But, the claim that abortion is always murder depends a lot on the "at conception" belief, which as I said, I don't believe there is a non-religious rationale for. That doesn't make it bad. Like I said earlier, not every logically derived thing is good. Sometimes we need to override logic with other ways of thinking. In my view religion evolved and served a purpose, but it's unclear that we can supplant that purpose with something else and not destroy ourselves.
But we "murder" people every day for numerous reasons and most people have no issue with it because it is seen as justified.
The constant insistence that ending a life is not murder is just muddying the waters to debate an aspect that functionally has no purpose other than to ease the minds of those engaging in it. Why can't we say "murder in this specific circumstance is permissible" and move on? The whole concept of deeming something not murder because we consider it sub-human is not a route I want to see society tread down.
I'm against abortion personally but I get that **** happens and life is more complicated than rigid ideology. I just think the debating point is silly.
Animals throw their own out or refuse to feed them after deeming them non-viable, which is murder. But there's a specific circumstance and reason why that is beyond mere convivence. And if you're religious, judgment of that seems like arguing with God to me. I think there's cases where it would be permissible and cases where it wouldn't be, and I'm not so sure there's as much friction as people think at getting to this point for a national debate. Most of Europe seems to have hashed this out without too much drama and is FAR more restrictive than the US is.
Last edited: