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

Anti-Abortion Centers Find Pregnant Teens Online, Then Save Their Data

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 331 posts

Re: Anti-Abortion Centers Find Pregnant Teens Online, Then Save Their Data

#111

Post by spaced-out »

gjsman-1000 wrote: post #72
weberer wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That sounds like a conspiracy theory. Even atheists and pro-abortion people have been complaining that the ruling in Roe vs Wade was a huge stretch. At the end of the day, its not a constitutional issue. So either amend the constitution or leave the decision up to the states.

Ruth Bader Ginsburg loved abortion, but thought Roe v Wade was a trash decision that actually risked being thrown out for how sloppy it was. She was right.

No she didn't and no it wasn't. RvW ruled that in order to be free, people have an implicit right to privacy when making personal medical decisions. Obviously moral busybodies don't like that so they're calling it "overreach".

Re: Anti-Abortion Centers Find Pregnant Teens Online, Then Save Their Data

#112

Post by tablespoon »

parkingrift wrote: post #33
jef_leppard wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IMO because the christian nationalist wing of the Republican Party needs talking points.

I think this completely ignores the moral issues of later term abortions. I am an atheist, and I am disturbed by the idea of a voluntary abortion after 20 weeks. Voluntary meaning no medical necessity. I think Republicans have latched onto this issue and Christianity in America has adopted it, but there is far more at play here than just Christian nationalism.

> I think Republicans have latched onto this issue and Christianity in America has adopted it, but there is far more at play here than just Christian nationalism.

Yes, and polarization-fueled straw-man memes really obscure that. I swear some people's only understanding of "the other side" is a twisted view of the distortions of some overheated partisan bomb-thrower, stupefied into slogan form. But you kind of need something like that to feel confidently self-righteous.

Re: Anti-Abortion Centers Find Pregnant Teens Online, Then Save Their Data

#113

Post by raverbashing »

parkingrift wrote: post #33
jef_leppard wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IMO because the christian nationalist wing of the Republican Party needs talking points.

I think this completely ignores the moral issues of later term abortions. I am an atheist, and I am disturbed by the idea of a voluntary abortion after 20 weeks. Voluntary meaning no medical necessity. I think Republicans have latched onto this issue and Christianity in America has adopted it, but there is far more at play here than just Christian nationalism.

> ignores the moral issues of later term abortions

If the SCOTUS decision was limited to that, the controvery would have been much, much smaller. Especially if it also considered medical exceptions.

But why be sensible when you can just go full Spanish inquisition on them, right?

Re: Anti-Abortion Centers Find Pregnant Teens Online, Then Save Their Data

#114

Post by triceratops »

parkingrift wrote: post #33
jef_leppard wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IMO because the christian nationalist wing of the Republican Party needs talking points.

I think this completely ignores the moral issues of later term abortions. I am an atheist, and I am disturbed by the idea of a voluntary abortion after 20 weeks. Voluntary meaning no medical necessity. I think Republicans have latched onto this issue and Christianity in America has adopted it, but there is far more at play here than just Christian nationalism.

How many abortions happen after 20 weeks? How many of them are due to medical reasons vs "don't want this baby anymore"?

I'd wager that the vast majority of abortions post 20 weeks are performed with extreme reluctance and sadness, and only out of great necessity.

Re: Anti-Abortion Centers Find Pregnant Teens Online, Then Save Their Data

#115

Post by esyir »

triceratops wrote: post #82
esyir wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From their perspective, it's more analogous to murder. Not exactly something you just live and let be.

Then why didn't they ever try for a federal abortion ban when they had control of Congress and the presidency? "Murder" isn't suddenly ok just because it happens in another state, right?

I said analogous, not identical. Clearly they see it as bad, but not nearly as bad as murder. If it was literally mass murder to them, I'd expect more bombs and riots, and less "campaign against it for 50 years to repeal it".

Re: Anti-Abortion Centers Find Pregnant Teens Online, Then Save Their Data

#116

Post by snikeris »

welshwelsh wrote: post #74
luxuryballs wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

It's not killing someone. A fetus isn't a person. > I can’t imagine anything LESS scummy than helping save the lives of those babies who are now likely very glad they were born So would it be ethical to rape someone and force them to give birth? Because the babies would be happy to be born and experiencing life? That's the same logic you're using. A fetus isn't a person. It's not sentient. It doesn't have hopes and d…

> I know, and I'm sure you know, that's the real issue. Lots of people are uncomfortable with the concept of consequence-free sex.

Hard disagree that the abortion issue is primarily about consequence-free sex. You stated the issue in the first line:

> A fetus isn't a person.

Pro-life people vehemently disagree about this, and it's not coming from a place of prudishness. They are outraged because they feel like babies are being killed.

> It's not killing someone. A fetus isn't a person.

Isn't a fetus kind of like a tadpole? Sure, we may quibble that it isn't a person, but it is still a living being on the way to maturity. Killing a tadpole is killing _something_, right?

Re: Anti-Abortion Centers Find Pregnant Teens Online, Then Save Their Data

#118

Post by jonhohle »

welshwelsh wrote: post #74
luxuryballs wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

It's not killing someone. A fetus isn't a person. > I can’t imagine anything LESS scummy than helping save the lives of those babies who are now likely very glad they were born So would it be ethical to rape someone and force them to give birth? Because the babies would be happy to be born and experiencing life? That's the same logic you're using. A fetus isn't a person. It's not sentient. It doesn't have hopes and d…

A fetus isn’t a person like a black person or Native American wasn’t a full person, like children weren’t full people, or like women weren’t given the same rights as men?

Re: Anti-Abortion Centers Find Pregnant Teens Online, Then Save Their Data

#119

Post by somehnguy »

jonhohle wrote: post #85
somehnguy wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like nonsense. Can you explain how it was ‘imposing a regime’, when nobody was forced to do anything? If you didn’t want an abortion you just…didn’t have one. Kinda sounds like religious people are the ones actually trying to impose a regime to me. Because I couldn’t possibly care less what anyones preferred god thinks, yet religious beliefs are being used to drive political changes that affect everyone.

Imagine you are in a people group that the court decided are free to be killed at someone else’s discretion and you have no legal recourse or advocate. Would you accept that for minority groups, groups of any other association? If you are not the one killing or being killed does that mean it affects no one?

It really sounds like you’re attempting to conflate minority groups with undeveloped fetuses. This is not a good argument in your favor.

Re: Anti-Abortion Centers Find Pregnant Teens Online, Then Save Their Data

#120

Post by Grustaf »

beardyw wrote: post #12

I find this whole thing so puzzling. In the UK, not so different from the USA, this is not really a thing at all. Even amongst Christians I have never heard it brought up. Is it a political thing, and if so how did it become so?

Do you find it puzzling that some people think it's wrong to kill unborn babies? You might think it's fine, but anyone can understand that people can think it's wrong.

Just like I as a meat eater can obviously understand that there are vegetarians that oppose the killing of animals.

Post reply on HN