Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site h-sc1.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!harvard!h-sc1!desjardins
From: desjardins@h-sc1.UUCP (marie desjardins)
Newsgroups: net.abortion
Subject: Definitions of murder
Message-ID: <485@h-sc1.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 30-Jul-85 21:01:52 EDT
Article-I.D.: h-sc1.485
Posted: Tue Jul 30 21:01:52 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 1-Aug-85 20:52:26 EDT
References: <3213@decwrl.UUCP> <1031@noscvax.UUCP>
Organization: Harvard Univ. Science Center
Lines: 22

> 
> There is no doubt that abortion is the killing of something, but that
> does not make it murder.  Murder is a term which only has meaning in a
> given social-legal context.  We kill cattle by the millions, soldiers
> and civilians during a war, theives, and other killers. 

This is very interesting.  Why is it justifiable to kill soldiers and
civilians during a war?  I would say to protect our (or someone's) way
of life, which *we* feel is "right" (note emphasis and quotes -- this
is a decision that "we" (whoever that may be -- nobody asks me these
things :-) ) made).  Why would somebody destroy a fetus (note: I'm not
convinced that this is killing, but I'm addressing the quote above)?
I would say to protect their way of life.  Why is an individual's way
of life any less important than a country's way of life (or culture)?

I think it would be interesting to hear some discussion on this
distinction, but I have a feeling that it's all going to eventually
come back to "yes, but why can't criminals protect their way of
life?" and degenerate from there.  Perhaps we can try to avoid 
that this time, and just focus on a single question...

marie desjardins park