Utah State Senator Mark Madsen switches to the Libertarian Party.

[♪alt13]

"Hard work, risk, reward, and recognition of the reality there are no guarantees in life" have all been abandoned by both major parties, with a "mommy state" pushed by the Democrats and a "daddy state" pushed by the Republicans, he says.

"No party is entitled to my membership or my support," Madsen says. He is going where his principles take him, he said, which is to the Libertarian Party and to support of its presidential ticket of Gary Johnson and William Weld.

https://reason.com/blog/2016/07/25/utah-sen-madsen-on-defecting-to-the-libe

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nv5vEaWhSds

 

[Stoked]

Interesting.

 

[moevillini]

...he said that a big part was to make the press come and listen to his message about the Republicans' abandonment of freedom-related principles, from civil rights to property rights to medical marijuana. He called on others in politics concerned with people's right to manage their own lifes to reconsider their political affiliations....

so I wonder, does this right to personal freedom extend to a woman's right to make personal medical decisions?

 

[Stoked]

so I wonder, does this right to personal freedom extend to a woman's right to make personal medical decisions?

That often requires a complicated answer that is not as easy as a yes or no.

But for the sake of simplicity. I say yes.

I doubt Mr. Madsen feels the same.

 

[NAOS]

I don't think Moe put forward that question so that someone on jazzfanz could answer it. It's a good question to simply put forward, since it remains an open one for all the Righties that are re-imagining themselves as "libertarian"

 

[Stoked]

I don't think Moe put forward that question so that someone on jazzfanz could answer it. It's a good question to simply put forward, since it remains an open one for all the Righties that are re-imagining themselves as "libertarian"

I realize that. Which is why I said I doubt it for Mr. Madsen.

 

[The Thriller]

Is this the same Madsen who voted for Sen Bramble's anti-abortion bill criticized by so many women's rights groups and doctors? Is this the same Madsen who receives a 0 percent rating for women's rights issues?

https://le.utah.gov/DynaBill/svotes.jsp?sessionid=2016GS&voteid=1099&house=S

Is this the same Madsen who doesn't recognize gay marriage?

Some libertarian...

Other than his stance on weed, how is he any different than your typical run of the mill republican in Utah?

Let's face it. He's pouting after his bill failed in the last session for the 2nd year in a row. Someone throw him a lollipop.

View attachment 4882

 

[The Thriller]

Btw, here's an article on the anti-abortion law passed which "libertarian" Madsen voted for just a few months ago:

(CNN)Utah will now require doctors to provide anesthesia to women having abortions at 20 weeks of pregnancy or later.

The law, which experts say is the first of its kind in the nation, is based on the scientifically disputed notion that a fetus can feel pain during the procedure.

And

"Imagine that I sit down with a patient and tell her what she can expect and how I'm going to take care of her and somehow I work in, 'Oh, by the way, the state has told me that I have to give this to you?' She asks, 'Why?' And I say, 'There's no benefit to you, but there will be additional risk.'"
"How as a doctor do I live with that? This law is about stopping abortion," Davis said. "This is just another measure to deter women from getting abortions."

Talk about getting big intrusive gubbamint out of our lives! LMFAO

https://www.cnn.com/2016/03/29/health/utah-abortion-law-fetal-pain/

 

[infection]

From a purely philosophical point of view, if one believes life in utero to consist of a being with rights and liberties, would it be consistent to not act as though they are defending or balancing those rights and liberties? Independent of debating the moral nature of abortion, if the principles are to be highlighted objectively, it doesn't make much sense to interject subjective views (the rightness or wrongness of abortion) into a debate of consistency.

 

[moevillini]

From a purely philosophical point of view, if one believes life in utero to consist of a being with rights and liberties, would it be consistent to not act as though they are defending or balancing those rights and liberties? Independent of debating the moral nature of abortion, if the principles are to be highlighted objectively, it doesn't make much sense to interject subjective views (the rightness or wrongness of abortion) into a debate of consistency.

And who gets to act as the proxy for that in-utero entity? The government? Or the parent?

And if it's the government, then why not also for any human entity below the age of legal consent, or some other age.

Where do you draw the line between government control and parental control?

 

[Siro]

And who gets to act as the proxy for that in-utero entity? The government? Or the parent?

And if it's the government, then why not also for any human entity below the age of legal consent, or some other age.

Where do you draw the line between government control and parental control?

The government, not the parent, act as a proxy for people below age of majority. For example, the government will prosecute offenses of statutory rape, regardless of the wishes of the minor or the parents.

 

[Boris]

so I wonder, does this right to personal freedom extend to a woman's right to make personal medical decisions?

Yes. I believe if people want to die they can. I believe if people want to not have cancer radiation than that is there choice.

 

[Boris]

BTW why do the libbies always have to bring abortion up? My God you people are obsessed. You won Roe v Wade a million years ago can we shut up about it already?

 

[Stoked]

BTW why do the libbies always have to bring abortion up? My God you people are obsessed. You won Roe v Wade a million years ago can we shut up about it already?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

 

[infection]

And who gets to act as the proxy for that in-utero entity? The government? Or the parent?

And if it's the government, then why not also for any human entity below the age of legal consent, or some other age.

Where do you draw the line between government control and parental control?

Sure, and those may well be debates to be had. But the question at hand is if it is inconsistent for someone to believe in a libertarian platform while being pro-life. The answer to whether or not those are consistent depends on the individual's view of the fetus.

 

[franklin]

The right is gonna far right while pretending they actually are libertarian.

 

[moevillini]

Sure, and those may well be debates to be had. But the question at hand is if it is inconsistent for someone to believe in a libertarian platform while being pro-life. The answer to whether or not those are consistent depends on the individual's view of the fetus.

There is absolutely no question that a person has the right to be against abortion on a personal level.

But if you truly believe in libertarian principles, it seems contradictory to me to feel you have the right to force your beliefs on another.

I really haven't looked into it in depth, but I believe Gary Johnson (the Libertarian candidate for President) personally is against abortion, though he supports a woman's right to make her own decision on those matters, which is consistent with his party's platform.

 

[Gameface]

There is absolutely no question that a person has the right to be against abortion on a personal level.

But if you truly believe in libertarian principles, it seems contradictory to me to feel you have the right to force your beliefs on another.

I really haven't looked into it in depth, but I believe Gary Johnson (the Libertarian candidate for President) personally is against abortion, though he supports a woman's right to make her own decision on those matters, which is consistent with his party's platform.

But the question still remains, at what point does the fetus have rights of its own that must be recognized?

 

[The Thriller]

There is absolutely no question that a person has the right to be against abortion on a personal level.

But if you truly believe in libertarian principles, it seems contradictory to me to feel you have the right to force your beliefs on another.

I really haven't looked into it in depth, but I believe Gary Johnson (the Libertarian candidate for President) personally is against abortion, though he supports a woman's right to make her own decision on those matters, which is consistent with his party's platform.

It's not just his stance on women's rights. Look at his stance towards gay rights. I fail to see any true libertarian voting for bans against gay marriage and laws favoring "traditional marriage."

With the exception of his stance on Medical cannabis (which he's in the business with cannabis distributor Jeremy Roberts also based in Lehi), his views are exactly what 100 percent of the other republican Mormons in the legislature.

 

[Siro]

I guess it's time for the Jazzfanz annual abortion debate.