It’s because the definition of the word murder is what is under discussion. Murder is a legal term. It is what defines what is or is not murder. There is a different question as to whether or not abortion should be classified as such. I would say yes. But the definition of murder, according to the word itself, is one which is always of legal qualifications. In this way, while you are right in pointing out that God says it is wrong, a grave, mortal sin, it is not the same thing as saying God says it is murder.

http://vox-nova.com/2009/04/27/do-not-kill-do-not-even-desire-the-death-of-another/

Should help with the issues at hand.

There’s a difference between murder and killing. Killing can be just in God’s eyes. Murder can never be just in God’s eyes.

Yeah, it’s important that we call abortion murder, not just killing. America says its killing, God says its murder .. I’ll go with God on this one.

There is really no such thing as “legalized murder”. Killing is a act. Murder is when that act violates the law.

DC and Joe,

Under the Constitution, you have every right to speak your mind in regard to truth. While supporting that right, what troubles me is that Joe seems more intrested in telling other people what “truth” is that effectively winning over hearts and minds, an essential feature of winning the enactment of legislation in our democracy. To my reading, it suggests an abandonment of using the democratic and constitutional means to winning protections for the unborn — or at, least, to be lacking a committment to using it as the exclusive means.

As to the Spanish Civil War, I should clarify that I am not one of the wimpy liberal Catholic pacifists you might know. I am very much an old school Cold War Democrat. I have no trouble using warfare to defend democracy. The Church had legitimate grievences in the Spanish Republic. (Though maybe less grievences than in the USA today based on how some see the abortion issue). Nevertheless, even with such legitimate grievances, I will defend republican government over a fascist coup. If called by my country, I will do so with arms. In defending her, I would give no special consideration of her enemies if they were wearing a biretta or miter.

Forgive me for taking your words at face value. You said,

“If you live in the United States, it is not murder. Can’t you deal with cultural truth? Work from there. There is no need to use language that is off-putting and that incites others to react negatively.”

The argument here is simple: you said abortion is not ‘murder’ in the US, as if the cultural climate dictates what is and what is not true, and moreover, that calling it such is ‘off-putting’ and ‘inciting’ others to ‘react negatively’.

Abortion is legalized murder. To deliberately take the life of an innocent human being is always murder, whether the courts recognize it or not – there is a moral law that stands higher than that of human institutions. There has to be, or there is no morality at all, only intellectual fashion. The concept breaks down and ceases to mean anything at all.

I am sensitive to tactical and pragmatic concerns but we will never win the battle against abortion in the long-term on the basis of reducing or minimizing its evil. People must come to reject abortion based on the full truth of what it is.

Most of the people who get abortions, I imagine, convince themselves that it is not murder – some think of it as a justifiable mercy killing, others buy the nonsense about it being a ‘clump of cells’ and others don’t think about it at all. But the bottom line here is that the language of the pro-choice movement kills. They have already made abortion into something it is not – why should we help them?

And how in heaven’s name can we possibly argue against abortion without explaining why we are against it? If we describe abortion in anything less than true and real terms – which includes murder, violence, bloodshed and the innocence of the victim – why should we ever expect anyone to be opposed to it?

Why should we expect that a person who does not believe abortion is wrong is going to one day change their mind on the basis of anything other than the recognition that abortion is indeed murder? What will convince them? A newfound and inexplicable love for clumps of cells?

Or is the plan simply to resort to bribery, to, instead of ever speaking the truth about abortion, simply promise pregnant women that they will be supported in their pregnancy no matter what? Don’t get me wrong, I fully support more financial aid for pregnant mothers as an intrinsic social good, but we will never be able to remove all of the circumstances that make abortion an attractive option. We can however make it universally known that no social circumstances ever justify child murder.