Political Crossfire Forums

straw man · Joined: 19 Apr 2006 Posts: 2948

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Can you people please READ the thread before going around in circles? We've been over this.

abortion can be called murder ONLY if it is illegal, or cruel and barbaric, and only if it's cruel and barbaric when you're not in a court of law (or otherwise in a legal context).

There is both a legal definition and a casual definion, but nothing that makes ALL killing "murder".

And I thought we had this wrapped up in a nice neat package. I guess not.

Selfish_Meme · Joined: 31 Jan 2006 Posts: 726

just making sure we are all on the same page on the definitions of murder.

straw man · Joined: 19 Apr 2006 Posts: 2948

Actually it wasn't directed at you but the other poster who said it was murder because it's killing. You were in the right to clarify.

I shouldn't care so much, but for some reason it's a big pet peeve of mine when people don't actually READ the thread before they post in it. It makes me feel like our effort in getting this clarified and resolved was just one big waste of time.

agentkgb · Joined: 23 Aug 2006 Posts: 2241 Location: US

Hypocritical_Hypocrisy wrote: Of course, abortion is depriving a baby of life. Thus, it is killing. And killing = murder.
If that was to me, I didn't use any of those words, I said "death," which is pretty vague. I'm a vegetarian so I see it differently, but if you kill a cow I see that as a death too. I was trying to avoid classifying a fetus as a life/non-life in that post by saying death instead of something else.

Prog · Joined: 10 Mar 2005 Posts: 2243

straw man wrote: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Can you people please READ the thread before going around in circles? We've been over this.

abortion can be called murder ONLY if it is illegal, or cruel and barbaric, and only if it's cruel and barbaric when you're not in a court of law (or otherwise in a legal context).

There is both a legal definition and a casual definion, but nothing that makes ALL killing "murder".

And I thought we had this wrapped up in a nice neat package. I guess not.

Objectively qualify "cruel and barbarism"? (In regard to abortion.)
You can't as these are simply your opinions towards abortion.

straw man · Joined: 19 Apr 2006 Posts: 2948

Peace of cake. If it causes the fetus pain then it's cruel. Nothing subjective about that.

Prog · Joined: 10 Mar 2005 Posts: 2243

straw man wrote: Peace of cake. If it causes the fetus pain then it's cruel. Nothing subjective about that.

So, early term abortions (where pain is not applicable) are acceptable to you via this qualification?

Lumina · Joined: 16 Mar 2006 Posts: 14998

straw man wrote: Peace of cake. If it causes the fetus pain then it's cruel. Nothing subjective about that.

I'd say that if it deprives a human being of the right to "LIFE, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness," that's enough. And almost assuredly, if not aborted, a pre-born baby will continue to grow until its gestation is complete.

Prog · Joined: 10 Mar 2005 Posts: 2243

Lumina wrote: straw man wrote: Peace of cake. If it causes the fetus pain then it's cruel. Nothing subjective about that.

I'd say that if it deprives a human being of the right to "LIFE, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness," that's enough.

Well, Lumina. The debate IS whether a fetus has any rights to LIFE, liberty....etc. or not. The proclaim this as 'cruel' seems a tad subjective.

Lumina wrote: And almost assuredly, if not aborted, a pre-born baby will continue to grow until its gestation is complete.

Yes. Why the digression from the issue of abortion?

straw man · Joined: 19 Apr 2006 Posts: 2948

Prog wrote: Well, Lumina. The debate IS whether a fetus has any rights to LIFE, liberty....etc. or not. The proclaim this as 'cruel' seems a tad subjective.

You're right. As I clarified, to be "cruel" it causes the fetus pain. That is the objective way to know if it's murder or not. You can asign other values to cruel suchas deprivation of the chance to live is "cruel" but those are all subjective.

straw man · Joined: 19 Apr 2006 Posts: 2948

Prog wrote: straw man wrote: Peace of cake. If it causes the fetus pain then it's cruel. Nothing subjective about that.

So, early term abortions (where pain is not applicable) are acceptable to you via this qualification?

Absolutely unacceptable. The qualification is for whether it is "murder" not whether it's acceptable or not. It wouldn't be called "murder", but certainly is not acceptable nonetheless.

Prog · Joined: 10 Mar 2005 Posts: 2243

straw man wrote: Prog wrote: straw man wrote: Peace of cake. If it causes the fetus pain then it's cruel. Nothing subjective about that.

So, early term abortions (where pain is not applicable) are acceptable to you via this qualification?

Absolutely unacceptable. The qualification is for whether it is "murder" not whether it's acceptable or not. It wouldn't be called "murder", but certainly is not acceptable nonetheless.

Absolutely unacceptable, on what grounds? You claimed it was unacceptable because it was murder, now early-term abortions are not considered murder by you, yet still unacceptable. Once again, is this your opinion masquerading as an absolute?

straw man · Joined: 19 Apr 2006 Posts: 2948

Prog wrote: You claimed it was unacceptable because it was murder...

I claimed no such thing.

Prog wrote: ...now early-term abortions are not considered murder by you, yet still unacceptable. Once again, is this your opinion masquerading as an absolute?

It is an ABSOLUTE FACT that TO ME early term abortions are unacceptable.

OF COURSE that's my opinion. It is an absolute that I hold this opinion. I was responding to your question, which was, and I quote:

"So, early term abortions (where pain is not applicable) are acceptable to you via this qualification?"

Note the words: TO YOU

I was answering THAT. TO ME early term abortions are absolutely unacceptable. And that is an absolute truth. The fact I hold such an opinion is absolutely true.

And that has nothing to do with "murder". If you must know on what grounds, it's because I believe it forever robs somebody of their chance to live.

Prog · Joined: 10 Mar 2005 Posts: 2243

straw man wrote:

It is an ABSOLUTE FACT that TO ME early term abortions are unacceptable.

OF COURSE that's my opinion. It is an absolute that I hold this opinion. I was responding to your question, which was, and I quote:

"So, early term abortions (where pain is not applicable) are acceptable to you via this qualification?"

Note the words: TO YOU

I was answering THAT.

It was important to know if YOU were expressing YOUR absolute as a formal decree or as a personal proclaimation. Glad to see its the latter.

Now we have a problem with your causal use of the term "murder'.

According to you some abortions are acts of murder, other are just medical procedures removing a fetus from mother's womb.

Doesn't the (casual?) accusation of murder seem inconsistent as the same procedure produces the same end result either way?

straw man · Joined: 19 Apr 2006 Posts: 2948

Prog wrote: Doesn't the (casual?) accusation of murder seem inconsistent as the same procedure produces the same end result either way?

The end result has nothing to do with it. The abortion ALWAYS results in the fetus' death.

The accusation of murder is dependent not on the end result, but on whether or not pain is inflicted (or cruel and barbaric methods are used) to reach that end result of death.

I'm not quite sure what we're arguing. I thought I was clear on this. There's no problem with my casual use of the word murder as long as pain is being inflicted.

Selfish_Meme · Joined: 31 Jan 2006 Posts: 726

law.com wrote: murder
n. the killing of a human being by a sane person, with intent, malice aforethought (prior intention to kill the particular victim or anyone who gets in the way) and with no legal excuse or authority.

malice
n. a conscious, intentional wrongdoing either of a civil wrong like libel (false written statement about another) or a criminal act like assault or murder, with the intention of doing harm to the victim. This intention includes ill-will, hatred or total disregard for the other's well-being.
Abortion has intent to harm, or disregard for the well-being of another.
Abortion has Aforethought, probably an appointment was made, no one spontaneously walks into an abortion clinic for no reason.
Abortion is not done with legal authority. The doctor is not performing a state decreed execution.
Abortion has a legal excuse via the Roe decision.
So abortion is not Murder legally.

dictionary.com wrote: mur‧der
–noun
1. Law. the killing of another human being under conditions specifically covered in law. In the U.S., special statutory definitions include murder committed with malice aforethought, characterized by deliberation or premeditation or occurring during the commission of another serious crime, as robbery or arson (first-degree murder), and murder by intent but without deliberation or premeditation (second-degree murder).
2. Slang. something extremely difficult or perilous: That final exam was murder!
3. a group or flock of crows.
–verb (used with object)
4. Law. to kill by an act constituting murder.
5. to kill or slaughter inhumanly or barbarously.
If you consider abortion inhumane or barbarous, then casually you can say it is murder. Are we all clear now. That was what straw man was saying spelled out in excruciating detail. Can we move on?

Prog · Joined: 10 Mar 2005 Posts: 2243

straw man wrote:
I'm not quite sure what we're arguing. I thought I was clear on this. There's no problem with my casual use of the word murder as long as pain is being inflicted.

Your selective use of the term murder has serious, broader connotations than your extenuated use of it. While you state that abortion is murder, the average person is NOT going to take such a strong term within such a "casual" context.

I suspect you know this quite well, thus use the term to its foremost advantage.

straw man · Joined: 19 Apr 2006 Posts: 2948

Of course I never SAID abortion was murder, so I guess I don't have to worry about this pitfall.

Hypocritical_Hypocrisy · Joined: 30 Aug 2006 Posts: 104 Location: Your bathroom!

I agree with Lumina! (Surprise!)

Abortion is definitely depriving a baby of life. And babies definitely deserve that right, as much as anyone else.

RyzinEnagy

obama08 wrote: REPUBLICANS PLEASE TAKE THE TIME TO READ THIS!
I know I made it slightly long, but im sure it will be worth the read.

Ramesh Ponnuru, the author of “The Party of Death” outlines his case against abortion by stating that the democrats, the media, and the courts have a “disregard for life”.
I cannot begin to state how many problems there are in what this man is trying to say.

To start off, out of all democrats, less than 50% are “pro-choice”, and almost the majority of pro-choice people do not condone late term abortions. One thing we do not see on his cover is that there are republicans who are pro-choice.

One thing he also fails to mention in his book is the fact that since abortion was made legal the crime rate in America has significantly been reduced.

(Are you telling me crime is lower now than it was in 1973?? Also, child abuse cases have increased over 1,000 percent since 1973, according to the National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect. Also, Dr. Philip Ney at the International Institute for Pregnancy Loss and Child Abuse Research and Recovery did an extensive study that revealed that 91 percent of child abuse cases come from parents who WANTED their child. Out of the children who were NOT abused in his study, only 63 percent of the children were planned and wanted.)

Quote: Many times, the people who are getting abortions tend to be poor black women in big cities, who’s children if not aborted would have in many cases become hooked into gangs, violence, drugs, and just causing more crime within big cities.

(Again, crime is higher now than in 1973)

Quote: Isn’t this what so many republicans want? I’m not calling them racist but we do understand from hurricane Katrina our republican administration did not have a very big heart for the thousands of black people ravaged in New Orleans…which leads to my point, aren’t they happy these black children are aborted?

(What does hurricane Katrina have to do with abortions?)

Quote: I like the term he uses…“The Party of Death”. It’s a phrase conservatives are going to love because it uses one of the biggest generalized titles that I have ever seen come out of a conservative book…well besides Ann Coulters “GODLESS” b/s.

But lets talk about “death” on both parties. Like I said before, less than 50% of democrats are pro-choice. Which leads to my question….what percentage of republicans are pro-war? See because out of every republican that I have ever talked too…almost all of them favor the war in Iraq. This compared to when I talk to a lot of democrats, they tend to not be too favorable of the pro-choice agenda.

(What does the war in iraq have to do with abortions?

Quote: How about the history of the death penalty. If you look back Republicans have always been the bigger favors on it. Notice how I say “the bigger favors” because I’m not going to be like Ponnuru and suggest there aren’t people who favor the death penalty from the Democratic Party.

(Here is something with a little more relevance. Pro-choicers approve of killing innocent babies who have not done any harm to society while they disapprove of killing criminals who have taken the lives of other innocent people...does that make sense?)

And my last issue…gun control. How would it be if we all had free access to guns? The death and crime rate in big cities would sky rocket, and if abortion was made illegal as well, the crime rate would soar even higher. Talk about a disregard of life…I see it way more in the Republican party then in the Democratic.

(Do you have any proof that legalizing guns will make crime skyrocket? Because I have proof to the contrary. Washington D.C. banned gun sales in 1987, and by the early 90's the murder rate was TRIPLED. Chicago first required handgun registration and a waiting period in 1968. Murder went up. Then they thought the solution was to ban guns altogether, which they did in 1982. Murder then DOUBLED over the next decade.)