“Not according to the law.”
So, by saying the law says, then you are saying that *you* say that abortion is not murder? Correct?
Am I understanding you to say the law is infallible? That the law is our God?
Or maybe you are saying the Supreme Court is infallible and they are our God?
If the law or the Supreme Court are not infallible, at what point do we contradict them in order to more perfectly craft the laws?
I can speak for myself just fine. No need to try to put words in my mouth.
The President has the duty to enforce the law. Not to invent the law.
Why do you think abortion was not shut down by President Reagan?
I can speak for myself just fine. No need to try to put words in my mouth.
The President has the duty to enforce the law. Not to invent the law.
Why do you think abortion was not shut down by President Reagan?
I can speak for myself just fine. No need to try to put words in my mouth.
The President has the duty to enforce the law. Not to invent the law.
Why do you think abortion was not shut down by President Reagan?
Your logic is almost perfectly circular. Murder is defined as the “unlawful” killing of one human by another, so what the law says is exactly to the point of whether or not abortion is murder.
Killing someone in justified self-defense is not unlawful, and therefore is not murder.
Even if the law finally and fully acknowledged the humanity of the unborn, there would still be legal circumstances under which the killing of the unborn was not murder.