It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Murder occurs when one human being unlawfully kills another human being. See Homicide. The precise legal definition of murder varies by jurisdiction. Most states distinguish between different degrees of murder. Some other states base their murder laws on the Model Penal Code.
At common law, murder was defined as killing another human being with malice aforethought. Malice aforethought is a legal term of art, that encompasses the following types of murder:
"Intent-to-kill murder"
"Grievous-bodily-harm murder" - Killing someone in an attack intended to cause them grievous bodiliy harm. For example, if a person fatally stabbed someone, even if she only intended to wound her victim, she could still be executed.
"Felony-murder" - Killing someone while in the process of committing a felony. Note that at common law, there were few felonies, and all carried the death penalty. For example, at common law, robbery was a felony. So if a robber accidentally killed someone during a robbery, the robber could be executed.
"Depraved heart murder" - Killing someone in a way that demonstrates a callous disregard for the value of human life. For example, if a person intentionally fires a gun into a crowded room, and someone dies, the person could be convicted of depraved heart murder.
According to Webster's Seventh New Collegiate Dictionary, a person is "a human being." Attempts to render an entire class of human beings as "non-persons" based upon arbitrary qualities such as age and place of residence in order to discriminate against them is immoral and unjust. History is full of infamous examples of governments legalizing the discrimination of an entire class of human beings by rendering them "non-persons." Jews were rendered "sub-humans" in Germany in the 1940's and colonial slaveowners bought and sold Africans as "property." As a matter of fact, the Supreme Court in 1857 ruled that Dred Scott, a black slave, was not a "person" with rights but the "property" of his master. Was the Court wrong then? Of course! The Supreme Court of 1973 that legalized abortion nationwide with its Roe v. Wade decision was just as immoral and unjust. They dehumanized an entire class of human beings in order to legitimize wholesale discrimination against them. Abortion may go down in history as the greatest human rights abuse of all time.
Death of an unborn child who is "quick" (fetus is moving) can be murder, provided there was premeditation, malice and no legal authority. Thus, abortion is not murder under the law. Example: Jack Violent shoots his pregnant girlfriend, killing the fetus. Manslaughter, both voluntary and involuntary, lacks the element of malice aforethought.
Originally posted by captaintyinknots
Why would you support restricting freedom?
In your opinion. You keep forgetting to add that. IN YOUR OPINION. Thats all it is. And i respect your freedom to have it. Its sad that you dont have the same respect for other people.
Honestly, this thread should be closed, as the question posed by the title has been answered.
/thread.
Why is it a womans right to choose
Originally posted by captaintyinknots
reply to post by tallcool1
1)freedom of speech is non existant on a privately owned website. Sad how many people do no understand this.
2)I asked for the thread to be closed, because the topic of the thread is a question, and that question was unequivocally answered. Thats it and thats all.
3)No one is saying you cannot say abortion is murder, even though it is wrong.
4)This thread is not about drone strikes.
5)Im not asking anyone to change their opinion. In fact, I have openly stated that I respect their right to have that opinion. what I dont respect is an attempt to force personal views onto society as a whole.
Why is that exactly?
Originally posted by captaintyinknots
reply to post by vasaga
I find it funny when so many choose to ignore the fact that, in the end, the legal definition is what matters.
And what about laws of other countries then? Not everyone can be right.
Originally posted by captaintyinknots
You have your idea of moral. I have mine. Neither matters in the eyes of the law.
What is 'legal' exactly, other than an OPINION that has been forced upon the people at gunpoint?
Originally posted by captaintyinknots
There are hundreds of arguments to be made for being pro-choice-in the end, though, none matter, because it is legal.
And the bad thing is, you can choose to have an abortion, after being irresponsible.
Originally posted by captaintyinknots
The good thing is, you can choose NOT TO HAVE AN ABORTION, if you wish.