No, it doesn’t: it’s killing something that could become a full-blown human being. That doesn’t make it murder. That makes it killing. Like I said, murder is a legal conclusion, not a statement of fact.
It is funny that the 10 commandments in most versions of the Bible (non-KJV) has "Murder" forbidden instead of "killing". Then just a few verses down we have this
If people are fighting and hit a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely but there is no serious injury, the offender must be fined whatever the woman’s husband demands and the court allows. But if there is serious injury, you are to take life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise.
Pro-choice people argue that the above verse proves that the baby is not as important as the mother. Interestingly enough, President George Bush wrote about this misinterpretation in a book he himself pinned.
https://www.amazon.com/Notes-Critical-Practical-Book-Exodus/dp/0260299693 George Bush (Notes on Exodus, vol. 2, p. 19) also writing in the last century said,
If the consequence were only the premature birth of the child, the aggressor was obliged to give her husband a recompense in money, according to his demand; but in order that his demand might not be unreasonable, it was subject to the final decision of the judges. On the other hand, if either the woman or her child was any way hurt or maimed, the law of retaliation at once took effect
The RSV version assumes the child dies, but the NIV version assumes the child lives. Thus giving the woman and child the same status of protection of life.