Abortion = Murder ?

[Marek]

What's wrong with this logic?

Murder is wrong because it deprives something of a future like ours.

Abortion deprives something of a future like ours.

Therefore, abortion is wrong.


edit: removed 'someone'

 

[Gracchus]

"Murder" is a legal term, variously defined by legislators.

"Abortion" is a medical term, and may or may not be "murder" depending on time or place.

 

[Marek]

"Murder" is a legal term, variously defined by legislators.

"Abortion" is a medical term, and may or may not be "murder" depending on time or place.

Sorry for the confusion. I was loosely using the term 'murder' defined as 'the intentional killing of an innocent person'.

edit: Also, I was not suggesting that abortion is murder. I was merely suggesting that morally, abortion is wrong for the same reason that murder is wrong.

 

[jayem]

I'm pro choice, but I'd agree with you that in some cases, an abortion may be a wrong choice. Especially when a pregnant woman is pressured into having an abortion against her will--by her husband, boyfriend, or family (which unfortunately, I think is not that uncommon.)

But even so, just because it's morally wrong, doesn't mean it should be criminalized. I personally think that trophy hunting-that is, killing a wild animal purely for sport--is morally wrong. Yet I wouldn't try to make it illegal. I think the Ku Klux Klan espouses immoral views, but I wouldn't want to ban their holding a (peaceful) public rally.

 

[butterfoot]

I'm pro choice, but I'd agree with you that in some cases, an abortion may be a wrong choice. Especially when a pregnant woman is pressured into having an abortion against her will--by her husband, boyfriend, or family (which unfortunately, I think is not that uncommon.)

But even so, just because it's morally wrong, doesn't mean it should be criminalized. I personally think that trophy hunting-that is, killing a wild animal purely for sport--is morally wrong. Yet I wouldn't try to make it illegal. I think the Ku Klux Klan espouses immoral views, but I wouldn't want to ban their holding a (peaceful) public rally.

You cannot compare Hunting and Abortion. I hunt for the sport but I don't just let the animals meat go to waste.

You could not ban the Ku Klux Klan due to their free speech.

Abortion is far to often used as birth control. I think abortion is wrong on so many levels. In fact I would say that Abortion is murder. You are taking a life of a child. You can't say that because the fetus isn't able to live on its own that it isn't murder. If the fetus was to stay in the womb for the entire time it would live.


Other thoughts on abortion stem from the fact that the Father has no choice in the matter. If the woman wants an abortion there is nothing the Father can do about it. I think this should be changed so that if the father wants the baby it would become illegal for the woman to abort it.


-cw

 

[Marek]

I'm pro choice, but I'd agree with you that in some cases, an abortion may be a wrong choice. Especially when a pregnant woman is pressured into having an abortion against her will--by her husband, boyfriend, or family (which unfortunately, I think is not that uncommon.)

But even so, just because it's morally wrong, doesn't mean it should be criminalized. I personally think that trophy hunting-that is, killing a wild animal purely for sport--is morally wrong. Yet I wouldn't try to make it illegal. I think the Ku Klux Klan espouses immoral views, but I wouldn't want to ban their holding a (peaceful) public rally.

I agree that not all acts that are morally wrong should be criminalized, but if abortion is wrong for the same reason that murder is wrong, why is murder illegal while abortion is not?

 

[Ledifni]

What's wrong with this logic?

Murder is wrong because it deprives someone/something of a future like ours.

Abortion deprives someone/something of a future like ours.

Therefore, abortion is wrong.

Murder deprives someone of a past, present, and future like ours. Abortion deprives something of a possible future like ours.

Not exactly the same.

 

[Marek]

Murder deprives someone of a past, present, and future like ours. Abortion deprives something of a possible future like ours.

Not exactly the same.

I disagree. You say it is wrong to take away someone's past. I don't believe this can be done. 'Past' can be defined as no longer current, gone by, or over. Clearly if it is alread gone, you cannot take it away. If you mean by past, memories or things gained such as family or material goods, this does not constitute as 'past'. Clearly, one can only enjoy this, such as memories or wealth, in their future. If you kill someone, you are not depriving them of their past, it is already gone, you are depriving them of their future. The same holds true for one's present. You cannot take away someone's present. As long as they exist, they are in their present state of mind. Once they cease to exist, they are no longer in their present state. A being cannot be deprived of it's present, for if it is, that being no longer exists.

Also, a fetuses possible future is no different than our possible futures.

 

[Spyr]

What's wrong with this logic?

Murder is wrong because it deprives someone/something of a future like ours.

Abortion deprives someone/something of a future like ours.

Therefore, abortion is wrong.

The fact that the issue hasn't been resolved shows that there are more grey areas than you might think. It isn't so clear cut as that. How about the fact that if the baby is kept then the person who has to take care of it will necessarily change them. They'll no longer be the person they were before; their old self would die. And don't tell me I don't know what I'm talking about because I know it to be true.

Abortion is far to often used as birth control. I think abortion is wrong on so many levels. In fact I would say that Abortion is murder. You are taking a life of a child. You can't say that because the fetus isn't able to live on its own that it isn't murder. If the fetus was to stay in the womb for the entire time it would live.

If you say that the fetus would have life is left in the womb then you're also implying that a fetus itself has no life until it gains it. If the fetus isn't alive then what's the big deal in getting rid of it.

Also, if you think abortion is wrong when people use it as birth control, do you also find it morally reprehensible to use pills to stop ovulation or condoms to prevent pregancy? If we're talking about the potential for life then why not fight for the valiant sperm who could be more if only allowed?

Murder deprives someone of a past, present, and future like ours. Abortion deprives something of a possible future like ours.

Not exactly the same.

Why worry about possible futures? Every day we make choices that not only influence not only our lives but those of people around us as well. You can't stress about what's going on with each person. You have to make the best deicison for yourself and then let events proceeds as they do. Aborting a fetus isn't intentionally and purposefully robbing it of life. It's the person choosing their best decision and it having a negative effect on the fetus. Sounds harsh I know but decisions like these are made every day and you don't hear any protest (or much) about that.

 

[Marek]

The fact that the issue hasn't been resolved shows that there are more grey areas than you might think. It isn't so clear cut as that.

The truth can be much more simple than it appears. Remember that the morality of slavery was debated for centuries while most educated people today would agree that it is clearly morally wrong.

How about the fact that if the baby is kept then the person who has to take care of it will necessarily change them. They'll no longer be the person they were before; their old self would die. And don't tell me I don't know what I'm talking about because I know it to be true.

I don't believe that you can say that a change in personality results in the death of a person. I also don't see how this relates to the issue of abortion...

 

[Lyric's Dad]

Right. Abortion is murder each and every time and if this society was decent, every person who committed such an atrocity would be punished harshly. A society that does nothing to protect the most innocent and helpless of it's people is dark, disturbed, and on it's way to hell.

 

[Lokisdottir]

You cannot compare Hunting and Abortion.

Why not? They're both killing. In fact, I'd say abortion is more justifiable than hunting (though I'm not opposed to either; I find hunting distasteful but prefer to stay out of other people's business when it comes to that).

Abortion is done to avoid an enormous physical, emotional, and financial burden. Hunting is done just for the fun of it. Or "sport" of it, as hunters like to say.

Abortion is far to often used as birth control.

I'd have to disagree. Abortion is a huge decision, not to mention a very expensive and invasive procedure. It's not something women undertake lightly, unless they're filthy rich.

 

[jayem]

I agree that not all acts that are morally wrong should be criminalized, but if abortion is wrong for the same reason that murder is wrong, why is murder illegal while abortion is not?

I don't agree that abortion is wrong for the same reason that murder is wrong. Murder is illegal because it ends the life of an innocent person. A fetus, at least in the early stages of pregnancy, is not a person, in the legal sense. Abortion is killing a fetus. I think a human fetus should be valued and protected by its mother, but a fetus does not have the rights of a person. Terminating the life of a healthy fetus, in my opinion, is wrong if it is done without a very compelling reason. But I have no right to dictate to a woman what constitutes a compelling reason. And I think that her perogative to control her body supercedes the rights of a fetus (at least up to a point.) Any abortion is a tragedy, but sometimes it may be necessary. And such a decision should be a private medical matter between a woman and her doctor.

 

[Marek]

I don't agree that abortion is wrong for the same reason that murder is wrong. Murder is illegal because it ends the life of an innocent person. A fetus, at least in the early stages of pregnancy, is not a person, in the legal sense. Abortion is killing a fetus. I think a human fetus should be valued and protected by its mother, but a fetus does not have the rights of a person. Terminating the life of a healthy fetus, in my opinion, is wrong if it is done without a very compelling reason. But I have no right to dictate to a woman what constitutes a compelling reason. And I think that her perogative to control her body supercedes the rights of a fetus (at least up to a point.) Any abortion is a tragedy, but sometimes it may be necessary. And such a decision should be a private medical matter between a woman and her doctor.

Please see the original post. I never claimed that abortions kill people. I never said that abortion is murder. I agree that murder is wrong because it ends the life of an innocent person, but why is ending the life of an innocent person wrong? It is wrong because it deprives them of their future like ours. Does abortion deprive a being (whether it is a person or not) of a future like ours? Yes. So therefore, abortion is wrong for the same reason that murder is wrong. Although a fetus does not have the same rights as a person, its right to life should be the same. The right to control one's body does not justify murder, so it should not justify abortion.

 

[Lyric's Dad]

Abortion is done to avoid an enormous physical, emotional, and financial burden. Hunting is done just for the fun of it. Or "sport" of it, as hunters like to say.


.

Wrong. Abortion is a selfish disgusting act to eliminate the responsibility one has for a child even though there are better options. Hunting in fact is used for exctly what you say abortion is. It is called hunger. Animals are intended to be eaten.

 

[Thirst_For_Knowledge]

What's wrong with this logic?

Murder is wrong because it deprives someone/something of a future like ours.

Abortion deprives someone/something of a future like ours.

Therefore, abortion is wrong.

I don't think that a child is a person in the first trimester, so to me it isn't equal to murder, so it isn't against my morals. Just because some people find something morally wrong doesn't mean that it should be outlawed. I do not eat meat, as I find it morally wrong to kill an animal, but I would never attempt to outlaw you eating an animal.

 

[Lokisdottir]

Hunting in fact is used for exctly what you say abortion is. It is called hunger. Animals are intended to be eaten.

...

This is where I shake my head and walk away. I'm very in favor of meat-eating, but I don't stand a chance trying to reason with someone who believes animals were placed on earth for the express purpose of feeding humans. Humans are no more "intended" to eat animals than lions are "intended" to eat gazelles.

 

[Marek]

I don't think that a child is a person in the first trimester, so to me it isn't equal to murder, so it isn't against my morals. Just because some people find something morally wrong doesn't mean that it should be outlawed. I do not eat meat, as I find it morally wrong to kill an animal, but I would never attempt to outlaw you eating an animal.

Please read my post more carefully. Nowhere does it say that a fetus is a person and nowhere does it say that abortion is murder(though the title is a bit misleading...). All that it shows is that if one believes murder is wrong, then for the same reasons they must believe that abortion is wrong.
As for eating meat, if one could present a valid and sound argument showing that eating meat is as morally wrong as murder, then I would surely hope that eating meat would be outlawed.

 

[Thirst_For_Knowledge]

Please read my post more carefully. Nowhere does it say that a fetus is a person and nowhere does it say that abortion is murder(though the title is a bit misleading...). All that it shows is that if one believes murder is wrong, then for the same reasons they must believe that abortion is wrong.
As for eating meat, if one could present a valid and sound argument showing that eating meat is as morally wrong as murder, then I would surely hope that eating meat would be outlawed.

I consider murder being the killing of a person. So, if a fetus is not a person in the first trimester, then it is not killing.

And I think it is wrong to kill anything that is a living being, hence why I find it immoral to eat animals. But once again, I don't consider a child in the first trimester to be a living being.

Morals are sunjective. There are times when it is not immoral to kill. If you are going to kill me or my family, I would not consider it immoral to kill a person. If I was starving and there was nothing to eat but a cow, I would not consider it immoral to eat a cow. There are times when immoral things actually aren't immoral.

At least that is my opinion on my own morality.

 

[Marek]

I consider murder being the killing of a person. So, if a fetus is not a person in the first trimester, then it is not killing.

And I think it is wrong to kill anything that is a living being, hence why I find it immoral to eat animals. But once again, I don't consider a child in the first trimester to be a living being.

Morals are sunjective. There are times when it is not immoral to kill. If you are going to kill me or my family, I would not consider it immoral to kill a person. If I was starving and there was nothing to eat but a cow, I would not consider it immoral to eat a cow. There are times when immoral things actually aren't immoral.

At least that is my opinion on my own morality.

I (partially) agree with all this, but none of this pertains to my post that you quoted or the topic that we are discussing. Please read the original post again and try to understand the argument before trying to discuss it any further.