Is Abortion Murder?

[WillJ]

My main point is really to focus on the rhetoric and the use of the term murder. I agree that abortion is killing something. I agree that that something whether a fetus, or a zygote or a blastocyst is human in the same way that one of my hairs is a human hair rather than a cat hair. I agree that this something is morally different than a hair in that left to its own devices it has a reasonable, although surprisingly low (especially in older women), chance of developing into a baby. I agree that you can oppose abortion on moral grounds be they religious or based on some other philosophical premise. I agree that you can seek to have the government prohibit abortion through political means if you oppose it for whatever reason. However, I don't think is that it is fair, accurate or logical to use the term murder. This is a rhetorical tool to put the other side in the position of arguing in favor of something heinous. I also think that the actions of the pro-life community belie the fact that they do not believe abortion is murder in the same way as killing a 10-year-old is murder. I mean really if your country was randomly killing hundreds of thousands of 10-year-olds every year for 32 years would the only action that you take be to petition government for change and maybe protest a bit? Seems to me obvious that those who say it is murder even if sincere do not believe it is the same as killing a fully formed human being. We need a new word (well not really we could just continue to call it abortion). I also think the use of the term murder is irresponsible and that it incites some unstable people to violence.

I quite agree.

 

[Akka]

1. Your wife is not a murderer, she is an accessory to a murder, the muderers are the ones who administer the abortion.

Well, she's the murder's contractor, at least. In most place, it's viewed as the same as a murder.

Anyway, it's been proved time and time again that what makes someone a PERSON is the mind, that the mind can't exist without a brain, and that an embryo has no brain (and a fetus only develop it in a complex enough way after quite a while).

As such, early abortion can't be a murder, and so far the only persons arguing the opposite do it out of religious blind belief, so it gives quite a good idea of the validity of the opinion.

 

[Masquerouge]

My main point is really to focus on the rhetoric and the use of the term murder.
----
However, I don't think is that it is fair, accurate or logical to use the term murder. This is a rhetorical tool to put the other side in the position of arguing in favor of something heinous. I also think that the actions of the pro-life community belie the fact that they do not believe abortion is murder in the same way as killing a 10-year-old is murder. I mean really if your country was randomly killing hundreds of thousands of 10-year-olds every year for 32 years would the only action that you take be to petition government for change and maybe protest a bit? Seems to me obvious that those who say it is murder even if sincere do not believe it is the same as killing a fully formed human being. We need a new word (well not really we could just continue to call it abortion). I also think the use of the term murder is irresponsible and that it incites some unstable people to violence.

My views exactly !

 

[samildanach]

Seems to me obvious that those who say it is murder even if sincere do not believe it is the same as killing a fully formed human being. We need a new word (well not really we could just continue to call it abortion).

No. It is murder.

In fact, I view abortion as more terrible than the murder of free living humans as there may be mitigating circumstances for murdering free living humans. Such as them being scum bags etc.

IMO abortion is the worst crime that a human being is capable of committing.

 

[GenMarshall]

I consider abortion of human fetuses a murder.

 

[Mark1031]

No. It is murder.

In fact, I view abortion as more terrible than the murder of free living humans as there may be mitigating circumstances for murdering free living humans. Such as them being scum bags etc.

IMO abortion is the worst crime that a human being is capable of committing.

It is quite widespread. What actions do you feel one should take to stop this mass murder?

 

[samildanach]

It is quite widespread. What actions do you feel one should take to stop this mass murder?

Nothing.

Apart from what I do already. Which is to take a very dim view of any female who has had one. Anybody who slaughters another human being just because they are an inconvience is utterly worthless IMO.

I like people with character. If a female has had an abortion it tells me she has no character and I like to know who can and cannot be trusted. Overall I'm just about in favour of keeping abortion legal so long as the information on those who have had them is available. Free will...and all that.

 

[Lozzy_Ozzy]

I oppose every form of physical or mental pain/killing, towards any living thing, and all none living things.

But I DON'T oppose abortion as the mother will generally have a good reason, and that reason would generally be as not having tha abortion would cause great suffering either in long term and/or short term.

 

[Mark1031]

You don't see a logical inconsistency in

IMO abortion is the worst crime that a human being is capable of committing.

What actions do you feel one should take to stop this mass murder?

Nothing

What actions do you feel one should take to stop people who murder 10-yr olds? Even a pacifist would not say nothing should be done to stop a world wide wave of "the worst crime that a human being is capable of committing."

You really help me make my point that the rhetoric does not match the actions and is thus likely highly overblown.

 

[Masquerouge]

I consider abortion of human fetuses a murder.

Then you support the death penalty for those who commit abortion, I guess ?
That's the penalty for cold-blooded, planned murder.

 

[Gelion]

Oups I was meant to vote "no". No abortion is not murder as "life begins when a baby first inhales"....

 

[samildanach]

You don't see a logical inconsistency in

I see why you are confused.

What actions do you feel one should take to stop people who murder 10-yr olds? Even a pacifist would not say nothing should be done to stop a world wide wave of "the worst crime that a human being is capable of committing."

You really help me make my point that the rhetoric does not match the actions and is thus likely highly overblown.

As someone who is not against killing, if I have a good reason, I am aware that some would label me a murderer if I took action. And it wouldn't bother me if people did view me as a murderer. Likewise the people who have abortions feel they have good reasons for committing the crime. I don't agree with those reasons. And I don't see why they should feel aggrieved at being labelled murderers by a part of society who don't agree with abortion.

In the same way that soldiers get labelled and expect to be labelled as murderers by liberals it is purely a matter of perspective. The liberals don't try and lock soldiers up after they have gone to war but they do give soldiers a hard time. Why should females who have abortions expect to not be labelled and given a hard time by conservatives?

War may be a good thing for society, it may be a bad thing. Some people view war as a crime regardless of the circumstances. Same with abortion.

 

[Mark1031]

In the same way that soldiers get labelled and expect to be labelled as murderers by liberals it is purely a matter of perspective.

So your justification for theoverblown abortion rhetoric is to cite another example of overblown rhetoric. You can find someone who has said or will say anything--it proves or justifies nothing.

You did not answer the basic question I asked. Everyone agrees killing 10 yr olds is murder. In your view a less bad case of murder than abortion. So what would you do to stop the government sanctioned murder of millions of 10 yr olds? If your answer is anything more significant than nothing then it is not logically consistent with your previous statements.

 

[A'AbarachAmadan]

I can't answer the poll because my definition comes at a different time than stated. I have no problem killing a zygote; however, I have a problem with the murder of a sentient fetus, which occurs well before the end of the second trimester.

 

[Ciceronian]

When does a foetus become a human being? After it is too large to be aborted? As soon as its head is visible at birth? Or as soon as it inhales? What magical transformation occurs that suddenly makes it a human being and no longer a worthless heap of cells?

Clearly, such arbitrary definitions are rubbish. If we want to state when a human being's existence begins, it must be when the sperm and egg form a cell. This is the clear-cut point in time when the human first exists. And killing a human is murder. Therefore abortion is murder.

You may argue that you are pro-choice and want to give the woman a choice whether she aborts her child or not. But do you care for the opionion of the child? Why not give it a choice? It deserves one just as much as anybody else.

 

[samildanach]

So your justification for theoverblown abortion rhetoric is to cite another example of overblown rhetoric. You can find someone who has said or will say anything--it proves or justifies nothing.

You did not answer the basic question I asked. Everyone agrees killing 10 yr olds is murder. In your view a less bad case of murder than abortion. So what would you do to stop the government sanctioned murder of millions of 10 yr olds? If your answer is anything more significant than nothing then it is not logically consistent with your previous statements.

You were the one who mentioned pacifism. I merely answered your question by incorporating your example into my answer

Murdering 10 year olds is bad, as is murdering the unborn. One is illegal and one is legal. What do you want WWIII? People aren't always going to agree with me. I've accepted it. You should try to learn this to. If the majority of society is in favour of abortion, then they are in favour of it. But IMO females who have abortions are murderers. And my opinion isn't going to change because you say it should.

As I said the only thing I'm doing about abortion is saying that I dissapprove of it. I'm not going to kill someone or blow up government buildings because of it. Those sort of activites I reserve for attacks on society from external forces.

My hope is in the act of dissapproving abortion becomes less socially acceptable. It might not be a very dynamic and wide ranging strategy but it might have some effect.

 

[Perfection]

Murder is the denial of future life, so yes- abortion is murder.

I'm not having unprotected sex right now when there are clearly plenty of unfertilized human eggs out there, that's future denying life!

I'm a murder!

 

[Sickman]

Some people seem to forget the "lawful excuse"-argument.
Even though the fertilized egg would be considered as human being it isn't murder if we find lawful excuse for it. Or I would use the term "lawful reason".

Just like in wartime we don't give the another person choice. Our society decides that we are in war and it's time to have lawful excuse to kill certain people. Same goes to many other things. Including capitol punishment.

My lawful excuse is that even though I consider fetus, or whatever to be human being, it isn't real person. So even though we eradict it, calling it to be same as killing ten year old is scretching someone's imagination beyond all limits.

Banning abortion will only lead to results that people will kill their babies when they are about to be born or are already born.

Of course we can go all the way and ban everything that even slightly reminds of killing. Then we can stop wars and such because it's against our basic principle.
I can see in the future that women that don't get then some medicine that safes fertilized eggs from dying naturally are accused from neglecting their "child". Where does this stop, I ask?

By your logic samildanach, if killing 10 year olds for whatever reason would be legal and making abortions illegal, you wouldn't still do nothing about it? Sounds little bit strange...

But hey, everything for patriarchal society and it's thousands of years of old "laws". Fill the earth with your children whatever suffering they might face is more right than giving them the easy exit from it.

What a freaking beautiful and sick world this is.

 

[Nobody]

Would you eat a fetus?

maori custom is to eat the after birth.
............................................................
It isnt muder, because it is apart of the women, just like a organ or peice of fat. its like liposucation. I am not a big fan of it because although its not murder i dont know how much feeling the baby has and it seems cruel. ALso its awaste of human. A freind of mine had one and she is ok, but it obviously hurts the person who has it (mentall). But she was 15 and her baby daddy ran away her life would of been ruined as well.

 

[Akka]

When does a foetus become a human being? After it is too large to be aborted? As soon as its head is visible at birth? Or as soon as it inhales? What magical transformation occurs that suddenly makes it a human being and no longer a worthless heap of cells?

Clearly, such arbitrary definitions are rubbish. If we want to state when a human being's existence begins, it must be when the sperm and egg form a cell. This is the clear-cut point in time when the human first exists. And killing a human is murder. Therefore abortion is murder.

You may argue that you are pro-choice and want to give the woman a choice whether she aborts her child or not. But do you care for the opionion of the child? Why not give it a choice? It deserves one just as much as anybody else.

Actually, this point has been discussed and I even showed the reasoning in my answer but, as usual, pro-lifer prefer to "forget" or "accidentally skip" anything that prove their beliefs wrong