Bullshit, the atheistguy!

[IrBubble]

Zylstra; all you have done in this thread is misunderstand and offend people. Take your last post for instance. If you were to read the posts you are responding to you would see what he means, and in some of the cases agree with him. Instead you have read it with the sole intent of correcting him, meaning that you have read it in a way which does not make sense intentionally.

The poster which you were responding to clearly made the distinction between murders that are justifiable and murders that are not, yet you felt the need to respond with:

So, a man breaks into your house, shoots your children, shoots you, and is raping your wife.

Shooting him should get you sent to prison for murder?

Now, as you might have noticed yourself this is a pathetic appeal to emotion, and should not be used as an argument in any shape or form.

 

[Zylstra]

It's an appeal to nothing. The appeal to emotion was in the use of 'murder' where the word was not applicable by two other posters to elicit a response to 'murder' where 'murder' (either in the legal sense or in the 'common' sense of 'morally or ethically unjustifiable') was simply not being discussed.

What I have done is to insist on honesty in the use of language instead of attempting to misuse words to elicit the desired response in a dishonest nature.

 

[RestrictedAccess]

The poster which you were responding to clearly made the distinction between murders that are justifiable and murders that are not, yet you felt the need to respond with:

Then the word that poster should have used is "homicide". Homicide by definition is the killing of another human being, and can be legal or illegal.

Murder is (in a legal sense) the illegal killing of another human. It is largely misused by people who want to attach an emotional significance to a loss of life.

 

[xman]

no no I've seen one of these before. It's a Troll. let's see what it does ...

 

[Fictionarious]

Then the word that poster should have used is "homicide". Homicide by definition is the killing of another human being, and can be legal or illegal.

Murder is (in a legal sense) the illegal killing of another human. It is largely misused by people who want to attach an emotional significance to a loss of life.

The word that I used was murder, and that was to describe the killing of any sentient agent ('higher' life form) against it's will. This is to resolve the dillema that arises in different States dictating different standards of legality by which to deem something "murder", so that the same act can be at once described as murder and not murder, pending the disclosure of the location of it's performance. My use of the word permits all possible standards of lawful/unlawful, as deemed by the killed. If the word murder may be used in a legal sense, then it undoubtedly may be used in other senses which would not necessarily constitute misuse, though I must admit to wanting to attach an emotional significance to the deliberate deprivation of sentient life.

 

[theatheistguy]

Then the word that poster should have used is "homicide". Homicide by definition is the killing of another human being, and can be legal or illegal.

Murder is (in a legal sense) the illegal killing of another human. It is largely misused by people who want to attach an emotional significance to a loss of life.

In the context of a debate with pro-lifers, the appropriate word to use was clearly murder, not homicide.

 

[RestrictedAccess]

The word that I used was murder, and that was to describe the killing of any sentient agent ('higher' life form) against it's will. This is to resolve the dillema that arises in different States dictating different standards of legality by which to deem something "murder", so that the same act can be at once described as murder and not murder, pending the disclosure of the location of it's performance. My use of the word permits all possible standards of lawful/unlawful, as deemed by the killed. If the word murder may be used in a legal sense, then it undoubtedly may be used in other senses which would not necessarily constitute misuse, though I must admit to wanting to attach an emotional significance to the deliberate deprivation of sentient life.

So you're essentially redefining murder to take on the definition and applicability of the word 'homicide' to satisfy the subjective idea of 'murder' by people who don't really understand the true meaning of it?

In other words, because the term 'murder' is so popular, it should essentially just be given the same definition of 'homicide'?

 

[RestrictedAccess]

In the context of a debate with pro-lifers, the appropriate word to use was clearly murder, not homicide.

I was referring to the definition change posed by Fictionarious. I can see why you would've avoided the term 'homicide' in a Christian forum. I doubt many of them could tell the difference between the two terms.

 

[Fictionarious]

So you're essentially redefining murder to take on the definition and applicability of the word 'homicide' to satisfy the subjective idea of 'murder' by people who don't really understand the true meaning of it?

In other words, because the term 'murder' is so popular, it should essentially just be given the same definition of 'homicide'?

Nope. Homicide is killing a man. Murder is killing any sentient being without their consent.
The slaughter of cows, obviously not a case of homicide, is not regarded as murder today, but according to me it is.
Call it a redefinition if you want. All definitions are, eventually.

 

[theatheistguy]

Nope. Homicide is killing a man. Murder is killing any sentient being without their consent.
The slaughter of cows, obviously not a case of homicide, is not regarded as murder today, but according to me it is.
Call it a redefinition if you want. All definitions are, eventually.

Murder refers to humans, not other beings.

 

[Zylstra]

Nope. Homicide is killing a man. Murder is killing any sentient being without their consent.
The slaughter of cows, obviously not a case of homicide, is not regarded as murder today, but according to me it is.
Call it a redefinition if you want. All definitions are, eventually.

Murder refers to humans, not other beings.

Murder/Manslaughter = Illegal Homicide

 

[scalyblue]

murder (n.)
O.E. morà°or (pl. morà¾ras) "secret killing of a person, unlawful killing," also "mortal sin, crime, punishment, torment, misery," from P.Gmc. *murthran (cf. Goth maurà¾r, O.Fris. morth, O.N. morà°, M.Du. moort, Ger. Mord "murder"). from PIE *mrtro-, from base *mor-/*mr- "to die" (cf. L. mors, gen. mortis "death;" mori "to die;" see mortal). The spelling with -d- probably reflects influence of Anglo-Fr. murdre, from O.Fr. mordre, from M.L. murdrum, from the W.Gmc. root. Viking custom, typical of Gmc., distinguished morà° (O.N.) "secret slaughter," from vig (O.N.) "slaying." The former involved concealment, or slaying a man by night or when asleep, and was a heinous crime. The latter was not a disgrace, if the killer acknowledged his deed, but he was subject to vengeance or demand for compensation.

"Mordre wol out that se we day by day." [Chaucer, "Nun's Priest's Tale," c.1386]

Not too far from how we use it in the modern day, but still specific to killing humans in a concealed manner

 

[theatheistguy]

Not too far from how we use it in the modern day, but still specific to killing humans in a concealed manner

So I take a man out onto a crowded street and shoot him in the head, this isn't murder?

 

[scalyblue]

Not too far from how we use it in the modern day, but still specific to killing humans in a concealed manner

So I take a man out onto a crowded street and shoot him in the head, this isn't murder?

Etymologically speaking, no :lol:

However, in any law you will see, the term would be defined very specifically. Something like "Any person found to yada yada death of another person shall be guilty of the crime of Murder" ....which means our legal system is ultimately based on bad grammar.