4 ms·
The very fact that it's allowed suggests heavily it's not murder; our green-coloured chum's statement is inherently contradictory and as such cannot be sensibly
by EliRivers 7y ago
The very fact that it's allowed suggests heavily it's not murder; our green-coloured chum's statement is inherently contradictory and as such cannot be sensibly addressed.
- krageon 7y agoWhen a soldier shoots another soldier, that is murder even when it is allowed. The fact that it is allowed is immaterial to the definition of what it is.
- gboone 7y agoThe description is taking of life. The definition is either killing or murder. Killing is broadly seen as not wrong, while murder is. For example, there are laws against murder. But if, while defending yourself, the other is killed that is not considered wrong, in most cases. You are right that taking life is taking life. And I would agree that a case could be made for murder in some cases with soldiers. So the real question is is it killing a fetus or murdering a fetus? No one debates there is life.
- EliRivers 7y agoI disagree. Murder is a crime; a legal idea. If that same legal system allows killing under various circumstances, it's not murder. State sanctioned legal killing is explicitly not murder. If you choose to define it as murder, that's up to you, knock yourself out, but the state has power and authority - you don't.