California, as usual, provides a perfect example of the hypocrisy in this
issue...

Look at the Scott Peterson case: he is charged with two counts of murder;
one in the death of his pregnant wife, a second in the death of the fetus.

But, in California, it is perfectly legal to abort a fetus, so a murder
charge would not be levied against an abortion provider...



"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
ink.net...

"G.R. Patterson III" wrote in message
...

Yes. It's defined in law. It's been defined in law for centuries. The
OED echoes that definition. The State determines what specific killings
are illegal. For a killing to be murder, the victim must be human, the
killing must have been intentional, it must have been premeditated, and
it
must be illegal. The State defines what is murder and what is not.


So no State has ever defined murder to include the intentional
dismemberment
of a fetus to be murder? So what's the big deal with Roe-v-Wade then?