[nonethewiser]

> "The government has no right to legislate that a woman cannot have an abortion - women should control their own bodies." - Libertarian Left

This classification depends on the aborted NOT being a person. If it’s a person then the libertarian position would be anti abortion because an abortion would maximally harm the individual liberty of that person.

I think a clearer example of lib/left is gay marriage or drug legalization.

[human_person]

This is incorrect. Even if the fetus is a person, it has a right to individual liberty. It doesn’t have a right to another person’s body. If it can’t survive without someone else’s organs it’s right to survival doesn’t out weigh the hosts right to bodily autonomy. An easy comparison is organ donation. We don’t require organ donation from corpses (much less demand organs from living people who have a ‘spare’) even though a lack of available organs does limit the life/liberty of people who need them. The uterus is no different than a kidney. You don’t have the right to demand to use someone else’s organs even if your life depends on them.

[nonethewiser]

>It doesn’t have a right to another person’s body.

It has a right to its body and 99.9% of the time its presence is due to the mothers decision making.

[endominus]

Just as people pointed out that my misinformation line was also said by AuthLeft, gay marriage and drug legalization are both supported by LibRight (under the reasoning of government minimization). But that just speaks to the problem; the political compass tries to map stances to political groups that often believe things arbitrarily, rather than grounding their positions on peoples' perspectives and framework for understanding the world. That's why I like the other political compass I linked in the sibling thread; it's based more on a person's understanding of the world rather than tribal allegiance.