ab

[ClaytonB]

For one thing, the fact that before Roe vs Wade hundreds of women died in back-alley abortions.

How does that have anything to do with Mises being opposed to abortion??

being able to date and fuck who you want without fear of pregnancy is hardly statist tyranny in my eyes.

Unless you make other people pay for the consequences. I’m not saying the State should prohibit these people from doing what they like but neither should the sword of the State be wielded to subsidize their choices.

Clayton -

[ClaytonB]

is anyone here at all bothered that Mises was against abortion?

No, what’s wrong with being opposed to abortion?

And the authors of those jumbled notes in your last post all miss the point that Mises is making - when the funds of the State are turned to “economically freeing” women from the “tyranny” of their husbands, the social order is fundamentally altered in ways that remove the autonomy of parents and lead to a “free love” society. Whether you consider that a bad thing or not is a separate topic. Mises’s point is simply that these are the consequences. If you think he’s incorrect, feel free to provide your counter-argument.

Clayton -

[mustang19]

No, what’s wrong with being opposed to abortion?

For one thing, the fact that before Roe vs Wade hundreds of women died in back-alley abortions.

And the authors of those jumbled notes in your last post all miss the point that Mises is making - when the funds of the State are turned to “economically freeing” women from the “tyranny” of their husbands, the social order is fundamentally altered in ways that remove the autonomy of parents and lead to a “free love” society. Whether you consider that a bad thing or not is a separate topic. Mises’s point is simply that these are the consequences. If you think he’s incorrect, feel free to provide your counter-argument.

Clayton -

I might do that. But being able to date and fuck who you want without fear of pregnancy is hardly statist tyranny in my eyes.