Abortion is a controversial topic amongst libertarian and small-government advocates. Complaints about government policy with regards to abortion exists on several levels. The dominant position amongst libertarians seems to be that regardless of the ethical status of abortion, the federal government does not have the jurisdiction to rule on its legal status. However, state's rights advocates may assert that the Constitution does allow the invidual states to make such rulings.

The two central positions amongst mainstream abortion advocates are Pro-choice and Pro-life. Most libertarian movements do not have definite support of one or the other given the controversial nature of abortion, however typically criticism is weighed the most against Pro-life advocates.

[edit] Pro-choice

Pro-choice advocates take the stance that the government should not, for ethical and rights reasons, limit the ability of women from accessing abortion facilities. This is often backed by a stance against forced abortion. This is similar to the stance of many libertarians. The Pro-choice argument however is often tied to the modern Liberal movement.

Pro-choice advocates often go beyond merely arguing for governmental non-intervention in abortion procedures, by advocating government expansion of sexual education programs, financing "safe" abortion clinics, contraception programs, and fertility treatments as part of a broader "fertility rights" movement. Libertarians, even those who are openly Pro-choice, do not support expansion of government programs designed to aid or finance abortion procedures, as they do not believe that it is in the scope of the proper role of government, and that even if it were, it would not be right to force those who do not support abortion to pay for something they find immoral via taxation.

[edit] Pro-life

Pro-life advocates, generally aligned with modern Conservatives, support prohibition of abortion mainly for ethical concerns but occassionally argue on the basis of health concerns. Many of these advocates equivocate abortion with murder. Many libertarians share the view that abortion is unethical, with varying degrees of ethical concern, and can thus can be considered Pro-life supporters. However, often these libertarians will disagree with the modern Pro-life movement on the treatment of abortion in law for several reasons:

1. That the U.S. Constitution does not delegate Congress or the Federal government the enumerated authority to rule on the issue of abortion, and thus it does not have the jurisdiction to prohibit it, only states or "the people" could be left to make that decision as outlined in the 9th & 10th Amendments. These people may take the stance of state's rights that suggests that individual states may prohibit abortion but cannot be compelled to do so by the Federal government.
2. Some may argue that regardless of the ethical status of abortion in terms of treatment of a human being, that the embryo/fetus deserves no special rights which would entitle it ownership of the adult woman's womb nor the right to force her to gestate it. Thus, the decision of a woman to cease gestation is her decision only.
3. Others still simply recognize it is an ethical concern only, and not a legal concern. These supporters might seperate their religious viewpoints from their political platforms. Thus these people may be pro-life socially, but not politically.

Still, while in the minority, there is a sizable portion of libertarians who agree that abortion should be prohibited. Libertarians often diverge from the Pro-life movement much in the same way as the Pro-choice movement, as like Pro-choice advocates, Pro-life advocates often take their iniatives few steps further than merely advocating prohibition of abortion. Some support prohibition of birth control procedures, expansion of government aid to abstinence-only education programs, and openly condone violent activism such as arson and murder of abortion doctors. Of the minority of Pro-life libertarians, very few if any agree with these additional activities.

Consequentialists might argue for limited abortion rights along the lines of existing legislation which legally allows early term abortion based on the medical viewpoint that early term abortions prevent unwanted pregnancies without added clinical risk to the patient, and that they terminate the fetus during early embroyonic stages before it develops many of the same organs and features which would identify it as a "person". This viewpoint can be expanded into a more elaborate view that the fetus is not a person until it hits a certain developmental stage, either sometime during pregnancy or sometime after birth. The idea of a medical classification of a "person" may hold relevance to libertarians who are both Pro-life and Pro-choice depending on the particular viewpoint.

Because arguments based on medical viewpoints are often inconsistent (the same medical facts are often deliberately used to argue incompatible and oppossing political viewpoints), they are often considered by libertarians to be compromises between the two viewpoints. Whether or not medical arguments are important to libertarians on this issue may largely be based on their general worldview and the priority they hold for abortion as a general social iniative, as it varies on an individual basis it is not considered as important to the libertarian abortion viewpoints as the rights debate and legal concerns may be.

The effects of abortion on society are often a prominent feature in arguments supporting or disapproving of abortion legality. These views vary depending on their origin, however common topics include emotional appeal for victims of rape and incest who would be forced to term a full pregnancy if abortion was made illegal, and the impact of abortion on crime rates and other social factors. Likewise Pro-life supporters may suppliment these social concerns with moral arguments revolving around the effect of casual abortions on fidelity, and sanctity of life.

Social viewpoints on this topic, like medical viewpoints, tend to vary greatly from person to person. However, few libertarians support or disapprove of abortion legalization solely on account of social effects of the practice.

Many libertarians see the controversial issue of abortion as a legitimate topic for discussion but not a top political issue. As such, many libertarians may criticize abortion advocates on both sides for using the topic to support special interests. The United States currently has no known movements supporting widespread forced abortions or a government-mandated eugenics programs, which both sides of the debate often use as parts of their arguments, as such many people are disaffected to the topic from the irrelevance of these standpoints.

Regardless of the view in terms of legalizing or prohibiting abortion practices, libertarians generally adopt a stance that the government should do whatever is minimally required to address this issue, and that its rulings should not require additional bureaucracies or taxation. That means no expansion of programs to accomodate whatever legislative initiative that is taken, and no additional laws besides those required to resolve this issue. Libertarian platforms and legislative proposals should reflect this basic principle.

[edit] Roe vs. Wade

The ruling in the Supreme Court case of Roe vs. Wade effectively negates state laws that might prohibit or regulate abortion. While state's rights libertarians see this as an infringement on the right of states to make those decisions for themselves, most libertarians consider it a low priority to have the ruling overturned.

The libertarian stance on abortion is divided, with the general favor being on a legalization stance. Whether for or against legalized abortion, libertarians do not want abortion used as an excuse for expanded legislation, regulation or coercive taxation.

The issues addressed in this article address topics of general reform of legislative policy, and as such are considered a part of SECTION 1: "CORE MEASURES".