- Reaction score
Brad Sallows said:>That's a value-loaded judgment from the "pro-life" side as to whether or not an abortion is equivalent to murder.
It's not "value loading", it's calling it how they see it. "Murder" has a moral meaning as well as a legal one; I refer to the former. If abortion isn't murder, there isn't really a reason to object to it; people object on the grounds that it is a taking of human (a person's) life. As for law, everything defined in law is arbitrary - it may be grounded on some sort of moral or other principle, but ultimately we can define anything we want, any way we want, in law. What the criminal code has to say is beside the point when discussing the issue in basic moral terms.
"Some" people object to it; the majority don't.
The crime v morality issue is really the point. Crimes need to be defined and uniformly applied within a society. Within a multicultural society morality varies from group to group and even individual to individual. Oppression occurs when one group insists that it's moral construct must apply to everyone. Our current laws regarding abortion mean that they need only apply to those who want to make use of them. Others are free to choose not to make use of the procedure.
Murder is a legally and socially defined concept as Good2Golf states. While morality may play a part, it's the "unlawful" part that's the key to the term. Societies permit many forms of lawful taking of another life (in war - whether as a direct target or collateral damage, in self defence, in capital punishment, and more). None of those are murder.
By stating that abortion is murder, one is not simply stating their own moral opinion but making a statement that the act is illegal when in fact it is not. It's not only a misstatement but a misuse of language for the express purpose of inciting passion in the listener who is either like-minded or uninformed. That makes it "value-loaded".