Not supporting the murder of unborn children is not fanaticism, it's called not being a degenerate. It's either a child and you can never kill it, or it isn't a child until birth and you can kill it any time before birth. And no, there's no magic moment where it goes from a clump of cells to being a child in the womb.
The left has pushed so far that regular beliefs are now "fanaticism". The sharp move to the far left is extremely inorganic and forced and thus should be ignored.
The middle ground is between no abortion and abortion with moderate to heavy regulation. Not between no abortion and abortion 5 months after birth or whatever other bullshit. This is just one example of the far lefts affect on society. Their move to the extreme left has stretched out what's considered the "middle" so people who take normal positions on the right that are only slightly more to the right than others are now massive extremists who are miles away from the "center".
And what do you even think finding a middle ground is? Everyone wanting the middle ground? No, it's people on both ends of the spectrum agreeing to compromise on something that isn't quite what they wanted instead of staying locked in argument over it and getting nothing done. This spectrum does not and should not include an ideology of literal child groomers and post-birth baby murderers. This is also where leftists fail, they can't compromise on anything without it being utterly superficial and meaningless.
I want abortion to be illegal and treated as just as barbaric as the gladiator matches of the past (because it is), that doesn't mean I won't compromise and support a ban with exceptions for rape or one that allows abortion before a heartbeat. But I'm also not going to stop saying what I believe and pushing for what I believe is right. I also won't "compromise" between vastly different extremes. Such as allowing late term abortion as a "compromise" between no abortion and post-birth abortion. That kind of shit is simply out of the range of reasonable views and shouldn't be entertained or attempted to find middle ground with.
I already gave you the basic common law legal definitions for murder. This isn't the "lefts effect." Common law was carried over from English common law. Under English common law abortion wasn't murder. There were laws for gestational limits for many abortions but I do not know of any that would imprison a woman or doctor for something as far reaching as murder that didn't result in the woman's death from a botched abortion. I'm fine with having gestational limits. I'm not fine with fanatics being legal experts. One sides hyperbolic nonsense drives the other sides hyperbolic nonsense.
Looking to the past exists to inform the present. We don't base our laws solely on the past. If the world were perfect we wouldn't have any need to ever revise a law again. Abortion is murder in the most literal sense. It not being classified as such is irrelevant to that reality.
Fights to the death used to be legal. Brutal gladiator matches for entertainment used to be legal. We made them illegal, the latter especially, because they're barbaric and have no place in a civil society. You think that because the baby isn't born yet there's a difference, there isn't. If two consenting adults fight each other to the death in brutal combat we'd throw the winner in prison. But somehow a baby that agreed to nothing and an adult killing them regardless isn't the same thing. Not only is it somehow not the same thing but it's seen as more acceptable and not less acceptable, despite the disparity in consent. This is the left's effect on the public consciousness and its effect is extremely apparent on you.
Now, I will say that throwing a woman in jail for getting an abortion may be too much even for me (the doctor can rot though) but I see no just world in which you can murder a baby in cold blood and not be punished. If a doctor and a mother both got their 5-year-old patient and child killed due to negligence on both their parts they'd probably both end up in jail. Especially if the child suffered. You could even draw a direct comparison. Outside of development, an unborn baby is no different than a child that's been born so imagine taking your 6-month-old child to the doctor and saying you can't take care of him, have no money, (insert reason for abortion here) and so he decides to tear the child apart limb from limb while the child is writhing in pain trying to escape what's happening all while the mother not only sits there and does nothing, but agrees fully with what's going on. These two would spend the rest of their lives in prison and should frankly be executed. Now I'm not arguing for execution as punishment for abortion but the difference between these two scenarios is nonexistent.
So you can scream fanatic into the void all you want but it doesn't change the reality. Abortion is murder. And the problem here isn't me, it's you and your refusal to acknowledge the life of the unborn and the fact that they are indeed alive, at conception, and therefore killing them is murder.
Not supporting the murder of unborn children is not fanaticism, it's called not being a degenerate. It's either a child and you can never kill it, or it isn't a child until birth and you can kill it any time before birth. And no, there's no magic moment where it goes from a clump of cells to being a child in the womb.
The left has pushed so far that regular beliefs are now "fanaticism". The sharp move to the far left is extremely inorganic and forced and thus should be ignored.
The middle ground is between no abortion and abortion with moderate to heavy regulation. Not between no abortion and abortion 5 months after birth or whatever other bullshit. This is just one example of the far lefts affect on society. Their move to the extreme left has stretched out what's considered the "middle" so people who take normal positions on the right that are only slightly more to the right than others are now massive extremists who are miles away from the "center".
And what do you even think finding a middle ground is? Everyone wanting the middle ground? No, it's people on both ends of the spectrum agreeing to compromise on something that isn't quite what they wanted instead of staying locked in argument over it and getting nothing done. This spectrum does not and should not include an ideology of literal child groomers and post-birth baby murderers. This is also where leftists fail, they can't compromise on anything without it being utterly superficial and meaningless.
I want abortion to be illegal and treated as just as barbaric as the gladiator matches of the past (because it is), that doesn't mean I won't compromise and support a ban with exceptions for rape or one that allows abortion before a heartbeat. But I'm also not going to stop saying what I believe and pushing for what I believe is right. I also won't "compromise" between vastly different extremes. Such as allowing late term abortion as a "compromise" between no abortion and post-birth abortion. That kind of shit is simply out of the range of reasonable views and shouldn't be entertained or attempted to find middle ground with.
I already gave you the basic common law legal definitions for murder. This isn't the "lefts effect." Common law was carried over from English common law. Under English common law abortion wasn't murder. There were laws for gestational limits for many abortions but I do not know of any that would imprison a woman or doctor for something as far reaching as murder that didn't result in the woman's death from a botched abortion. I'm fine with having gestational limits. I'm not fine with fanatics being legal experts. One sides hyperbolic nonsense drives the other sides hyperbolic nonsense.
Looking to the past exists to inform the present. We don't base our laws solely on the past. If the world were perfect we wouldn't have any need to ever revise a law again. Abortion is murder in the most literal sense. It not being classified as such is irrelevant to that reality.
Fights to the death used to be legal. Brutal gladiator matches for entertainment used to be legal. We made them illegal, the latter especially, because they're barbaric and have no place in a civil society. You think that because the baby isn't born yet there's a difference, there isn't. If two consenting adults fight each other to the death in brutal combat we'd throw the winner in prison. But somehow a baby that agreed to nothing and an adult killing them regardless isn't the same thing. Not only is it somehow not the same thing but it's seen as more acceptable and not less acceptable, despite the disparity in consent. This is the left's effect on the public consciousness and its effect is extremely apparent on you.
Now, I will say that throwing a woman in jail for getting an abortion may be too much even for me (the doctor can rot though) but I see no just world in which you can murder a baby in cold blood and not be punished. If a doctor and a mother both got their 5-year-old patient and child killed due to negligence on both their parts they'd probably both end up in jail. Especially if the child suffered. You could even draw a direct comparison. Outside of development, an unborn baby is no different than a child that's been born so imagine taking your 6-month-old child to the doctor and saying you can't take care of him, have no money, (insert reason for abortion here) and so he decides to tear the child apart limb from limb while the child is writhing in pain trying to escape what's happening all while the mother not only sits there and does nothing, but agrees fully with what's going on. These two would spend the rest of their lives in prison and should frankly be executed. Now I'm not arguing for execution as punishment for abortion but the difference between these two scenarios is nonexistent.
So you can scream fanatic into the void all you want but it doesn't change the reality. Abortion is murder. And the problem here isn't me, it's you and your refusal to acknowledge the life of the unborn and the fact that they are indeed alive, at conception, and therefore killing them is murder.