Saturday, March 10, 2012


Carpet bomb a civilian population or abortive infanticide; both legal ways of destroying innocent human life regardless of the rational behind it.

To the rational: I read Freakonomics in order to better understand how actuaries are used by policy think-tanks to justify their special interest legislation.  Thanks to this so-called science, we have a failed Chicago School of Economics model economy and multiple pyramid scheme insurance industry that's quasi state and private sector dictating every aspect of our lives while the premiums keep going up.  The only thing useful taken from this book is that when actuaries speculate on the causes of statistics, they're often wrong.  I say to actuaries, 'get a real job as a statistician and leave the prognosticating to theologians'.  'Why is this relevant to the subject at hand,' you say?  To speculate that abortion reduces crime is tantamount to saying that the holocaust was necessary to reduce poverty in Europe.

As for woman's rights:  I'm all for them, but since when did the female quotient become elevated to god status over mankind as a whole.  As was established in the forming of this nation, to have a free society there must be certain inalienable rights:  life, liberty, and property (or the pursuit of happiness).  If a being is not guaranteed the right to live,  they aren't free and certainly cannot posses anything of substance if they're dead.  Rights are predicated on the right to live, without it there is no freedom.  This argument that woman have the right to choose to destroy innocent human life is megalomaniacal.

That's not to say I'm not still libertarian when it comes to woman's rights.  Satirically speaking:  Just like I have the right, in my private property, to put a pipe-bomb up my ars and light the fuse; a woman can go to work with a coat-hanger and and shopvac in private and who would be the wiser?  So yes woman have a right to their own bodies but yet no-one has a right to perform infanticide.  Like no-one has a right to assist suicide because suicide is illegal, yet if you want to shoot yourself in the peanut what's to stop you?  It's a matter of protecting the innocent, yet at the same time, individual liberty.  A seemingly ambivalent yet necessary balance.

No comments:

Post a Comment