You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: Life is a Natural Right - In response to "Abortion Is a Natural Right"

in #life • 8 years ago (edited)

Note:
If murder is the taking of a human life, then abortion is murder
it's not.
Murder is Unlawful killing.
At this time Abortion is Legal so therefore it is legal killing.,NOT murder.

8 years ago in #life by
$0.00
    Reply 5
    Sort:  
  • Trending
    • [-]
     8 years ago 

    Your definition is subjective, based on the jurisdiction. This is an inherent flaw.
    Basic human rights dictate otherwise, objectively. In common law, which more closely approximates basic human rights, murder is:

    ... killing another human being with malice aforethought. Malice aforethought is a legal term of art, that encompasses the following types of murder:
    "Intent-to-kill murder"
    "Grievous-bodily-harm murder" - Killing someone in an attack intended to cause them grievous bodily harm. For example, if a person fatally stabbed someone, even if she only intended to wound her victim, she could still be executed.
    "Felony-murder" - Killing someone while in the process of committing a felony. Note that at common law, there were few felonies, and all carried the death penalty. For example, at common law, robbery was a felony. So if a robber accidentally killed someone during a robbery, the robber could be executed.
    "Depraved heart murder" - Killing someone in a way that demonstrates a callous disregard for the value of human life. For example, if a person intentionally fires a gun into a crowded room, and someone dies, the person could be convicted of depraved heart murder.
    Source

    $0.03
    • Past Payouts $0.03, 0.00 TRX
    • - Author $0.03, 0.00 TRX
    • - Curators $0.00, 0.00 TRX
    5 votes
    Reply
    [-]
     8 years ago (edited)

    so if you don't like what the law says just define it away?
    gotcha.
    The bad guys do that.
    Makes it difficult to tell the good from the bad.
    that's just UGLY.

    $0.00
      Reply
      [-]
       8 years ago (edited)

      Law does not define basic human rights. In fact, it often defies them. Basic human rights are inalienable. One of them is the right to life, regardless of what some crony living on extorted monies and sitting behind a desk getting handouts from "supporters" writes on a piece of paper.
      Historically, murder has been the taking of an innocent life.
      In addition, I showed where common law IS that definition. Contemporary politics "define it away". If that's what you embrace, then you simply don't understand (or reject the concept of) inalienable rights and the non-aggression-principle, and embrace the state's jurisdiction over changing the meanings of words for political expediency.

      EDIT to respond to your edit:

      The bad guys do that.
      Makes it difficult to tell the good from the bad.
      that's just UGLY.

      That's just the point. The "bad guys" redefined murder for political ends. It is indeed ugly.

      It probably would have been helpful if you had used the quote in context as well, which also backs up the point.

      This is pretty basic. Either murder is objective or it's subjective. If murder is the taking of a human life, then abortion is murder. Otherwise, it must be given subjective parameters.

      Cherry picking out of context? Bad guys do that.

      $0.03
      • Past Payouts $0.03, 0.00 TRX
      • - Author $0.03, 0.00 TRX
      • - Curators $0.00, 0.00 TRX
      5 votes
      Reply
      [-]
       8 years ago 

      the law is a set of rules put in place and enforced by those in power. 'might makes right.' according to the law, always has, always will. 'Murder is a legal term. That is ALL I was saying. Don't put words into my mouth. I might bite.

      I agree about 'rights'. Rights are inherent. Government can either protect them or infringe upon them. (guess what they more often do?)

      When I used the term. The good, the bad, the ugly. That was a joke son.

      [-]
       8 years ago 

      Your definition is subjective, based on the jurisdiction. This is an inherent flaw.

      that also makes your argument invalid since you bring legality into the subject as well as ethics.

      double standards much?

      $0.00
        Reply

        Coin Marketplace

        STEEM 0.18
        TRX 0.15
        JST 0.029
        BTC 61956.82
        ETH 2417.96
        USDT 1.00
        SBD 2.62