Hacker News Reader

I don't understand the connection to abortion at all - just because they somehow both concern 'future humans' doesn't mean there is a logical connection here, in the sense that A leads to B or B leads to A. Could you explain?

View on HN

Both involve potentially realizable persons.

No? One applies to any future person that has been "realized", the other is about whether people are being "realized" or not. People that never existed in the first place don't need to be protected, but generally the two questions are just not related at all.

I think the confusion relies on whether one asserts that ‘realized’ is a persistent state variable.

I think what you are getting at is the question of when "being realized" begins, and while I know that we could be discussing that aspect for days and I would not sway you, what remains either way is the fact that there is no analogy to the topic at hand here.

If you assert that "realization" begins very early, then legislation such as this one applies to the embryo as well. If you do not assert that, then legislation that applies to living humans does not apply here.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com