nj writes:
Well, then, that wouldn't be murder now would it...?
In which case, what does that have to do with anything. I'm asking if murder is right or wrong. Not a single person has answered that honestly. NO circumstances are needed to answer the question. You are conflating between determing whether something is murder with the very definition of murder.
Just answer the question.
Why are you hiding behind a tautology? You have rolled up the contextual questions into a dictionary definition. Murder is the unlawful taking of a human life. Therefore, those who attempted to assassinate Hitler--a plot which, if successful, would have excised a great evil and likely have saved millions of lives--were conspiring to commit an immoral act. Abortion, where legal, by your lights, then must be a moral act by definition, and those who oppose it do so immorally, since it is itself--again, by your lights, and the law in many places--a moral act.
So, sure, I'll answer the question. No, murder is not an immoral act. It is certainly illegal, by definition, but law does not legislate morality.
Do
you believe law determines morality? Did the laws of Nazi Germany--and do the laws of China regarding prison labor, forced abortions, arbitrary executions--determine absolute morality in those nations? If a nation adopts a law allowing its security forces to kill at their own discretion, are those killings moral?
Does Caesar trump Christ?
You should stop your definitional, tautological posturing and engage the real question: What moral case does not require consideration of the context? If there is a moral absolute, then there are cases where no knowledge of context is required to determine the morality of the action. So far, you have failed to name one.
Check the mirror. It is not your debate opponents who are arguing in bad faith.
Real things always push back.-William James
Save lives! Click here!Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC!---------------------------------------
™ Version 4.2
