Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why is it traitorous to understand the people you disagree with?

dynomight.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 388 posts

Re: Why is it traitorous to understand the people you disagree with?

#41

Post by hutzlibu »

h2odragon wrote: post #18
gadflyinyoureye wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m confused by your first paragraph. Are you saying a parent should be able to kill a 12 year old?

> Are you saying a parent should be able to kill a 12 year old? Yes, that is the correct reading. Note: This is an extreme statement to prompt discussion, not a deeply held belief that everyone must share. It's not that I don't feel this way; but i feel more strongly that this is a question that shows the limits of what the state can do.

" but i feel more strongly that this is a question that shows the limits of what the state can do"

No, it just shows how extreme your property thinking is. A child is the property of their parents and they should be able to do with it, what they want?

Even kill them, as it is their property?

Nope. Those times have passed.

And even in savage times, where this might have been more common, there was certainly social backslash, too.

Re: Why is it traitorous to understand the people you disagree with?

#42

Post by dvt »

Almost every serious non-partisan legal scholar agrees that Roe v. Wade is on tenuous legal footing. It's purely a logical argument, and it doesn't follow very well from the Constitution. We have a very simple mechanism to rectify this: amend the Constitution. But that ship has long sailed, and the problem now is stare decisis†, which complicates things further. So there's a very real justification for keeping Roe in spite of its shortcomings. But that's neither here nor there.

The issue isn't that people don't understand arguments, it's that they misrepresent them. A rational, reasoned, mature, back-and-forth debate on abortion won't get you views and clicks, so of course no one does it. Panem et circenses.

† And of course Casey, which reaffirmed Roe.

Re: Why is it traitorous to understand the people you disagree with?

#43

Post by lostcolony »

jaywalk wrote: post #29
lkxijlewlf wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not fair. Those extremists are succeeding in pushing their agenda.

Show me a law on the books in any state that would outlaw abortion in the case of rape. Obviously it would be a "trigger law" since states can't actually have such a law right now, but no such law exists as far as I'm aware. Unless you can do that, it's not fair to claim that those extremists are succeeding in pushing anything. Edit: I'm not going to individually address all of the dishonest rhetoric from the article…

LMGTFY - https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2022/05/supreme...

'In the past few years, though, the anti-abortion movement has moved in a different direction. In 2019, Alabama legislators passed an abortion ban that lacked rape and incest exceptions. Nine other states—Arkansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Ohio, Oklahoma, Tennessee, and Texas—have passed similar laws. Courts blocked all the laws but Texas’s; if Roe is overturned, it will be a felony for any Texas doctor to perform an abortion for a woman who was raped or impregnated by a family member. In March, Arizona Governor Doug Ducey signed an early-abortion ban without rape or incest exemptions.'

Re: Why is it traitorous to understand the people you disagree with?

#44

Post by nicoburns »

ramesh31 wrote: post #11
mikece wrote: post #6

"Seek first to understand, then to be understood." -- habit #5 of the 7 habits of highly successful people

Quoted post unavailable.

Is it? I strongly disagree with such a position. But it seems clear to me that many such people:

1. Believe that the foetus is alive (and often also that it is human)

2. Believe that life is sacred or otherwise precious.

3. Believe that the foetus's right to life outweighs the mother's right the self-determine use of her body.

I can understand how one can have a thought process like that even if I think it's wrong in numerous different ways.

Re: Why is it traitorous to understand the people you disagree with?

#45

Post by causi »

MockObject wrote: post #17

It is frustrating. I am on one side of the abortion debate, but I understand the other side, yet I have no success in even explaining it to my side.

Same here. I find it very annoying that on most major issues, the sides argue at right angles to one another. They say the other side is wrong without saying what they believe is wrong. Anti-abortion activists don't address the issue of bodily autonomy and pro-abortion activists don't address the issue of the definition of personhood. If you're like me and settled on strictly-consistent stances on the topic you find yourself with some extraordinarily unpopular opinions, to both sides.

Re: Why is it traitorous to understand the people you disagree with?

#46

Post by conorcleary »

MockObject wrote: post #17

It is frustrating. I am on one side of the abortion debate, but I understand the other side, yet I have no success in even explaining it to my side.

Religion is like a firewall keeping logic out based on old rules and whitelists.

Re: Why is it traitorous to understand the people you disagree with?

#47

Post by comrh »

jaywalk wrote: post #29
lkxijlewlf wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not fair. Those extremists are succeeding in pushing their agenda.

Show me a law on the books in any state that would outlaw abortion in the case of rape. Obviously it would be a "trigger law" since states can't actually have such a law right now, but no such law exists as far as I'm aware. Unless you can do that, it's not fair to claim that those extremists are succeeding in pushing anything. Edit: I'm not going to individually address all of the dishonest rhetoric from the article…

There are plenty of examples, do your research https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2022-04-08/red-states...

Re: Why is it traitorous to understand the people you disagree with?

#48

Post by Cenk »

jaywalk wrote: post #29
lkxijlewlf wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not fair. Those extremists are succeeding in pushing their agenda.

Show me a law on the books in any state that would outlaw abortion in the case of rape. Obviously it would be a "trigger law" since states can't actually have such a law right now, but no such law exists as far as I'm aware. Unless you can do that, it's not fair to claim that those extremists are succeeding in pushing anything. Edit: I'm not going to individually address all of the dishonest rhetoric from the article…

Alabama:

“The Human Life Protection Act "defines all unborn children as persons". It bans abortions AT ANY STAGE OF A PREGNANCY. The law provides for exceptions in cases where a fetus has a lethal anomaly (a medical condition that would cause the fetus to be stillborn or to die shortly following birth), or in cases where a pregnancy would "present serious health risk" to the woman. The law also allows abortions to be performed "upon confirmation from a psychiatrist" that a pregnant woman diagnosed with a "serious mental illness" might otherwise take an action that would lead to her own death or to the death of the fetus. The law does not ban procedures to end ectopic pregnancies or procedures in which a dead fetus is removed from the uterus. IT DOES NOT INCLUDE AN EXCEPTION IN CASES OF RAPE OR INCEST.”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Life_Protection_Act

Here is another example, from Texas: “Senate Bill 8, ushered through the Republican-dominated Texas legislature and signed into law by the Republican governor, Greg Abbott, in May, bars abortion once embryonic cardiac activity is detected, which is around six weeks, and offers NO EXCEPTIONS FOR RAPE OR INCEST. Texas is the first state to ban abortion this early in pregnancy since Roe v Wade, and last-minute efforts to halt it through an appeal to the US supreme court by Tuesday did not succeed.”

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/sep/01/texas-aborti...

Further reading: https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2022/05/supreme...

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/04/us/abortion-trigger-laws....

Re: Why is it traitorous to understand the people you disagree with?

#49

Post by lostcolony »

mikece wrote: post #16
ramesh31 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

Show me someone who is pregnant from rape and I'll show you 100 couples who eagerly want to adopt the baby.

And I'll show you 400k children -currently- in the foster care system, unadopted.

Re: Why is it traitorous to understand the people you disagree with?

#50

Post by astrange »

lemonlime wrote: post #34
car_analogy wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well yes, but as much as I am a proponent of both the right to privacy and abortion, the latter doesn't really follow from the former. Just because one has a right to privacy, it doesn't follow that everything done in private is legal. Nor is abortion necessarily private - one could declare one is going to have one, or one could be visibly pregnant and then get an abortion. It would be a bizarre law if abortion was l…

>Just because one has a right to privacy, it doesn't follow that everything done in private is legal. No one, anywhere, has ever argued that the right to privacy means everything done in private is legal. That is not even remotely close to what the debate is about. You have constructed an impressively bad strawman.

Hmm, but that’s quite similar to the current reason abortion is legal, and it’s one of the (correct) reasons sodomy is not a crime anymore.

I think there’s a good argument that abortion should be allowed under the 13th amendment but that seems like someone would yell at me if I said that.

Post reply on HN