Murder is a legal term and as of currently Abortion is not defined as murder. So under what non-religious moral or ethical grounds can you define Abortion as murder?

bob 2012/05/04 15:39:11
The moral or ethical grounds can you define Abortion as a form of murder ...
Women have the rights and priviledges granted under the constitution including reproductive rights
No man, government, corporation or religious institution has any reproductive rights
Men, government, corporation or religious institution should have all reproductive rights
The moral or ethical grounds can you define Abortion is not murder ....
All of the above
None of the above
Add Photos & Videos
Add a comment above

Top Opinion

  • Pat 2012/05/04 16:30:49
    Women have the rights and priviledges granted under the constitution includin...
    I agree with ETpro. Women have the right to determine what happens to their own bodies. I also agree that once the fetus has grown to the point where it would be able to survive outside the womb, abortion should not be allowed. This is a very personal decision and not one that should be open to public discussion. It's between a woman and her doctor. Most abortions could probably be avoided if women had easy access to reliable birth control and if our young men and women were educated about birth control before the issue becomes a problem for them. Some groups want it both ways - no birth control and no abortions. That will not work.

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest

  • Reichstolz norman 2012/05/04 23:46:36
    We are talking about human life, there is no legality regarding "murder" when speaking of anything but humans. You need to stay on topic.
  • BrianD3 2012/05/04 15:52:29
    None of the above
    the childs right to live supercedes the womans right to kill it
  • Nestofa... BrianD3 2012/05/04 16:09:02
    no it doesnt, the mothers right over her own body supercedes Any fetus
  • BrianD3 Nestofa... 2012/05/04 16:30:36
    she had a right to not have sex, she had a right to use contraceptives; once the baby is concieved it has rights and she has no right to kill the baby
  • norman BrianD3 2012/05/04 17:25:26
    So conception is when it becomes a person? Why is it then that we don't celebrate "conception-days" as the time when our lives begin, instead of "birthdays?"
  • BrianD3 norman 2012/05/04 17:26:04
    dont be obtuse
  • Mandy norman 2012/05/04 17:29:36
    It's easier to figure out when a person was born than when it was conceived. By your logic we could abort an 8-month old fetus. I mean, it's not born yet, so it's not a person.
  • Nestofa... Mandy 2012/05/04 19:31:46
    If its viable outside the womb, then it wont be aborted, unless the mother or the child is in danger.
    Most states and most countries recognize this. and most have limits, right now, it is tied largely to 22-24 weeks as the top limit with exceptions of rape, incest, or medical issues,, because preemies born around that time CAN survive outside the mother.
  • Mandy Nestofa... 2012/05/05 00:09:17
    Yes, I know the law. How is it that the law can define personhood at 22-24 weeks when it comes to abortion, but if a pregnant woman is murdered, no matter how far along she is, it is considered a double homicide. Double standard much?
  • Nestofa... Mandy 2012/05/05 01:23:24
    If you know the law so well you could answer your own question.
    At 22-24 week a fetus may be able to survive out of the womb rarely without medical intervention(because the lungs are not fully developed), that is NOT the description of personhood however.
    The womans body and what she does with it is her choice, If someone murders that woman, he is taking the life of a woman born and grown, and if she is pregnant at the time of her death, she obviously hasnt had an abortion and her choice to carry it is also hers. A woman has the legal constitutional and HUMAN RIGHT to abort. The moment that fetus is born and not dependent on the womb, it is an individual person
    NO not a double standard. Just a clearer standard to judge , what an individual is.
  • Mandy Nestofa... 2012/05/05 12:50:00
    I don't think it's any more moral for a woman to take the life of her fetus any more than someone else's, unless it directly threatens her own life. Self defense is another issue. If she had been hit by a car while crossing the street to the abortion clinic, her death would STILL be ruled a double homicide.

    Being pro-life is not putting the rights of the fetus above the rights of the mother either. It's not an equal dichotomy. If the fetus is not threatening her life, then at most it is inconveniencing her. She is not obligated to keep the child, so she can have her body back after 9 months. However, should she chose to abort, the fetus gets its entire life taken away from it before it's even had a chance to stand up for itself. I don't care what stage of development it's at, a properly implanted embryo or fetus is an unborn human being. I believe it has the right to life as much as any other human being. Nowhere else in civilized society is it okay to kill someone because he or she is inconveniencing you or making your life more difficult.
  • Nestofa... Mandy 2012/05/05 15:23:29
    thats your opinion ...which is fine, BUT you dont get to decide for women who feel otherwise. You dont get to decide what is right for her or anyone but yourself.
    LEGALLY and constitutionally and in a human rights capacity.
  • Mandy Nestofa... 2012/05/05 17:48:01 (edited)
    Because something is legal, it doesn't mean it's right. The only opinion in my post above was "I believe it has the right to life as much as any other human being." Every thing else is fact. Those little human beings being killed can't defend themselves, so I do.
  • Nestofa... Mandy 2012/05/05 17:55:47
    then you are talking morals only, which is an opinion, and a belief and not subject to laws or legislation for others
    Your opinion about what being pro life means is purely YOUR moral opinion, not legal, not constitutional or human rights wise. so yeah, no fact, just moral interpretation.
    you dont care what the constitution or the law says but expect everyone to accept and live by your belief.
    If you dont agree with abortion dont have one, simple.
    If you have to make a law that hurts a number of people, just to prove your morals or faith, then you have no true morals or faith to prove
    UNBORN is the clue...NOT a person with rights that supercede the rights of the living breathing person carrying it.
  • Mandy Nestofa... 2012/05/06 03:38:07
    This FACT stands: If a woman is murdered on her way to get an abortion, it is still considered a double homicide.

    I cannot fathom how anyone can think that simply because a human being is still in utero that it is not a human being. That has nothing to do with morals. Once an embryo implants, the process of human life has begun. To end that life is to end a life, and that's murder. You can call that an opinion if you'd like, but you'd be wrong.
  • Nestofa... Mandy 2012/05/06 15:08:35
    """This FACT stands: If a woman is murdered on her way to get an abortion, it is still considered a double homicide. """
    I never said otherwise and it is a fact and SHOULD be.
    For the rest...you are entitled to think that. You are entitled to say that, you are not entitled to make that "decision" for another person. And im just as entitled to disagree with you.
    Have a great day
  • Mandy Nestofa... 2012/05/06 17:12:28
    And who speaks up for the rights of the unborn children? I'm not here to make the decision for other people. I'm here to convince people to make the ethical decision.
  • Nestofa... BrianD3 2012/05/04 19:28:37
    constitutionally, legally and by all standards of human rights, she most certainly does have the right to have a legal medical procedure.
    Be careful to wear a condom or get the snip for EVERY time you have sex, cos it takes two to tango, reduce YOUR risk of fathering a child too.
  • bob BrianD3 2012/05/04 16:10:56
    where the moral or ethical underpinning? you got none so far
  • BrianD3 bob 2012/05/04 16:29:51
    fine, you remain a baby killer then.....
  • nverumind BrianD3 2012/05/04 16:21:55
    I agree with you !!
  • BrianD3 nverumind 2012/05/04 16:31:27
    I have not heard that saying but it is very appropriate
  • Evan 2012/05/04 15:49:38
    None of the above
    The first sentence, of the first paragraph, of the first Text Book OB/GYN students had to study said: "Life begins with conception". Cells begin to multiply and divide well before a woman knows they're pregnant. When cells begin to multiply and divide, what do you have? "Life". The STOPPAGE of life, against the will of the live human being is murder. If someone is trying to kill another, then the kill-ee has the right to defend themselves to continue living, but other than that, stopping life against the will of the live person, no matter their size, would be murder, would it not? (Of course the first line of the first paragraph, of the first OB/GYN Textbook, no longer says that "life begins at conception", so who knows what today's OB/GYN students are being taught now?)
  • bob Evan 2012/05/04 15:51:33
    A text book still does not define the moral or ethical reason to define abortion as murder
  • frank bob 2012/05/04 16:26:48
    I find it hard to believe that I agree with you for once. A living person is one who is breathing and has a heartbeat. I don’t think an unborn child can breathe.
  • Nestofa... Evan 2012/05/04 16:16:33
    As you arent pregnant until IMPLANTATION. Im sorry but you are wrong. Zygotes are expelled by the woman if implantation does not occur in her period.... if the implantation occurs outside the uterus, it is an ectopic pregnancy and non viable in 99.9% of cases. After a certain point, the placenta, cord and blood vessels need the mother to survive beyond divided cells.
    And I did my first OBGYN back in the 80s and that is what I read, learned and took to heart.
  • obi_have 2012/05/04 15:44:37
    None of the above
    first degree murder - "the killing of another human being characterized by deliberation or premeditation or occurring during the commission of another serious crime."

    the killing of another human being... check
    characterized by premeditation... check

    Don't know why that's so hard to understand.
  • Evan obi_have 2012/05/04 15:50:44
    I'm proud of you, Jason.
  • bob obi_have 2012/05/04 15:53:25 (edited)
    OK so the President Bush sent our troops to war knowing that some will be murdered because of his choices so does that make him a murderer?
    So when does a embro become a human being? you missed that definition
  • obi_have bob 2012/05/04 15:56:19
    Troops made a decision to join the military knowing in advance that war is possible. They also have a means of defending themselves. An unborn child does not have that advantage.
  • bob obi_have 2012/05/04 16:11:40
    So when does a embro become a human being? you missed that definition
  • nverumind bob 2012/05/04 16:40:56 (edited)
    when the egg is fertilized by the sperm. At this point it is a genetically unique single cell human organism and is just as alive as any protozoan or other single cell organism. scientifically you cannot be bias. If we are to consider one-celled organisms alive then we have to consider the first cell of a future baby as alive. Science agrees that the smallest form of life is a cell. Not to mention that the first cell of a baby has its own distinct DNA that will be transcribed and translated on and on. People would argue because they still want to have an abortion without the guilt feeling.
  • Atrum A... nverumind 2012/05/04 17:21:58
    Atrum Angelus
    Again, biologically, everything you said is correct. Butlegally, not so much. You aren't a person under the law until you are physically born.
  • obi_have Atrum A... 2012/05/04 17:23:33
    Shouldn't laws be based in reality.. oh wait no... this is US law we're talking about. Silly me.
  • Atrum A... obi_have 2012/05/04 17:33:03
    Atrum Angelus
    Laws should be written in reality, but in a lot of cases, no matter which side it stands, left or right, it's based on money.
  • nverumind Atrum A... 2012/05/04 17:55:28
    so..when it was law , and ok for hitler to be murdering mass amounts of jews...since it wasnt by his standards illegal,,it was ok??
  • Atrum A... nverumind 2012/05/04 19:17:45
    Atrum Angelus
    Did I say that? No. Don't read what isn't there.
    Right and wrong is a separate spectrum from legal and illegal. While things that are wrong should be illegal, that is not always the case. And even then, everything that is wrong should't be illegal, as where do you draw that line (but that's a different discussion all together).
    All I said was it's not legally murder as they are not legally people.
    To make it legally murder and stop abortion, you must change the legal definition of a person to include an embryo and/or fetus. And thus far, most states that have tried have failed.
  • Nestofa... Atrum A... 2012/05/04 19:37:48
    even biologically she isnt correct, because implantation in the uterus has to occur for the fetus to be viable.
    99.9999999% of out of utero pregnancies will grow to a certain point and usually be an ectopic pregnancy which HAS to be removed for the life of the mother.
  • Atrum A... Nestofa... 2012/05/04 19:56:56
    Atrum Angelus
    She didn't bring up viability. She said it was a single celled organism. Yes, implantation is what makes a EMBRYO viable (fetus is several weeks after implantation). However, it is unique cell with unique DNA. And, yes, you are correct, ectopic pregnancies have to be removed as they are a threat to the mother.
  • Nestofa... Atrum A... 2012/05/04 20:00:39
    yes, my term was wrong, apologies, Ive been writing lots today and brain is repeating without thinking.

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2016/02/06 00:30:43

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals