Should murderers be charged with two counts of murder if they murder a pregnant woman?

[JDPriestly]

44. Yes. The law has to be consistent, but when rights conflict,

one takes precedence over the other.

So, yes, you can say it's murder when a third party kills a fetus within a pregnant woman and still say that the mother's right to choose takes precedent over the life of the fetus.

You say: "Basically you can't say it's murder in this case and then claim it's not in another case based simply on the mother's feelings (well, I can, but I don't think the law can)."

The language "simply on the mother's feelings" betrays an anti-choice bias against the mother's right to choose. A pregnant woman may very much want to carry her child to term. Her feelings may want a child, but her knowledge that the risk that she and/or the child will not survive or will not be healthy if she does may cause her to resist her desire to have the baby and choose to have an abortion. It is a very personal thing. That is why it is the mother's choice.

For example, a woman may discover that she is pregnant when she is several months, say three months into her pregnancy. When she thinks back, she realizes that, not knowing she was pregnant, she took a medication that is highly likely to cause her child to have a serious disability. This might happen with certain prescribbed psychotropic medications, for example. She may choose to have an abortion because she does not want to condemn her child to life with a serious disability.

Another mother may, to the contrary, decide to take her chances and try to carry the baby to term. That is a painful choice. Only the mother has the right and responsibility to make that choice. Only she knows what she can deal with.

One woman would feel terrible guilt and remorse if she had an abortion under that circumstance. Another would feel less guilt and remorse about an abortion than she would if she had a severely disabled child and was reminded every time she looked at or cared for her child that she (or her medication) had caused the disability. So that is why it is an individual choice.

The mother's right to choose takes precedence over the rights of others concerning the fetus. That the mother has the right to choose does not give others the right to make her choice for her. There is no conflict between saying that you can decide to homeschool your child, but your neighbor cannot decide to kidnap your child and homeschool him or her. The state does require that the child be educated but does not require that the child attend a particular school.

We value one right over the other all the time. A property owner has certain rights as to a property he or she owns that a renter on that property does not have. There are so many examples of rights that are superior making other rights inferior.