Return to the Free Liberal Homepage

« $1 Billion for Georgia? | Main | Want Offshore Drilling and Lower Gas Prices: Comment Here! »

Biden knows when life begins for him, but it's a private issue

That's what he claimed on "Meet the Press" today.

I'd just like to say that I'm glad a big-government politician like him still recognizes the public/private distinction.

But really: if when life begins is different for you than for me . . . if it's a private issue . . . then who is the government supposed to protect from being killed?

"What are you cops doing here?"

"We're here to stop that murder behind you, Sir."

"How did you find out I was alive? That's a private matter. For all you know I might consider myself undead."

"Well, you filled out the 'I'm Alive Form' down at the Department of Life, Sir."

"Oh, right. I forgot about that. Well, I guess I've given up my right to privacy on the issue of when my life began. Carry on then."

Posted by Micah Tillman on September 7, 2008 12:58 PM |

Comments

I was disappointed with Biden's comments for the oppossite reason. The question is not when life begins, but what is to be done to protect it.

I will agree that life trumps liberty, but claiming to protect life while enacting methods which do not such thing are damaging to both life and liberty. Using tax incentives to increase income for families is a much better strategy than police action against doctors.

Biden will lose if he can't come up with a better response than the one he used in that interview, which is identical to the Kerry debate response which convined no one.

The authoritarians in the Catholic Church are already hitting the pulpit against Pelosi and Biden. If anything, siding against them is an act of Liberty.

Posted by: Michael Bindner | September 10, 2008 09:45 PM

As opposed to those who see government as an economic entity first and foremost, I see it as a physical force, first and foremost.

Therefore, I see its job -- if it's going to exist at all -- to be being itself: throwing its weight around. And so long as it's doing so to protect lives from physical violence by other people, it's on the right track.

But for it to protect lives, it's gotta have some basic definition of life.

And depending on your version of that definition, rebelling against the Church on this issue would be one of those acts of liberty which government is supposed to stop.

Of course, the government doesn't officially see many abortions as falling into the "physical violence upon a life" category. Roe v. Wade set up a different official (practical) understanding of when life begins (i.e., when rights begin) than Biden's Church.

Posted by: Micah Tillman | September 10, 2008 10:31 PM

There are good ways and bad ways for government to stop this act of liberty. Doing it in such a way that poor women self-induce or seek back alley abortions while rich women travel to abortion states is hardly a good way.

Greasing the pockets of Regent University Law School Grads who go after doctors as prosecutors or in representing women who have had miscarriages and want to cash in with a simpathetic jury is not good public policy but will occur if you turn first trimester fetuses into citizens.

Using the tax police rather than the bedroom police seems less coercive and more effective.

Pointing these facts out will do Biden more good than relying on what is essentially a pluralist argument (not imposing his faith held view on others).

Posted by: Michael Bindner | September 12, 2008 10:49 PM

Free-for-all (frfr-ôl) -- n. A disorderly fight, argument, or competition in which everyone present participates.

from Dictionary.com



Advertisement
Free For All -- The Free Liberal Blog