U.S. companies lash out at Texas law changes, including abortion ban • Hacker News Board

Re: U.S. companies lash out at Texas law changes, including abortion ban

#71

Post by beaner » Sat, Sep 04, 2021, 4:38 PM UTC

bambax wrote: post #59

collegeburner wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Abortion is really a very simple issue, those who say it is about "regulating women" attack a straw man. Pro-lifers believe that abortion is murder of the baby. This trumps a woman's right for a medical procedure. So the question about whether it's a private medical choice or an issue of bodily autonomy doesn't even enter into the discussion. There are laws against murdering someone other ways that restrict bodily au…

> Abortion is really a very simple issue, those who say it is about "regulating women" attack a straw man. Pro-lifers believe that abortion is murder of the baby. Doubtful. So-called "pro-lifers" are also, generally, against other forms of birth-control, including pills and condoms. Also, even if they did believe that an embryo is a baby, that doesn't make it so. What they "believe" (or say they believe) shouldn't ma…

> So-called "pro-lifers" are also, generally, against other forms of birth-control, including pills and condoms.

You might need a source on this one. This certainly applies to some religious types, but is it a "general" truth for people who would pass the heartbeat law? A law which still allows abortion but identifies a test for when life begins? I don't think so.

Re: U.S. companies lash out at Texas law changes, including abortion ban

#72

Post by azinman2 » Sat, Sep 04, 2021, 4:38 PM UTC

Sevii wrote: post #13

samizdis wrote: post #3

"Looking at the abortion law, or the gun law, or the voting law, it's a form of vigilante justice, where you're empowering individuals to enforce the law," said Tyson Tuttle, the CEO of Austin-based Silicon Laboratories (SLAB.O). "It's been a rough week in Texas and a harbinger of what's to come across the country." I'm from across the pond, and have spent limited time in the US - none of it in Texas - but I always t…

America is a huge country and we've been discovering over the last decade that we are a lot more divided than we realized. It's like combining France, Germany, England, Spain and Italy into one country and expecting them to agree on everything. Luckily in America we can just move to a state where reasonable people run things.

> Luckily in America we can just move to a state where reasonable people run things.

Wait 4 years, or 2 years for a recall…

Re: U.S. companies lash out at Texas law changes, including abortion ban

#73

Post by ivnubinas » Sat, Sep 04, 2021, 4:39 PM UTC

s5300 wrote: post #25

Those who enact law against abortion should have to Google "trisomy 13 cyclops" (warning: NSFL) on a large projector in public and have their reactions broadcast. I can't even find the worst image in an older case study I'm thinking of right now, but damn has Google images of it gotten worse since I last looked. Some life is simply incompatible with life.

Genuine question: Is that an argument for abortion only on extreme circumstances or for abortion in general?

Re: U.S. companies lash out at Texas law changes, including abortion ban

#74

Post by amanaplanacanal » Sat, Sep 04, 2021, 4:39 PM UTC

bambax wrote: post #59

collegeburner wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Abortion is really a very simple issue, those who say it is about "regulating women" attack a straw man. Pro-lifers believe that abortion is murder of the baby. This trumps a woman's right for a medical procedure. So the question about whether it's a private medical choice or an issue of bodily autonomy doesn't even enter into the discussion. There are laws against murdering someone other ways that restrict bodily au…

> Abortion is really a very simple issue, those who say it is about "regulating women" attack a straw man. Pro-lifers believe that abortion is murder of the baby. Doubtful. So-called "pro-lifers" are also, generally, against other forms of birth-control, including pills and condoms. Also, even if they did believe that an embryo is a baby, that doesn't make it so. What they "believe" (or say they believe) shouldn't ma…

Last time I tried to find a pro-life organization that wasn't also anti birth control, I couldn't find one. I suspect that's because they were funded mostly by the catholic church.

Re: U.S. companies lash out at Texas law changes, including abortion ban

#75

Post by pope_meat » Sat, Sep 04, 2021, 4:39 PM UTC

6051A86D wrote: post #44

This is not a political discussion site. Please don't submit stories like this. They just provide yet another anonymous place for people to argue and talk past each other.

Insisting on keeping things apolitical is a political statement in itself, just in favor of the status quo, rather than in opposition.

You can't escape politics.

Re: U.S. companies lash out at Texas law changes, including abortion ban

#76

Post by dragonwriter » Sat, Sep 04, 2021, 4:40 PM UTC

tristanMatthias wrote: post #37

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> supposedly restrictive voting laws do not generally have more restrictions than blue states such as New York Can you give any examples to support this? We have no ID requirement, no questions asked mail-in ballots, early voting, and paper ballots. The Texas law isn’t all bad. Recording vote counting, paper trails and regulating the removal of voters from rolls is good policy. But the restrictions on early voting an…

What about vaccine passports?

> What about vaccine passports?

Vaccine passports are not a voting restriction in New York, or anywhere else in the US.

Re: U.S. companies lash out at Texas law changes, including abortion ban

#77

Post by lax4ever » Sat, Sep 04, 2021, 4:40 PM UTC

gfodor wrote: post #51

WanderPanda wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Human rights are a binary thing: either you are a human and you have them, or you are not a human and you don't have them. IMO it all comes down to when we define the bag of cells to be a human being. Once the bag of cells is a human being murdering it is obviously a crime. IMO any view point between the first cells are already a human being to it becoming a human at birth are valid. Why not settle this in a referend…

This frame is an error, and is leading to a lot of unnecessary division imo. Unborn people are unique because they are entirely dependent upon a mother to survive in a way that cannot be replaced. The human right to life is not absolute, at least under current law: a person who literally requires your body’s metabolical processes to survive is not entitled to that, and so we have decided the provider has the choice t…

Why is it just metabolic support that is the qualifier here? A child is still very dependent on caregivers for years after exiting the birth canal, and in many cases a child remains dependent on the mother's metabolic processes when thy receive breastmilk. Why is it acceptable to kill the child before exiting the birth canal but not after?

Re: U.S. companies lash out at Texas law changes, including abortion ban

#78

Post by azinman2 » Sat, Sep 04, 2021, 4:40 PM UTC

option wrote: post #66

samizdis wrote: post #3

"Looking at the abortion law, or the gun law, or the voting law, it's a form of vigilante justice, where you're empowering individuals to enforce the law," said Tyson Tuttle, the CEO of Austin-based Silicon Laboratories (SLAB.O). "It's been a rough week in Texas and a harbinger of what's to come across the country." I'm from across the pond, and have spent limited time in the US - none of it in Texas - but I always t…

regarding “voter suppression”. Do you require an ID to vote in UK? I don’t get why is this controversial in US…

Because many poor and specific minority groups people don’t have IDs. These laws are specifically designed knowing that these groups rarely vote Republican yet are big enough group to make a dent.

Re: U.S. companies lash out at Texas law changes, including abortion ban

#79

Post by collegeburner » Sat, Sep 04, 2021, 4:40 PM UTC

bambax wrote: post #59

collegeburner wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Abortion is really a very simple issue, those who say it is about "regulating women" attack a straw man. Pro-lifers believe that abortion is murder of the baby. This trumps a woman's right for a medical procedure. So the question about whether it's a private medical choice or an issue of bodily autonomy doesn't even enter into the discussion. There are laws against murdering someone other ways that restrict bodily au…

> Abortion is really a very simple issue, those who say it is about "regulating women" attack a straw man. Pro-lifers believe that abortion is murder of the baby. Doubtful. So-called "pro-lifers" are also, generally, against other forms of birth-control, including pills and condoms. Also, even if they did believe that an embryo is a baby, that doesn't make it so. What they "believe" (or say they believe) shouldn't ma…

Well, maybe some do, but I don't see similar efforts to restrict access to pills and condoms. Mostly arguments on these involve access by youth, whether to give them away for free, and whether insurance should pay for them. Some nutty evangelicals may want them banned, I suppose.

I should have been clearer. What we are really questioning is what counts as a human life. These days many babies that would have died from premature birth can be delivered early and survive; that line moves further back in pregnancy every year.

Re: U.S. companies lash out at Texas law changes, including abortion ban

#80

Post by ericmay » Sat, Sep 04, 2021, 4:41 PM UTC

collegeburner wrote: post #32

colinmhayes wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see how it matters whether the fetus is alive or not. If it can't survive outside the mother then the mother has the right to kill it. If you caused a car accident which lead to the other person needing a kidney transplant that only you can provide should you be required to give up a kidney? I don't see how abortion is different. Either way you made a risky choice that you knew could cause someone's life to b…

If you could be determined to be solely at fault, and if you're a match, and if there aren't other kidneys available, then I suppose that would make sense. The issue is that the mother (usually) made a choice to help create the fetus, or with the possibility of doing so (note that I am okay with abortions in case of rape for this reason).

I do think abortion is a complicated ethical issue and us discussing it here in a few paragraphs won't do it justice, but if the mother can choose to create it, why can't the mother choose to un-create it? I'm not sure why assigning responsibility to the mother for creating it doesn't come with the benefit of destroying it too. And this is not even getting into well ok fine you make a mother go through with it, now you pay taxes for it when the mother walks away and says "well I didn't want a baby in the first place, you deal with it".

You might say, well but then that means the mother could "abort" a baby that's 2 years old or was just born or something. Well I'd say sure in a state of nature. But since we have a society we don't have to kill the child and someone else can just take care of it.

I think there are some reasonable parameters. Conception? Not reasonable to call that murder. A week before birth? Yea that looks a whole lot like murder to me. I don't think most reasonable people who are ok with abortion would see the argument that the mother has an ultimate right to destruction when so close to birth. But where they give, anti-abortion proponents take and get to the point where you start banning contraceptives and don't allow someone who maybe is safely having sex and a condom breaking to get an abortion.

And this is saying nothing about the stupid website like it's some sort of intellectual purge under Maoist China or Stalinist Russia. This is exactly the kind of thing that authoritarian regimes love or would love to implement and it's easy to see the slipper slope toward, well, why don't we start reporting people who are suspected of being "white nationalists" or Christians?