No, it is most certainly not "murder" in all cases. If you are attacked in your home by a crazed rapist and you kill him, his life is ended and you did it deliberately, but it is not "murder."
As I said, murder is a legal concept, and the use of this drug is legal, so, like it or not, it is not "murder."
Whether it is right or not is an entirely different question. See my post #33.
So, if some leftist can convince the judiciary that murder doesn't exist than NOTHING would constitute murder?
It is murder. A baby is murdered by it’s mother because it’s an inconvenience. It is murder because it is not done in self-defense. It was done because Mom wanted a few seconds of pleasure and deemed it worth her child’s life.
Taking of an innocent life is murder.
It’s not the same as self-defense, nor is it the same as the military engagement in times of was, nor is it the same as capital punishment by the government in the enforcement of civil law and order, as God ordained.
If *murder* is a legal concept, what legal concept does ending the life of a human being innocent of any crime by a non-combatant citizen of the country called?
And where do you draw the line? At what age does the lump of undifferentiated cells become human and when does it become murder to end it? What standard do you apply to determine the humanity of the person and on what is it based?