MURDERING THE UNBORN – PART 1 As mother, you do not have the moral justification

MURDERING THE UNBORN – PART 1

As mother, you do not have the moral justification to kill your offspring unless your offspring will kill you – all other arguments are illogical.

You certainly CAN kill your offspring for other reasons, just as I can kill you for other reasons, or you can kill anyone else for other reasons.

Now, you might say that killing is pragmatic. And I have no problem with killing. But you cannot deceive others by obscurant argument that you are not killing. You are in fact, killing.

As for Parasitism: a child is not parasitic for the simple reason that it is an offspring (kin). You acted to create the child. It is the reason that you exist.

As for taboos: the purpose of traditional taboos is moral and logical: you should take all precautions possible so that you kill as infrequently as possible.

But that said, we should preserve the stigma that one is killing, precisely because one is in fact, killing. Murder is murder. Whether we choose to prosecute murderers is a matter of willingness. But our willingness to prosecute murderers is a choice, while the act of murder is a fact.

I have no problem with killing. I argue that we need to do a LOT of killing at present. But I have a problem with deceit. I cannot for the life of me understand the logic of killing the unborn and not killing the repeated violent offenders.

But then, that’s feminism’s deceit at play: (a) women are victims and devoid of responsibility for their actions, and (b) women are fully capable of military participation, and membership in the special forces. OR (a) abortion is a woman’s right, and (b) we cannot raise animals for fur. OR (a) abortion isn’t murder, and (b) women’s almost universal insistence that their children are good, and (c) women’s almost universal defense of their criminal and murderous offspring.

All speech is justification. The question is only whether we justify moral or immoral action. And moral action is that which does not break the contract for cooperation. And the contract for cooperation is one in which we do not impose costs upon others.

**So the basic female argument is to (a) justify her imposition of costs upon others, but (b) refuse to bear costs that are her responsibility.** )

The parasitic argument cannot hold, since demonstrated feminist behavior in all walks of personal and political life, is parasitic.

While I could write an entire book on the subject, using thousands of similar examples, as far as I know the last sentence: ***So the basic female argument is to (a) justify her imposition of costs upon others, but (b) refuse to bear costs that are her responsibility.*** is the final word on the matter.

Unpleasant truths are unpleasant truths.

THE PURPOSE OF THIS ARGUMENT: SPEAK TRUTH.

I am not making such a grand argument really. There is nothing of moral equivalency about it. Instead, it’s a very simple, but profoundly important argument: “BE TRUTHFUL”.

If moral discussions appear complicated, or paradoxical, then falsehoods are contained in the propositions.

Just as mothers must discipline children, men must discipline men. Violence occurs when the accumulated incentives are insufficient to discipline men. Violence also occurs when incentives outweight costs. (Crimea/Donbas, Kuwait, Hungary).

But deception, is just deception, and makes rational resolution of differences impossible. That is why this debate is interesting. It is very simple. It is not a moral question. It is not a question between mother and child. It is a question of what we will tolerate from one another while still maintaining cooperation.Political order being our most complex form of cooperation.

Feminism, like its male counterpart socialism, is an elaborate verbal game of loading and framing in order to use guilt to obscure and justify parasitism. And democracy is merely a slow road to socialism: parasitism.

S THE ONLY MORAL GOOD IS TRUTHFUL, FULLY INFORMED, VOLUNTARY EXCHANGE IN THE ABSENCE OF PARASITISM

The only common good is not a singular, monopoly optimum, but voluntary exchange (cooperation) in the absence of parasitism(non-cooperation) for the purpose of constructing commons.

All majority-rule mandates are lost opportunities for voluntary and mutually beneficial cooperation. ie: theft.

Curt

PS: You should read these posts as follow-up.

1) MURDERING THE UNBORN — PART II

https://www.facebook.com/curt.doolittle/posts/10153259110292264

2) HONESTY, TRUTHFULNESS AND TRUTH (PART III)

https://www.facebook.com/curt.doolittle/posts/10153259239887264

3) WE MAY NOT CHOOSE TO PUNISH MURDER. BUT ITS AN ACT OF MURDER. (PRELUDE)

https://www.facebook.com/curt.doolittle/posts/10153255381997264

(Note: Moral rules are justificationary because they are contractual. Conversely, the search for truth is critical).