Why is killing a fetus only murder if it wasn't the choice of the woman to kill the fetus?

Question

People will claim that the fetus is "not human" or "not alive" or "only part of the woman's body", but why then is it considered a double murder if a pregnant woman gets murdered even if that woman had planned on getting an abortion?

I always get a lot of crazy irrational answers whenever I ask a question about abortion. I don't expect this will be any different. I think it's because a lot of people give an emotional answer without giving it any thought.

Jade H, a woman can easily find an abortionist to kill the baby inside her all the way up to 9 months of pregnancy legally with no questions asked.

spamandham, so do you think that a burn victim would lose their rights to personhood if they can't be recognizable as a average human?

Answer 1

abortion IS murder. But if people were allowed to realize that, then Planned parenthood would lose LOTS of money.

Answer 2

Good question! Believe it or not, this is rational. Here's why:

The concept of 'personhood' is nothing more than people agreeing to honor certain rights for a given entity. That entity might be a fetus, a baby, a child, an adult, a sentient robot, a sentient alien, or another intelligent life form on earth (maybe dolphins or whales or chimps).

In the case of the unborn, there is contention as to when such rights should be bestowed. This is unavoidable, because the rights are black and white, but a conceptus only gradually becomes recognizably human. Ignoring arbitrary religious arguments about souls for the moment, there is no fundamental reason I can think of that a fertilized egg should be treated as a person. It really is nothing more than a mass of dividing human cells, differing very little from a cancer in that regard.

So how do we decide when to assign personhood? Basically, it's at the point that someone with a vested interest wants those rights assigned. In the case of a pregnant mother who wants a baby, that assignment happens as soon as she finds out she's pregnant usually. But in the case of a mother who doesn't want the baby, that assignment happens at birth, since there are many who would happily take it at that point without cost to a mother who doesn't want it.

Answer 3

In the absolute sense the killing of an unborn child is always murder unless it is to save the physical life of the mother. In that case there is no sense in both persons dying.

However what you are asking is a matter of legality. Man's law in the U.S. says a person is not a person unless the child is by location outside of the womb as defined by the head being past the vaginal opening.

As for it being murder when a pregnant woman is harmed well this has more to do with postmodernism in my opinion. In postmodernism everything is about desire, and desire cannot be fulfilled without power. Who has the power? Certainly not the unborn, they do not have the voice, and are vulnerably dependent.

Healthy and or wealthy adults have the most power. If these adults desire children, hence desire the protection of there own, they will construct laws to protect such a desire.

I realize the reasoning is a little more complex than what I have stated so far, as I am sure non-postmodernists have had a large hand in creating these laws. Nevertheless the reasoning I have spelled out for you still stands as a powerful undercurrent for how a large portions of this society operates. Pro-Lifers would not be able to create such laws if they were not in some way catering to the logic of the postmoderns.

Personally, I am glad they these laws are on the books, even if they conflict logically with other laws that also exist. The laws that protect the unborn are not the laws which are out of wack.

Answer 4

Well thats where your wrong because its double murder when the woman is in the last trimester, When the baby is a fully developed baby! And if the woman was killed, how do you know she was going to get an abortion? You need to listen better or something because your mis understanding laws it seems.

If the woman was killed and the person was charged with DOUBLE MURDER then there is NO WAY that woman could have had an abortion as there is LIMITED time on when this can be done.....

Answer 5

You have an extreamely valid point. We should make sure our laws are all fair. We can't have it 1/2 one way and 1/2 the other. But mind you, scientifically and medically a fetus is a parasite, by that i mean it is a living organism that lives off another organisms contributing nothing to the relationship. I'm not stating that as an attacking im simply saying that is all that some time require to see a difference for the aboration issue. Personally, i think abortion, if kept legal should be made much more difficult and require the paternal father and paternal mother (obviously she'll be there) to sign an agreement only after an expensive blood test, it does take to create life why should it only take one to destroy it? (and no that doesn't apply in all cases) Just my opinion.

Cpl Rush
US Army Combat Medic

Answer 6

The reason for this is that states have a lot of latitude as to how they define "murder." For example, killing in self-defense is not murder. In some states, killing a fetus is defined as murder, for example if someone deliberately kicks a pregnant woman for the purpose of killing her fetus. That doesn't necessarily mean that the law recognizes that a fetus is a human being for all purposes. It may seem illogical to you that the law doesn't do that, but to others there is a difference between a woman's choice not to have a child, where the law recognizes that the fetus, according to her beliefs, is not a human being yet, and someone deliberately trying to harm a pregnant woman against her will.

Answer 7

The word "choice" is tossed around a lot as if it's the all-being. What if I chose to murder my boss just moments before she was going to keel over and die of a heart attack anyway? Ridiculous, huh?

Whether a baby is wanted or not, whether or not the woman does the oh-so-godly thing as to "choose" whether or not to abort the child, regardless of all of these gobbledigook circumstances, the child is just that, a human child. If it's a zygote, it's a human zygote. If it's a fetus, it's a human fetus. Is it a carrot? Or a parrot? No, it's a human life. What makes it human? Human chromosomes, human DNA. So you see, even a zygote has human DNA. We can't kill that.

Spiritually speaking, the soul enters a life at conception. We cannot kill a human life just because it's not wanted. We can't kill something with a soul, so that leaves even abortion out of the question, because the soul enters at the moment of conception. There is ZERO window of opportunity after the fact, but ALWAYS opportunity to close one's legs and keep it in one's pants BEFORE the fact. THAT'S the choice that the pro-abortion people seem to forget, disregard, or discredit.

Answer 8

What do expect from humans as they are today? We have so few answers. We have no direct contact with GOD. We are stuck doing the best for the most, of course that will leave a huge number of people not being treated correctly, properly.
I misunderstand your question: Are you opposed to forcing a women or girl to live with a rape or for it?
Do you oppose the mistreatment of women by men or support it?
Women are equal to me in all but one thing. They are needed for reproduction - so must be protected against men totally, without loopholes. Children under 18, and all single women deserve this protection. The community must listen to the medical Representatives about the safest way to do this. Without religious or emotional distractions.
Also men, and the money of men, influence of men should be removed from any discussion about the medical care of female bodies.
About the double murder thing - that's easy. The community of the DA wants to put murderers away. Murder by knife, gun, violence - that's a person we need out of the community. So the community adds the fetus, to help put the violent person away.
"Why is killing a fetus only murder if it wasn't the choice of the woman to kill the fetus?" This queston is related to the double murder question?

Answer 9

State Laws on Abortion, in regards to Funeral Home Directors, by: The Department of Human Services.

It is wrong according too man and Christianity.

1.) When a fetus weighs 11.3 ounces, or 20 weeks of term, whichever comes first. The baby dies, it has to have a Birth Certification and Death Certificate.

2.) When a fetus is less than 350 Grams and dies, it needs a Fetus Death Certificate.

3.) A fetus/baby is a live human being after it meets the above criteria, according too law.

4.) a nonlife needs no Death Certificate. [ It had to be a Life, to be declared dead.]

5.) A baby is a live human being even according too man, and will remain so, until man's law changes.

6.) By man's own deffinition as too Life: You tell me who is contradicting themselves.

7.) A fetus/baby is a live human being at conception, according to God, and will remain that way until YOU or someone else proves with the Word of GOD, that it isn't.

Answer 10

The reason they can get by with the incongruity is what is known as the "abortion distortion." It's not okay if someone else does the killing. But a licensed physician can do it because of the woman's choice.

The greatest question I ever heard asked on the subject was this: "If someone gets in a traffic accident, and kills the fetus, he gets charged with involuntary manslaughter. But what if the woman was on her way to an abortion clinic?"

He still gets charged, even though the baby's life would've been forfeit moments later anyway.

Answer 11

A very good point.

I could never, myself, have an abortion unless there were a medical reason. However, I also feel an unwanted child should not be brought into this world (unless to adoption). I end up finding myself on the fence and overpopulation and abused children simply add to the argument in favor of abortion. Which is more morally wrong: supporting murder or supporting abusing children you never wanted. Tough call for me. It becomes a lesser of two evils argument. Just depends on which one you think is lesser.

The true answer, of course, is to practice safe sex or no sex at all. People need to be far better educated on this. Have you ever checked out the parenting or pregnancy sections of Y!A? VERY SCARY what people do not know or think that they do know.