Roe vs Wade benefits everybody

Murder is a legal term, and abortion does not qualify where it is legal.

Murder is illegal,
abortion is legal,
therefore, abortion is not murder.

If you disagree with this logic... you are simply wrong.
(Or you're using some other definition of murder that nobody else is obligated to respect.)
One human who purposely kills another human is an act of murder.
 
The goal of abortion is to end a pregnancy, not to kill an unborn child.
It's just that the latter is an inexorable (at the moment) consequence of the former.

Were there some alternative - transplanting the unwanted pregnancy into a willing woman, or an artificial womb, or something - sign me up right now.
Are you suggesting the dead baby is just collateral damage? Don't want to get pregnant, protect yourself or refrain from sex. This is not rocket science.

Why do we need an alternative when the causes are so clear? Adoption is answer to unwanted children.
 
Are you suggesting the dead baby is just collateral damage?
Precisely - I have trouble imagining how small a percentage of women seeking abortions do so with the intent of "punishing" the pregnancy.
Don't want to get pregnant, protect yourself or refrain from sex. This is not rocket science.
Then you are also not opposed to abortions where contraception was used, but failed?
Why do we need an alternative when the causes are so clear? Adoption is answer to unwanted children.
Adoption does not solve the problem - the woman still has to carry the baby to term, which is exactly what the abortion is done to prevent.
 
Rape is a terrible thing. But that doesn't mean the baby should get the death penalty. No sin on the part of the child. No blame is attached to the baby. Adoption is the answer.
So you are in favour of using the law to force a rape victim to carry her rapist's baby to term.

As abominable as you find abortion, I find ^this.
 
Murder is a legal term, and abortion does not qualify where it is legal.

Murder is illegal,
abortion is legal,
therefore, abortion is not murder.

If you disagree with this logic... you are simply wrong.
(Or you're using some other definition of murder that nobody else is obligated to respect.)
Murder is murder. You avoid the truth, avoid the word baby, and choose not to accept the truth of babies being torn limb from limb. That's inhumane and morally reprehensible.

This is the face of abortion:

 
Murder is a legal term, and abortion does not qualify where it is legal.

Murder is illegal,
abortion is legal,
therefore, abortion is not murder.

If you disagree with this logic... you are simply wrong.
(Or you're using some other definition of murder that nobody else is obligated to respect.)
Surely you don't respect this:
I don't think there should be - why should my taxes raise your child?

Only those that can afford children off their own back should be having them, IMO - the rich get poorer, and the poor get richer!
On this we agree. There is no evidence that a school can provide a better environment than a good home.
 
Execution, war, self-defence, assisted dying are all not considered various parts of the world.
Yes, we live in a fallen world. I just want to be counted as one who abhors most of these. But in this case, you are trying to minimize the horror of abortion by classifying them as just part of the evil of the world. Truth is, it's evil.
 
Murder is a legal term, and abortion does not qualify where it is legal.

Murder is illegal,
abortion is legal,
therefore, abortion is not murder.

If you disagree with this logic... you are simply wrong.
(Or you're using some other definition of murder that nobody else is obligated to respect.)
Done that and no. Gave the definition, murder is the illegal pre meditated killing of another human being. In some countries therefore abortion fits the definition of murder; all we need is for the law in your country to be changed.
 
The goal of abortion is to end a pregnancy, not to kill an unborn child.
It's just that the latter is an inexorable (at the moment) consequence of the former.

Were there some alternative - transplanting the unwanted pregnancy into a willing woman, or an artificial womb, or something - sign me up right now.
The goal of an abortion for some doesnt change what it is. In abortion the offspring is killed whether you like to admit it or not.
One can say the goal of abortion is to end a pregnancy but one can also say it is killing an unborn child. Both statements are valid. You are deceiving yourself by denying one of them.
 
Murder is murder.
Please define murder.
The law - and I - define it as "the unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another."

In order to be considered murder, a thing must be illegal, and abortion does not qualify, so your definition of murder must not be the same - what is it?
You avoid the truth, avoid the word baby, and choose not to accept the truth of babies being torn limb from limb.
I'll use zygote, embryo, foetus, baby, whatever term applies the state of the pregnancy at that time.
That's inhumane and morally reprehensible.
In your opinion.
In mine, it is inhumane and morally reprehensible to use the law to force a woman to carry to term.
 
Yes, we live in a fallen world. I just want to be counted as one who abhors most of these. But in this case, you are trying to minimize the horror of abortion by classifying them as just part of the evil of the world. Truth is, it's evil.
You miss the point - you said that all premeditated killing is murder, and I gave four legal - and, therefore, not murder - examples.

If you define murder merely as any premeditated killing... well, good for you. The law - which is what actually matters when it comes to punishment - doesn't care.
And neither do I.

A horse has four legs, even if some call a tail, a leg.
 
Back
Top