Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

That's my point. If the only legal difference was "a fetus is a human life" that wouldn't be sufficient to consider it homicide. At least that's my impression.



I'm not a legal scholar but the argument seems to be that actions taken by the justice system or the police (death penalty, imprisonment) are legally different than actions done by individual citizens. A woman can go to a doctor and get an abortion without government intervention. A woman cannot execute another human being without government intervention.


I think I understand what you are saying, but it seems to me that's not the point.

I mean, correct me if I'm wrong, but what I was responding to is your statement which I read as "the difference between an abortion and homicide is that we don't consider a fetus as an alive human". To which I responded by saying that if it was the only difference, capital punishment, euthanasia and other stuff would be considered homicide too, as the fact that the subject of these procedures is an "alive human" seems insufficient to consider these cases as homicides.

I'm afraid I'm not understanding whether you're telling me I'm right, I'm wrong or arguing another point entirely. Can you please help me understand?

(I hope I don't come across as belligerant or condescending because neither of those is my intention, I'm genuinely trying to understand your point of view and what you're saying. Also, as you may have understood, English is not my native language, so I may be missing something in my reading of your comments)


I believe we're encountering a real-life example of how "naming things is one of the hard problems" :), and for a non-native English speaker, your English is impeccable.

All I'm saying is that the previous commenter [0] was making a tautological error:

> Abortion is definitely harmful to a human life.

When a woman and her doctor commit a legal abortion, they are ostensibly not doing so thinking that the fetus/embryo is a human being. Roe v. Wade argued that "the word 'person,' as used in the 14th Amendment, does not include the unborn" [1].

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16757245

[1] https://archive.nytimes.com/www.nytimes.com/learning/general...




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: