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.
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.