Quote:
|
Quote by: Ken Carman "Real doctors" as defined by you. I know plenty of doctors who aren't appalled. Chop shop? Right. No, the chop shop was in the alley. Apparently you like and prefer chop shops.
"No one cries when a child-molesting priest gets struck by a car shortly after commiting tthe heinous act."
Would I cry? Depends upon the doctor, the specific situation... One doesn't make the other "good," although for some it's for the better... for them and society.
"poor murderer"
In the situation we are discussing that is neither my definition of "murderer" or the states definition. Should it be? That is what we are debating. You have jumped from arguing that it should be to using it as if it were fact. It is not. Murder is a legal term. |
Typical leftist double-speak.
murder: n. The unlawful killing of one human by another, especially with premeditated malice.
Now, the question is, which law? Considering the totaliarian states which craft the laws so that any number of immoral acts are legal, moral law must supercede any other law. Murder has a legal definition, but that is only one component of what it is.
The arguement that abortion is murder is not an attempt to change the definition of murder because murder is
morally wrong whether the state recognizes it as such or not. Whether abortion is legal or not, the definition of murder does not change. The legal and the moral opinions
of abortion are not in accordance with each other. Morality not being subject to a majority vote, it should be obvious which should be changed.