And despite my instincts, I'll take the time to explain:

You are showing violations of individual rights as though the violations somehow trump the concept.

Civil rights often trump natural rights in American society. Restaurant owners aren't allowed to engage in racial discrimination, for example.

Because a law exists in America does not make it consistent with individual rights. In point of fact, if someone owned his own restaurant, he should be allowed to refuse service to any damn person he wants. It's his restaurant. If he's stupid enough to not let black people in there, fine with me. Damn straight he wouldn't find me coming into his restaurant either, and I suspect I'm far from the only one. I visualize picket signs...

Meanwhile, the guy down the road who's less looney and likes money no matter who's carrying it, picks up all the business. The market at work.

This is an extreme example, but once the government has established that it can tell you how to run your business, it never ends.

If George Bush wants to build a ballpark on your property, he can have it condemned, pay you off and take it, his civil rights trumping your natural right to property.

That doesn't make this action consistent with individual rights either. You might have noticed that modern America is a bit tough on property rights.

And there are people (mostly religious nuts) who believe the unborn conceptus is a human being whose natural right to life demands violating the natural rights of the woman carrying it.

Wide variety of opinions on this. A libertarian would be pro-choice. Ayn Rand was vehemently pro-choice. Conservatives feel differently. I am against abortion, unsure about whether it should be a legal issue, and dead sure my tax money shouldn't be paying for it. But I believe that the legality should be handled at the state level, tops. It is not and should never have been a Federal issue.