Should we allow Infanticide?

[Tecknojock]

Ghostwriter, do you believe capital punishment is acceptable for soliciting the services of a a murderer or just for murder? If the latter, it doesn't really follow that it is just for a woman to die in a back alley abortion because she wouldnt be the one performing the murder and even if the woman died, the actual murderer would go unpunished (unless he gets caught I suppose)

 

[GhostWriter16]

Yes I do think soliciting a murder should be a capital crime, however the abortion doctor should die as well (In a world with GhostWriter's preferred laws already on the books.)

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Yes I do think soliciting a murder should be a capital crime, however the abortion doctor should die as well (In a world with GhostWriter's preferred laws already on the books.)

Would you prefer laws to be based on religious believes?

 

[Traitorfish]

Yes I do think soliciting a murder should be a capital crime, however the abortion doctor should die as well (In a world with GhostWriter's preferred laws already on the books.)

You think that the entire Department of Defence should be put to death?

 

[civ_king]

You think that the entire Department of Defence should be put to death?

A legally sanctioned killing by the government can't be murder as murder requires it to be illegal.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

A legally sanctioned killing by the government can't be murder as murder requires it to be illegal.

"In a world with GhostWriter's preferred laws already on the books."

 

[Traitorfish]

A legally sanctioned killing by the government can't be murder as murder requires it to be illegal.

So abortion isn't murder if it's legal?

 

[useless]

So there for Abortion is not murder

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

In a legal sense. There are definitions of murder that can, and will be for emotional impact rather than furthering the debate, be used which are outside of the legal sphere. (pre-empting the excuse. It's almost as if I've been here before)

But I admit it's fun to observe the double standard.

 

[Traitorfish]

But at the very least, anyone who describes abortion as "murder" should also describe the killing of civilians and, indeed, conscripted soldiers in war as "murder". You can come up with this or that justification for why it's necessary murder, perhaps- it's always fun to watch these people take a half-considered utilitarianism and a half-considered deontology and ram them together at full speed- but it should still be, in the strictest sense, "murder".

 

[GhostWriter16]

You think that the entire Department of Defence should be put to death?

A legally sanctioned killing by the government can't be murder as murder requires it to be illegal.

"In a world with GhostWriter's preferred laws already on the books."

So abortion isn't murder if it's legal?

So there for Abortion is not murder

In a legal sense. There are definitions of murder that can, and will be for emotional impact rather than furthering the debate, be used which are outside of the legal sphere. (pre-empting the excuse. It's almost as if I've been here before)

But I admit it's fun to observe the double standard.

But at the very least, anyone who describes abortion as "murder" should also describe the killing of civilians and, indeed, conscripted soldiers in war as "murder". You can come up with this or that justification for why it's necessary murder, perhaps- it's always fun to watch these people take a half-considered utilitarianism and a half-considered deontology and ram them together at full speed- but it should still be, in the strictest sense, "murder".

I acknowledge the existance of other definitions of murder, but when I use the term, I mean a totally unjustifiable murder. I don't care if its legal or not. If its justified, its not murder. If its war, the soldiers aren't committing murder since they are being ordered to do it, but the government could be depending on the war (Usually not though.) If a killing is partially justified, its probably something else, such as manslaughter or criminally negligent homicide, not murder outright.

Now I acknowledge that an alternate definition of murder goes strictly by the law. By that standard, abortion can't be murder unless its illegal (I've talked to Civ_King and he actually uses that definition there too, he says abortion is "Slaughter of the unborn" but not actually murder.) And yet another alternate definition of murder applies any and all killing, regardless of reason, "Murder." (That's when "Justifiable murder" is often used and I don't like that definition.) Some people say any individual killing is murder, but don't apply it to the state (Too inconstant for my tastes.) One can even say a killing has to be both illegal AND unjustifiable to be murder. There's a lot of possible definitions out there. Unless I say otherwise, I'm using the one I first described.

 

[Traitorfish]

So I was right about smashing together deontology and utilitarianism, eh?

 

[holy king]

the lovely thing about utilitarianism is that nobody will ever agree on what the greatest possible happiness is.
you can basically use it to justify or condemn any given action at will.

 

[Patroklos]

You've constantly implied that i am okay with murder,

I didn't imply you were okay with murder. I quoted you saying you were okay with other people committing murder.

yet when called out on it you claim that you are "pro-choice" (which i do not believe for one second).

Your permissivness to others murdering children is of no relevance to my position on abortion.

As I have said many times, in many threads, I think abortions should be allowed for within the first trimester because all the scientific evidence points to a person developing sometime in the second trimester.

Want to know what I consider a person? Someone that has left the goddamn confines of a woman's body. Is that an "extreme" position?

Yes, it is.

It also doesn't explain your two week restriction. If it is not a person to you until it leaves the women's body, and you have been waxing on and on about the primacy of a women's right to her body and every other convoluted rationalization under the sun, how do you justify violating that women's right to abort a non person within those two weeks.

What is your qualitative metric you are using to elevate that entity within those two weeks to a position that NOW its okay to violate those rights of the women you pretend to hold so dear?

Oh and an abortion around 1-2 weeks before birth is actually pretty dangerous, so it would only occur in the circumstances in which an abortion is needed to save the mothers life.

Again, you position makes no sense. If it is just a nondescript grouping of cells with no personhood attached, how can you justify not allowing the women to get rid of it inside those two weeks?

But I didn't realise that trying to save an actual person "extreme".

The life of whom? The mother or the child?

The problem is that you are not being honest with the examinations of your own position. You obviously do think the child is a person within those two weeks, that is the only justification you can possibly have for not allowing unrestricted abortion in that timeframe that makes any sense. You just don't want to say it.

 

[Mr. Dictator]

Throw me in the "totally cool with abortion, not infanticide" camp.

There's too many people in the world, there's probably no god, and it's not my business.

 

[GhostWriter16]

Throw me in the "totally cool with abortion, not infanticide" camp.

There's too many people in the world, there's probably no god, and it's not my business.

How do you feel about Useless' position that abortion is OK well into the third trimester?

 

[Mr. Dictator]

How do you feel about Useless' position that abortion is OK well into the third trimester?

If that's his opinion, cool.

 

[GhostWriter16]

If that's his opinion, cool.

Do you agree with it? Or do you draw the line earlier than that?

For the record, by "Well into the third trimester" Useless means "A week before birth."

 

[Patroklos]

What is your opinion about abortion two weeks from birth or even inside that window?

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

I've talked to Civ_King and he actually uses that definition there too, he says abortion is "Slaughter of the unborn" but not actually murder.

The issue is the use of as colourful wording as possible for emotional impact only. You can easily call it killing and it will still mean the same, but murder sounds so much sexier. Slaughter of the unborn is even more horror-move-title-esque. It's not helping the discussion and it's not catchy enough. You need to get some alliteration going. Go the full Monty. Genome Genocide or Baby Butchering.