[WikiEN-l] NPOV: Fetus personhood - thanks for all the fish

Fri Jul 29 16:51:45 UTC 2005

>From: Sam Korn <smoddy at gmail.com>
>
> > >Referring to a "human fetus" as "human" doesnt appear
> > >to be controversial
> >
> > Referring to it as "a human fetus" (as opposed to, say, "a chimpanzee
> > fetus") is non-controversial.  Referring to is a "a human", quite 
>obviously
> > is.
> >
> > Jay.
>
>Surely there has to be some difference between using human as a noun
>and as an adjective.  Using "human" as a noun to refer to a foetus
>(i.e. "a foetus in a womb is a human"), has a subtle but important
>difference to using it as an adjective (i.e. "a foetus in a womb is
>human").  The first implies personhood, the second does not.
>
>Is this a viable compromise?

As opposed to "a foetus in a womb is chimpanzee"?  "A foetus in womb is 
inhuman"?  Frankly, I can't see a meaningful usage which wouldn't imply 
personhood. The example you provide doesn't give any useful information, 
and, in fact, if found in an article would appear to be promoting exactly 
that, personhood.

Jay.