No. Something can be bad without being worse than the other options, and people can be mistaken about whether something an action will kill people. This is quite separate from actually having no term for human life in their utility function.
There’s an important difference between “not bad” and “bad but justifiable under some circumstances”. I don’t think believers in abortion, execution or war believe that killing per se is morally neutral. Each of those three has its justification.
Do you see my point that there are plenty of ways by which somebody can consider killing as not-so-bad, without needing to be a psychopath?
No. Something can be bad without being worse than the other options, and people can be mistaken about whether something an action will kill people. This is quite separate from actually having no term for human life in their utility function.
There’s an important difference between “not bad” and “bad but justifiable under some circumstances”. I don’t think believers in abortion, execution or war believe that killing per se is morally neutral. Each of those three has its justification.
I believe abortion is morally neutral, at least for the first few months and probably more.
But I said “killing per se”.