Women have a right to infanticide

Murray N. Rothbard, in his The Ethics of Liberty, wrote...

" The proper groundwork for analysis of abortion is in every man’s absolute right of self-ownership. This implies immediately that every woman has the absolute right to her own body, that she has absolute dominion over her body and everything within it. This includes the fetus. Most fetuses are in the mother’s womb because the mother consents to this situation, but the fetus is there by the mother’s freely-granted consent. But should the mother decide that she does not want the fetus there any longer, then the fetus becomes a parasitic “invader” of her person, and the mother has the perfect right to expel this invader from her domain. Abortion should be looked upon, not as “murder” of a living person, but as the expulsion of an unwanted invader from the mother’s body.[2] Any laws restricting or prohibiting abortion are therefore invasions of the rights of mothers.

It has been objected that since the mother originally consented to the conception, the mother has therefore “contracted” its status with the fetus, and may not “violate” that “contract” by having an abortion. There are many problems with this doctrine, however. In the first place, as we shall see further below, a mere promise is not an enforceable contract: contracts are only properly enforceable if their violation involves implicit theft, and clearly no such consideration can apply here. Secondly, there is obviously no “contract” here, since the fetus (fertilized ovum?) can hardly be considered a voluntarily and consciously contracting entity. And thirdly as we have seen above, a crucial point in libertarian theory is the inalienability of the will, and therefore the impermissibility of enforcing voluntary slave contracts. Even if this had been a “contract,” then, it could not be enforced because a mother’s will is inalienable, and she cannot legitimately be enslaved into carrying and having a baby against her will."

[link to mises.org]

They have the free choice to do it, doesn't make it right. In the same way a person has the free choice to walk into a primary school and gun down little kids, doesn't make it right. Just because you can doesn't mean you should.

Here is a thought...should we be shipping food or condoms to Africa...

That's pretty evil, OP.


Pretty sure the OP is using a fallacious argument against abortion.

Here is a thought...should we be shipping food or condoms to Africa...

Any child under three (some say under five) for which women cannot take care of is eligible for infanticide.



This is quite true. Most western women who kill their kids get sent to a psych ward & let out 2 years later because they were somehow a 'victim' of an evil husband....
Most men get the chair or lethal injection.

If this was common in the past how is it "progressive"?

It was done away with to progress or move forward.


Only if you believe that patriarchal medieval philosophy leads to progress. Most modern progressives have embraced the Greek philosophy of infanticide as being truly progressive because unaffected by Christianityé

Which is why I always fight labels like "progressive" or "conservative". They are far from accurate.


That's right...you are a evolutionist...survival of the fittest?
Well the Maya would sacrifice hundreds of people and cut out there hearts so they could have good crops...why don't we do that again?....BTW....you go first

if youre against abortion, dont have one

your a sick fuck

Any child under three (some say under five) for which women cannot take care of is eligible for infanticide.

From a progressive point of view, legalizing it would be the best way to achieve efficient population control.

It was common in the Greek classical age, when liberated advanced women could freely dispose of their children. It's time to return tho Thids Godlen Age of female freedom.

Any child under three (some say under five) for which women cannot take care of is eligible for infanticide.

From a progressive point of view, legalizing it would be the best way to achieve efficient population control.

It was common in the Greek classical age, when liberated advanced women could freely dispose of their children. It's time to return tho Thids Godlen Age of female freedom.

A smart woman would just say no to sex if she didn't want a child.

Any child under three (some say under five) for which women cannot take care of is eligible for infanticide.

From a progressive point of view, legalizing it would be the best way to achieve efficient population control.

It was common in the Greek classical age, when liberated advanced women could freely dispose of their children. It's time to return tho Thids Godlen Age of female freedom.

A smart woman would just say no to sex if she didn't want a child.


Tell that to the zillions of women who have been raped by marauding armies and find themselves pregnant, widowed, and homeless thanks to said army.

Any child under three (some say under five) for which women cannot take care of is eligible for infanticide.

From a progressive point of view, legalizing it would be the best way to achieve efficient population control.

It was common in the Greek classical age, when liberated advanced women could freely dispose of their children. It's time to return tho Thids Godlen Age of female freedom.