It was intriguing, though, to read the first chapter, which is on abortion (the issues are presented in alphabetical order). A gynecologist before entering the world of politics, Dr. Paul is staunchly against the practice of abortion, but his arguments against it are completely areligious. Instead, his pro-life stance is rooted in classic libertarian ideas of personal liberty, which also extends the concept of “pro-life” to opposing the death penalty and “preventive” wars of aggression. This has put him at odds with people all over the political spectrum.
Here is a summary of some of his biggest points:
- There is no consistent moral basis for defending abortion as a “right”.
- The federal government has no authority to rule on abortion as a right, as the Constitution lists only four crimes which come under federal jurisdiction: counterfeiting, piracy, treason, and slavery. Abortion’s legality should be left to the states.
- For the same reason, pro-life groups that seek a federal ruling to end abortion nationally “give credence to the very process that made abortions so prevalent.”
- Laws and legislation will never be able to fully end the practice of abortion. “Only a truly moral society can do that.”
- Deregulating the adoption market would reduce the number of abortions, as people would have far fewer hoops to jump through to give birth mothers options.
- People cannot be consistently pro-life if they affirm things like torture, capital punishment, nation-building, and wars of aggression. It is an irony that most who so strongly oppose abortion now approve of the rest of these things, and vice versa.