It's a movement.

[BMS]

I quite agree. However, some people have no argument at all, just gut-think and emotional claptrap. Only by clinging to tropes about murdering babies can they keep their failed ideology going. It's a shame really, since there are real arguments and discussions to be had around the subject, but so quickly they degenerate into this mindless semantic morass.

So what are the meanings of the words you are using and how does the common bit apply?

 

[mikeT]

There's really no point getting hung up on semantics. The purpose of language is to provide a common means of communicating and receiving ideas. When they don't do that, just use another word.

The problem is similar to the one in your shell game thread: we're not dealing with people interested in using language correctly. They only pretend to be using it to communicate. The reality is that they're trying to communicate by feelings, not words. Words can convey feelings, and if there's ever a situation in which a series of words literally means one thing but evokes a feeling which conflicts with the meaning, you can guarantee that they're going the emotional route rather than the linguistic one.

It's very much a semantic shell game.

 

[BMS]

If some people use the opposite meaning of a word to others,, then communication will break down.

 

[romishpopishorganist]

Slavery is not a legal term - slavery can be legal or illegal.

Murder is a legal term - it is illegal by definition.

Again, what does this have to do with anything?

How many legs would a dog have if we define the tale as a leg?

You would answer "Why 5 of course!"

I would answer "4. A dog has 4 legs and one tale whether we call the tale a leg or not."

 

[romishpopishorganist]

I've explained it till I'm blue in the face - the prospect of forcing an already-pregnant woman to carry to term is morally worse than allowing her to abort it.

Why is forcing an already pregnant women to carry to term morally worse than allowing her to murder her unborn child?

It's not an argument. It's a FACT.

No, it is an OPINION.

We are not arguing that abortion is OK because it's legal; we are arguing that it should be legal because it's OK.

YOU may be arguing that. Your other cohort is NOT. Your other cohort is a moral relativist. That poster believes that moral actions have no objective meaning.

That person's argument is basically "Abortion is right because most in society have decided that it should be legal. If most in society changed their minds, then it would be wrong."

But at least we are getting some where.

Why do you think the slaughter of innocent unborn people is OK?

 

[Eightcrackers]

Again, what does this have to do with anything?

How many legs would a dog have if we define the tale as a leg?

You would answer "Why 5 of course!"

I would answer "4. A dog has 4 legs and one tale whether we call the tale a leg or not."

And abortion is not murder if it's legal, whether you call it murder, or not.

Thanks for the helpful analogy.

 

[Eightcrackers]

Why is forcing an already pregnant women to carry to term morally worse than allowing her to murder her unborn child?

That's my opinion.

No, it is an OPINION.

It is not an opinion that legal abortion is not murder.
It is a fact.

"Legal murder" is the same as "married bachelor".

That poster believes that moral actions have no objective meaning.

So do I - as far as anybody has been able to prove, morality exists in the mind of moral agents, and nowhere else.

As soon as somebody makes a purely logical argument for the morality/immorality of any act, I will change my mind.

Why do you think the slaughter of innocent unborn people is OK?

Strawman, and loaded question.

I think that abortion is OK because I am of the opinion that a pregnant woman should not have to continue to be pregnant, if she doesn't want to.

 

[BMS]

Which may be the point. When you're losing the game, flip the table

Its already flipped as soon as the words dont have common meaning

 

[romishpopishorganist]

"Legal murder" is the same as "married bachelor."

No it isn't. A "married bachelor" is an oxymoron. "Legal murder" is what happens in an abortion. That is not an oxymoron, that is what an abortion is.

Your logic here seems to be "No one would ever legalize murder. If abortion was murder, then abortion would be illegal. Abortion is legal, therefore abortion isn't murder." I am here to tell you--it does not work that way. A things being legal or illegal has no bearing on what it actually is.

So do I - as far as anybody has been able to prove, morality exists in the mind of moral agents, and nowhere else.

Except when the moral relativist says so. Theft isn't immoral--until you steal from the moral relativist.

Strawman, and loaded question.

I think that abortion is OK because I am of the opinion that a pregnant woman should not have to continue to be pregnant, if she doesn't want to.

And I am of the "opinion" that a woman who did not want to be pregnant, or was uncertain about a pregnancy should not have chosen to get pregnant in the first place.

If the woman made a responsible "choice" she would not have gotten pregnant in the first place.

There should be no reason for an abortion when no one is demanding that women get pregnant.

 

[romishpopishorganist]

And abortion is not murder if it's legal, whether you call it murder, or not.

Thanks for the helpful analogy.

No, abortion is murder whether you call it murder or not, and whether it is legal or not.

What is legal vs. illegal just tells us what actions are or are not against the law--it tells us nothing about the ontology of the action itself.

This is sort of like "Science." Science cannot tell us about the NATURE of things, it can only tell us about how things interact, what laws govern the goings on in our universe, etc. The law is to behavior what Science is to nature.

 

[Eightcrackers]

No it isn't. A "married bachelor" is an oxymoron.

So is "legal murder".

"Legal murder" is what happens in an abortion.

"Legal murder" never happens at all.

Your logic here seems to be "No one would ever legalize murder.

No; it's "nobody would ever legalize murder".
Because, the moment it becomes legal, it ceases to be murder.

The way, once a man gets married, he ceases to be a bachelor.

And I am of the "opinion" that a woman who did not want to be pregnant, or was uncertain about a pregnancy should not have chosen to get pregnant in the first place.

I am of that opinion as well.

If the woman made a responsible "choice" she would not have gotten pregnant in the first place.

Again, agreed.

There should be no reason for an abortion when no one is demanding that women get pregnant.

Three out of three.

But we don't live in Shouldland.

 

[Eightcrackers]

No, abortion is murder whether you call it murder or not, and whether it is legal or not.

You are arguing with the dictionary, not with me.

What is legal vs. illegal just tells us what actions are or are not against the law--it tells us nothing about the ontology of the action itself.

Murder is a legal term, not an ontological one.

The one you're looking for is "unjustified killing".

The law is to behavior what Science is to nature.

Murder is not a behaviour.
It is the legal interpretation of a behaviour.

 

[romishpopishorganist]

So is "legal murder".

No, legal murder is what happens in an abortion.

"Legal murder" never happens at all.

What is an abortion if not that, in your mind? Just a medical procedure?

No; it's "nobody would ever legalize murder." Because, the moment it becomes legal, it ceases to be murder.

No it doesn't--any more than calling a dog's tale a leg means the tail ceases to be a tail and becomes a leg.

The way, once a man gets married, he ceases to be a bachelor.

Right; because there is no such thing as a married bachelor--even if the law said there was.

But we don't live in Should land.

Agreed--and if we weren't dealing with a human life growing inside of a woman, I wouldn't care about abortion. No one would.

 

[Eightcrackers]

What is an abortion if not that, in your mind? Just a medical procedure?

A justified killing.

No, legal murder is what happens in an abortion.

Nobody cares how you define murder.

 

[BMS]

You are arguing with the dictionary, not with me.

Murder is a legal term, not an ontological one.

The one you're looking for is "unjustified killing".

Murder is not a behaviour.
It is the legal interpretation of a behaviour.

No. That has been explained. According to the dictionary it is murder when its illegal. It is you who is arguing with the dictionary. Unless of course you have a different meaning to the words you are using