7 ms·

And?

by veriuhri 7y ago

And?

Paraesthetic 7y ago
exactly
- Fam2019 7y ago
  Humans are allowed to be murdered under two conditions: * They are at earliest stage of their life * The parent ordering the murder is female
  - omarchowdhury 7y ago
    They at earliest stage of their life But is that a human?
    - krageon 7y ago
      The right question is "is this murder". By talking past the sale so to speak (asking a question about a later piece of rhetoric), we are in danger of legitimising (to onlookers) a piece of rhetoric that is hand-crafted to cause outrage.
      - EliRivers 7y ago
        The very fact that it's allowed suggests heavily it's not murder; our green-coloured chum's statement is inherently contradictory and as such cannot be sensibly addressed.
        krageon 7y ago
        When a soldier shoots another soldier, that is murder even when it is allowed. The fact that it is allowed is immaterial to the definition of what it is.
        gboone 7y ago
        The description is taking of life. The definition is either killing or murder. Killing is broadly seen as not wrong, while murder is. For example, there are laws against murder. But if, while defending yourself, the other is killed that is not considered wrong, in most cases. You are right that taking life is taking life. And I would agree that a case could be made for murder in some cases with soldiers. So the real question is is it killing a fetus or murdering a fetus? No one debates there is life.
        krageon 7y ago
        > No one debates there is life. People do in fact debate whether or not there is human life.
        pnongrata 7y ago
        People debate about that all the time, whether there's life, a 'soul', etc.
        EliRivers 7y ago
        I disagree. Murder is a crime; a legal idea. If that same legal system allows killing under various circumstances, it's not murder. State sanctioned legal killing is explicitly not murder. If you choose to define it as murder, that's up to you, knock yourself out, but the state has power and authority - you don't.
      - belorn 7y ago
        Is it the right question? It seems like almost all laws have abortion law and murder laws meeting at the point where the embryo or fetus reaches the point where it can survive outside the uterus. The legal test used is commonly a viability test, and current medical technology sets that to week 22. Abortion is thus usually not allowed after week 21. A murder is thus any intentional death after the date where abortion is no longer legal. It does however get a bit complex at times. Here in Sweden there has been some discussion what to do with delays in abortion caused by the hospital. The result of the discussion was to determine viability based on the initial date that the decision to have an abortion was registered. The argument is that the treatment women go through to have an abortion makes the embryo/fetus less viable, thus making it still legal to have an abortion in those cases beyond week 22. From a philosophical perspective I see the viability test as being a unfulfilling answer to both side of the political space, but it seems like the best approach from a practical perspective.
        AlexTWithBeard 7y ago
        Should make a great horror comedy plot: "Dear sir, the abortion requested by your mother twenty years ago has finally been granted. In order to proceed please present yourself to the hospital at... If you do not appear within two weeks you may be found guilty in female reproductive rights infringement..."
        teddyh 7y ago
        Already done in 1974, more or less: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pre-persons https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pre-persons
        pjc50 7y ago
        The problem is that "liveness" is one thing but "viability" is a statement about the future. The case that ultimately tipped Ireland over the edge was https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Savita_Halappanavar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Savita_Halappanavar , in which the hospital deemed themselves unable to treat her septic miscarriage because the fetal heartbeat was still present - despite it being impossible for a viable delivery or c-section to be carried out. This resulted in the death of mother as well as the fetus.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - rasz 7y ago
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fUspLVStPbk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fUspLVStPbk Every Sperm is Sacred - Monty Python's The Meaning of Life
  - bob_doggo 7y ago
    why is this anti-abortion bullshit on hacker news, shouldn't the standard here be quite a bit higher?
    - bitlax 7y ago
      Actually you're the one breaking the Hacker News guidelines by making this kind of unsubstantive comment.
    - veriuhri 7y ago
      My sentiments exactly.
rdiddly 7y ago
And, tricking people by lying is what Satan does. The end.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]

And?

Paraesthetic 7y ago

exactly

Fam2019 7y ago
Humans are allowed to be murdered under two conditions: * They are at earliest stage of their life * The parent ordering the murder is female
- omarchowdhury 7y ago
  They at earliest stage of their life But is that a human?
  - krageon 7y ago
    The right question is "is this murder". By talking past the sale so to speak (asking a question about a later piece of rhetoric), we are in danger of legitimising (to onlookers) a piece of rhetoric that is hand-crafted to cause outrage.
    - EliRivers 7y ago
      The very fact that it's allowed suggests heavily it's not murder; our green-coloured chum's statement is inherently contradictory and as such cannot be sensibly addressed.
      - krageon 7y ago
        When a soldier shoots another soldier, that is murder even when it is allowed. The fact that it is allowed is immaterial to the definition of what it is.
        gboone 7y ago
        The description is taking of life. The definition is either killing or murder. Killing is broadly seen as not wrong, while murder is. For example, there are laws against murder. But if, while defending yourself, the other is killed that is not considered wrong, in most cases. You are right that taking life is taking life. And I would agree that a case could be made for murder in some cases with soldiers. So the real question is is it killing a fetus or murdering a fetus? No one debates there is life.
        krageon 7y ago
        > No one debates there is life. People do in fact debate whether or not there is human life.
        pnongrata 7y ago
        People debate about that all the time, whether there's life, a 'soul', etc.
        EliRivers 7y ago
        I disagree. Murder is a crime; a legal idea. If that same legal system allows killing under various circumstances, it's not murder. State sanctioned legal killing is explicitly not murder. If you choose to define it as murder, that's up to you, knock yourself out, but the state has power and authority - you don't.
    - belorn 7y ago
      Is it the right question? It seems like almost all laws have abortion law and murder laws meeting at the point where the embryo or fetus reaches the point where it can survive outside the uterus. The legal test used is commonly a viability test, and current medical technology sets that to week 22. Abortion is thus usually not allowed after week 21. A murder is thus any intentional death after the date where abortion is no longer legal. It does however get a bit complex at times. Here in Sweden there has been some discussion what to do with delays in abortion caused by the hospital. The result of the discussion was to determine viability based on the initial date that the decision to have an abortion was registered. The argument is that the treatment women go through to have an abortion makes the embryo/fetus less viable, thus making it still legal to have an abortion in those cases beyond week 22. From a philosophical perspective I see the viability test as being a unfulfilling answer to both side of the political space, but it seems like the best approach from a practical perspective.
      - AlexTWithBeard 7y ago
        Should make a great horror comedy plot: "Dear sir, the abortion requested by your mother twenty years ago has finally been granted. In order to proceed please present yourself to the hospital at... If you do not appear within two weeks you may be found guilty in female reproductive rights infringement..."
        teddyh 7y ago
        Already done in 1974, more or less: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pre-persons https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pre-persons
      - pjc50 7y ago
        The problem is that "liveness" is one thing but "viability" is a statement about the future. The case that ultimately tipped Ireland over the edge was https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Savita_Halappanavar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Savita_Halappanavar , in which the hospital deemed themselves unable to treat her septic miscarriage because the fetal heartbeat was still present - despite it being impossible for a viable delivery or c-section to be carried out. This resulted in the death of mother as well as the fetus.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- rasz 7y ago
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fUspLVStPbk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fUspLVStPbk Every Sperm is Sacred - Monty Python's The Meaning of Life
- bob_doggo 7y ago
  why is this anti-abortion bullshit on hacker news, shouldn't the standard here be quite a bit higher?
  - bitlax 7y ago
    Actually you're the one breaking the Hacker News guidelines by making this kind of unsubstantive comment.
  - veriuhri 7y ago
    My sentiments exactly.

rdiddly 7y ago

And, tricking people by lying is what Satan does. The end.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]