But if I give birth to a 26 week premature baby, then kill it. That’s murder, but if I do while still in the womb I didn’t kill anything because the mother didn’t want it?
The logic fails, it literally the exact same life you’re ending. The difference is only the location and whether someone wants it.
unlike homicide, a woman has to carry a child inside of her body for 9 months, dealing with all manners of complications (even life threatening complications)
the abortion = homicide idea is so flatly intellectually dishonest, im surprised to even see it mentioned here.
You appear to be confusing abortions and inductions. Both procedures end a pregnancy, but the former by definition involves the intent to kill the unborn child.
In the case of a dead child, the procedure is an induction that results in a stillbirth. Or, if necessary, a caesarean section. Regardless an abortion is impossible on account of there no longer being an unborn baby in that case.
You’re creating a twisted, unrealistic example. A pregnancy is not out of the norm and can be stopped prior to impregnating. There is no force, the person made a decision and changed their mind. Murdering a child in the process.
It's not murdered, the amass of dividing cells called a fetus isn't viable on it's own. When that fetus is unwanted, abortion is comparable to removing a tumor.
No, abortion is not murder because fetuses do not have personhood under the law. It's clear you don't really understand the legal precedents you're pontificating on so I don't really see this going anywhere.
You can come up with any justification you want, give it any name you want, but what you advocate for is still, in the end, killing a baby which would do perfectly fine on its own in the outside world.
Which is why I would be charged with murder if I go punch a heavily pregnant woman in the gut and kill her child.
Great job. Now take it the other extreme: is it okay to kill a baby that had already been born, but was still attached by the umbilical cord? It’s still, technically, part of the mother’s body at that point.
To me, this is not a philosophical argument. That is the de facto outcome of such a position. If you call it murder to end a pregnancy at any stage, as the GP does, then women are hostages of a life not yet able to survive on its own.
Following the viewpoint of the parent commenter, you are not choosing to kill the fetus. You are choosing to stop letting the fetus have residence inside your body (your property) and choosing to stop providing it with free nourishment. It's the lack of the fetus's ability to fend for itself that causes it to perish.
If its not a baby you are terminating then you're not pregnant.
reply