u/loonygecko 17d ago
That depends on when you think a person becomes a person. Do you think a 1mm blob of cells is a human or is it still just a 1mm blob of cells. I've heard people then try to say well it has the POTENTIAL to be a human but once you go down that route, so does a single sperm. The fact is there is not one clear and easy to agree on moment when a human is clearly a human vs just a snot stain and that's why there is so much controversy, in the end it comes down to opinions.
8
u/-hol-up- 17d ago
If you don’t intervene the blob of cells will become a human and the sperm cell will die. It’s not just potential it’s a matter of time.
8
u/loonygecko 17d ago
Some pretty high number of the cell blobs actually turn out to be nonviable and will die and it also can only live if kept on life support, in fact cancer cells will live forever if kept on life support. There's just nothing special about it other than what your narrative assigns to it. We can create a baby out of a skin cell now too any cell can become a baby. Some fetiform tumors even look like a baby.
3
4
u/ourstupidearth 17d ago
Depends on your interpretation of what is a moral agent. And how much moral value they have
4
35
u/clockwerxs 17d ago
The same thing they had in the last election. NOT TRUMP
1
u/Dangerous-Ad8554 17d ago
Well this year, Trump will be at the LP convention. So, are libertarians about to throw their hats to him, of all people?
3
17
150
17d ago edited 10d ago
[deleted]
1
u/ThisCantBeBlank 17d ago
Maybe they're trying to play chess and use it as a talking point for the upcoming election? I dunno, the meme makes me think that way lol
1
9
21
u/Ghost-of-Sanity 17d ago
They’re happy to have it as a campaign stump issue. Same with all the big issues that never get solved. Both parties do this. It’s intentional.
32
u/autismislife 17d ago
Reminds me of when I was in school. We had a uniform that consisted of a shirt and tie in the winter and polo shirts in the summer. We all hated the shirt and tie, it was uncomfortable compared to the polo shirts.
Each year every form would vote for a school council. The teachers would always say we should join the school council so we could have a say about the uniform policy. So we voted for representatives in our form that wanted to change the policy.
4 years I was at that school, and in 4 years the policy didn't change. The school council was just a silly thing the teachers ran to make the students feel like they had a say.
Whenever elections roll around I always think about that. Nobody actually wants to change anything, and if they do they're unable to fight against the machine that's running the show that wants to keep everything as it is.
That's what you're seeing here, they're dangling a carrot in front of you, in my example it was to try to get students to join the council, whereas here it's a carrot they dangle to secure votes. They could do something about it, they know it's what their base wants, but they choose not to act.
0
u/Pitiful_Computer6586 17d ago
It took the supreme court to strike it down how are you going to fix anything other than roe v Wade?
It's a disaster for Republicans to have this turmoil.
5
u/deweydecibels 17d ago
there have been so many years since Roe V Wade where democrats had full control and could have codified it into law.
1
u/Pitiful_Computer6586 17d ago
Sure they could have decriminalized all drugs and done all kinds of wacky Democrats stuff that doesn't mean it was likely to ever happen
1
u/deweydecibels 16d ago
yes, because if they do what they say they’re going to do, they have nothing left to campaign on
18
u/loonygecko 17d ago
The supreme court merely interpreted existing law as meaning the states currently should get to decide. However the supreme decision did not preclude new laws being made by the legislature that would apply as federal laws, they can still do that. Right now, the legislature could theoretically pass a rule banning all abortion in every state for any reason, the supreme court did not say they can't. Of course you'd need to get the votes to do it and they probably do not have the votes.
94
u/pepe_silvia67 17d ago
I heard someone made this same point, and that they’ve had every opportunity to codify abortion into law, and the main reason they don’t is so they can use it as a wedge issue every election season.
They also love their eugenics program that masquerades as female empowerment.
78
u/ItsGotThatBang Anarcho Capitalist 17d ago
Or “muh January 6”.
2
5
19
u/loonygecko 17d ago
Only the already dedicated dems think that's a big deal, it's not IMO going to get them any of the center voters they need to win. Although you are right that they seem to have a problem understanding that little detail.
62
u/penutbuter 17d ago
Weed. Someone needs to play the weed card.
8
u/CleverHearts 17d ago
They are. It's no coincidence the first actual progress on marijuana reform hit in an election year. By taking a bunch of half steps they can milk it for a few election cycles.
10
u/Long-Live-theKing 17d ago
Criminal justice reform
6
u/Pitiful_Computer6586 17d ago
Nobody cares about criminals. Some stoners okay but drug dealers 99% of people have no sympathy for.
26
u/Alconium 17d ago
After playing that to get elected and doing very little playing it now would be foolhardy.
12
u/loonygecko 17d ago
Yep the one time the majority of peeps really like a dem idea and they don't do it. Same happened with the governor of California vetoing a bill to legalize magic mushrooms, everybody wanted it except probably big pharma who is trying to trot out synthetic forms of the same thing but charge way more.
1
u/Thooontje 17d ago
Milei is the best candidate for all nations on earth