Wednesday, February 02, 2005

So Joe, what's the going rate for a womb?

Joe Hockey has made the statement that,
"We need to look at ways to restructure the taxation system or restructure so that people if they choose to have another child, or maybe if they don't, we can give them an incentive."
Seeing it's the 'taxation system' Joe wants to restructure, I'm assuming it involves more dollars not more daycare places.

Perhaps Joe is applying the principle of libertarianism to the abortion debate?

The following was found here written by Russ Nelson.

"A standard principle of libertarianism is that the best solutions are discovered when people have the most control over their own lives. Given private property and free markets, people will negotiate and trade to improve their circumstances. A difficulty with applying this principle to abortion is that neither a zygote, a fetus, nor a baby are particularly at will to enter into these negotiations. There are enough people who have an interest in protecting a baby's rights that they can act as a reasonable proxy for the baby's interests.

The libertarian problem here is that the baby has, without any intention on its own part, found itself at risk of loss of life without cooperation from the owner of the womb it needs for its nurture. What is clear is that the mother does not wish to cooperate, and history has proven that cooperation cannot be easily coerced.

Pregnancy is similar to other legal quandaries. Let's say that a person needs to use the resources of another to save their life, and cannot negotiate the use of those resources. A reasonable law will let them use those resources, as long as they "make the owner whole". That is, they must restore the owner's property to its original condition, and compensate them for the use of their property.

I think, then, that a libertarian solution to abortion is to allow a mother to rent her uterus to the baby. On a practical basis, that is what many parents do. Parents expect that their children will take care of them in their old age, just as they took care of the children when they were helpless and feeble. The trouble comes when a mother doesn't want the baby. Of course, there are these days any number of parents who are unable to have their own child and are willing to expend resources to adopt a baby.

So, you have a willing buyer, and a willing seller. Why not sell babies? Or, rather than buy and sell babies, perhaps anti-abortion groups could act as baby brokers. They could take a payment from someone who wanted a baby, be responsible for the actions of that person, and use the payment to compensate someone who didn't want their baby and wanted to give it up.

This would work just fine if there were no unwilling sellers. That is, if every woman had a price for which she would allow her womb to be used, then it just becomes a matter of finding enough money to clear the market. Doubtless, some women would be unwilling to allow their womb to be used for someone else's nurturing. In this case, the whole problem comes down to eminent domain. Would it be possible to "take" a woman's womb for use by a baby (that is, for public purposes). Clearly, if there were enough willing sellers of "womb services", it would be possible to establish a fair market value, and compensate women for the use of their womb.

Basically, then, the failure of current and past abortion laws to make enough people happy comes down to the confiscation of private property for public purposes without due compensation."
Please Joe, consider the usual and known implications of coercing women to give birth to unwanted, purchased babies.


6 Comments:

Blogger Mushroom said...

Miranda Devine has decided to put her 2 cents into this rediculous debate we are supposedly having on abortion rights

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2005/02/02/1107228765861.html

I'm so furious.

9:09 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'm all for reducing the number of abortions needed and access to welfare is one way, however research into better contraception is a much better way.

I don't think reducing pregnancy to a monetary value will work - pregnancy is very draining and damaging to the woman's body, and the impact on her life is not something that can be adjusted by three thousand dollars. But then I'm not an economist, I don't think enjoyment of life comes down to a dollar value.

So, I was told if anyone knew about pro-choice groups in Sydney, it would be you. Any ideas?

Evelyn - http://planetevelyn.net

9:56 am  
Blogger weezil said...

Evelyn, I think Suki was trying to make that very point to Mr Hockey.

Don't miss Bozzo's newest boffo act- he now wants to know when, where and why YOU terminated a pregnancy and how old you were when you did it.

-weez

3:13 pm  
Blogger suki said...

Mushroom,
Thanks for the link. Miranda gets it so wrong; believing that feminists are a homogenous group and when they aren't there is anarchy.
The lesbian-separatists don't agree with the feminist-separatists who usually ban males from everything...etc. *sorry I digress.

What Miranda (and others) fail to realise is that this has not been a grassroots, ground swell movement from women who are central to the 'debate.' Women don't care to revisit this issue. The older ones have fought the good fight and the younger ones have grown up with the right to abortion on demand.

Women are shaking their heads at these (mainly) men in positions of power trying to whip up outrage.

Women know that a man will be involved in the pregnancy occurring and more often than not men assist in supporting and funding the abortion.

Most men who oppose abortion will be bombarded by indignant mothers, partners, sisters, daughters and most female friends they have an acquaintance with demanding their right to self-determination.
This is the level of support from Australian women to the Abortion issue.

What gets me furious are Virgin priests pontificating about places they have never been, will never go and know nothing about!

Roaming without permission in the uteri of women.
GET OUT!!!

10:23 pm  
Blogger suki said...

Evelyn,
Your request made me realise that I haven't needed to dust off my pro-choice banner for some time.
I guess we all haven't...
I would start my research here Evelyn.
They are the biggest feminist concern I have come across.
They still annually Reclaim the night.

11:00 pm  
Blogger sjusju said...

Onya Suki - good to see someone's got her shithead-kicking boots on.

the thing i find really off about these womb-bossing dickheads, is their concept of babies being a transferrable commodity, that you can just take from someone with an "oversupply" and transfer to somewhere there is "market demand". So much for the "sacredness of life"...

Evelyn if you're interested, there are several sydney reproductive rights groups active at the moment. email me on sjusju at gmail dot com if you'd like further info.

2:26 pm  

Post a Comment

<< Home