🚀 go-pugleaf

> Laura, nicely expressed except for one point -- you are assuming that killing
> of a human being is murder in some absolute sense....
> 

Generally, in a society not ruled by tyranny, laws in absoluate terms without
ambiguity define what is murder and what is not.  I don't see your point here.


> However, a) murder is a crime -- defined by humans, committed by humans,
> punished by humans, all without God's assistance.  There are several instances
> where a human can be killed without it being murder -- a soldier in wartime,
> a policeman using "deadly force," an honest accident (manslaughter), or
> even self-defence.  If (a foetus is human), then (abortions are murder) is
> not valid reasoning, since (killing a human) != (murder).
> 
Murder is not a gray area, laws define when killing a human being is murder.
Thus, in most instances within a society, the killing of a human equals murder.

> All right, so let's assume that we are talking about the "before the throne"
> guilt.  In this context, the "human" discussion is pointless, since the
> commandment reads "Thou shalt not kill," not "Thou shalt not kill humans."
> Therefore, any abortion is a grevious sin.  q.e.d.  However, this also has
> a few problems associated with it (I say as I eat my bacon-double cheese-
> burger.)  Even the french fries were once alive....
> 						Pat Juola
> 						JHU - Maths

"Thou shalt not kill applies only to the killing of humans, PERIOD 
If you apply it to all living things, then kindly explain to me how we could
live, we can't live off inorganic substances.

ray (not brain dead as some appear to be) frank