I guess I won on the point that I addressed in that you have passed over it in silence. So, it's now established between us that one may know that abortion is murder and yet one might not kill an abortionist. That was easy!
;-)
“’There are other issues that play into the question....’
“Which means, when it comes down to brass tacks, what Tiller was doing was not murder.”
Although what Mr. Tiller was doing was murder in the moral sense, in the legal sense, you're correct. It is not legally an act of murder under the law in any state to kill an unborn child. “Murder,” as defined in the law, is not a term that the law applies to what an abortionist does. Even though it is actually murder.
That IS one of the issues that comes into play.
sitetest
Apparently that is all that matters.
We can't "take the law into our own hands" even to save condemned children who are destined to be murdered before our eyes (or behind clinic walls).
As long as it is "legal" to perform abortions, then I guess it is both legally and "morally wrong" to take any kind of "illegal" step to prevent the murder of any specific child.
Instead we hold candlelight vigils at night while during the daytime abortionists are executing our posterity with inmpugnity.
I give up.
Nobody really believes it is "murder" so why should I bother fighting against it?
When someone takes a drastic step and actually does prevent a few actual and specific murders we are all on board condemning him for breaking "the law".
To Hell with it. If nobody really believes it is "murder" except in some esoteric moral sense, then who am I to condemn the abortionist. He's making money by legal means. That is what capitalism is all about.
Instead of calling it "murder", let's just call it what it is "CAPITALISM".