Laws should derive from rights.

Yet there is a contradiction in the laws if we allow abortion and count the situation described as homicide.

A fetus has not even the rights of a child, according to current law,

It isn't a person, a right bearing being, but an object owned by the mother under abortion.

Yet, to count its death as homicide if done by another against an unconsenting mother somehow grants it "personhood", and the right to life.

To put it in logical form:

~R (no rights for fetus)

K(kick to the stomach that kills fetus)

(K->R)(if Kicked and killed then fetus is granted rights(retroactively I might add...), but this doesn't override our first statement)

Thus ~R&R; which is a contradiction.

Rather what would be a valid thing to do, is to recognize that is a contradiction and so either count (k->R) as a false premise, as I propose, or to state that K must then be false.

To put it simply, there simply isn't the violation of life necessary for it to count as murder.

Perhaps of a pregnant woman's choice, which should then be a violation of a different law because it is a violation of different rights.

Also, you were suggesting in your argument that the right to life is subject to parental consent. Something I bet you would argue against in another context.