Live data from Hacker News

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

bloomberg.com

121–130 of 331 posts

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

#121

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…

Do you find killing a new born baby reprehensible? If no this is a _very_ minority view you have. If yes what is the difference between the new born to a 9 month old fetus in the womb? Then what about an 8 month old? Most would protect it too against abortion. And so on.

A compromising time limit solution for which elective abortions before is permitted and after is forbidden is the only pragmatic solution.

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

#122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What issue? What are the numbers on non medical necessity abortions post 20 weeks? Why 20 weeks? Are the voting populace or politicians knowledgeable enough about pregnancy to be able to legislate these things without exposing doctors and women to unnecessary legal risk? And again, back to the numbers, does the is even need legislating? Are women or doctors haphazardly running around killing perfectly viable fetuses…

There are over a million abortions performed every year in the US. If your belief is that these are humans with all the rights of any other human, that’s a staggering human rights issue. The concept of viability is legal fiction. Given the technology, there’s no reason a fetus couldn’t live at any stage of development and likewise, until about age 3 or so, no child will live without external support. Culturally, we c…

> Given the technology, there’s no reason a fetus couldn’t live at any stage of development

This cannot be true, and just because a fetus could live does not mean the quality of life is worth living. Not to mention the staggering costs of NICU healthcare.

The numbers I was asking about were specifically post 20 week, as a reply to parkingrift’s concerns.

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

#124
post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The moderate pro-life crowd should see this behavior as scummy and denounce it, as it taints their cause. IE take the high road to attaining their goals. Why? To someone who thinks abortion is the murder of babies, what you advocate is priority inversion error. Your idea is a lot like saying the police in Uvalde shouldn't have gone in and (eventually) shot the school shooter, rather they should have "take[n] the hi…

Except that (virtually) nobody on the right truly believes that it's full fledged baby murder. They believe it's bad, but clearly, from their response, it's not anywhere near as bad as that. If your government/heathcare/someOtherOrg was grinding up babies post birth at scale, or any equivalent, I'd expect the response to be more riots and bombs, and less "Let's campaign for fifty odd years to get the capability to ba…

Google "March for Life." Its massive (rivaling the "Women's March" a few years back), has happened every year for nearly 50 years at DC, and always has a media blackout talking about it. And everyone there believes without a doubt it is murder. Also the Gen Z presence is massive at these marches, much more so than the "Women's March" which is interesting.

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

#125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

No one has ever been sad that they weren't born. "How would you feel if you weren't born?" is a nonsensical question.

You do realize you can feel before you are born, right? Verbal communication and feeling are not the same. It is well established that newborns remember the sounds they heard prior to birth.

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

#126
post #106
post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Republicans won a majority of the Congressional popular vote in 2016 And then lost the popular vote in 2018 and 2020. Not sure why 2016 would be particularly relevant

Not that I support this ruling in any way or form, but the 2016 election led to the current slate of justices who came up with this ruling. It is probably good and by design that we don’t change justices with the popular vote.

The 2̵0̵1̵8̵ election of Trump led to these judges as he appointed three of them.

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

#127
post #126
post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not that I support this ruling in any way or form, but the 2016 election led to the current slate of justices who came up with this ruling. It is probably good and by design that we don’t change justices with the popular vote.

The 2̵0̵1̵8̵ election of Trump led to these judges as he appointed three of them.

> The 2018 election of Trump led to these judges as he appointed three of them.

Trump was elected in 2016.

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

#128
post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The moderate pro-life crowd should see this behavior as scummy and denounce it, as it taints their cause. IE take the high road to attaining their goals. Why? To someone who thinks abortion is the murder of babies, what you advocate is priority inversion error. Your idea is a lot like saying the police in Uvalde shouldn't have gone in and (eventually) shot the school shooter, rather they should have "take[n] the hi…

Except that (virtually) nobody on the right truly believes that it's full fledged baby murder. They believe it's bad, but clearly, from their response, it's not anywhere near as bad as that. If your government/heathcare/someOtherOrg was grinding up babies post birth at scale, or any equivalent, I'd expect the response to be more riots and bombs, and less "Let's campaign for fifty odd years to get the capability to ba…

> Except that (virtually) nobody on the right truly believes that it's full fledged baby murder

Why would you think that? Clearly almost everyone that is against abortion believes that, that's the whole point.

Even most people who are in favour of abortion would consider it at least close to murder if say an abusive husband beats his pregnant wife, killing the baby.

The only difference there is that the mother wanted the child to live, how can that have bearing on whether it's murder or not?

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

#129
post #4

A former girlfriend of mine went to what she thought was a clinic, and was effectively scared out of having one, and had twins at 18. These scummy tactics work, or people wouldn't do them.

Quoted post unavailable.

> helping save the lives of those babies who are now likely very glad they were born

I have met many people who hated their lives for many reasons. What makes you think these children won't?

Some of the reasons include:

- parents didn't want the children

- children grew up poor

- children grew up with disabilities

- children were put up for adoption

- the world is becoming uninhabitable for the children's children

I can't imagine how someone could feel good about birthing a baby without also giving all of the necessary safeties. And that's just looking at the children's perspective. What about the parents'?

Can you imagine having been raped, then being forced to carry an unwanted child to term, and then also being forced to pay child support to the rapist?

Can you imagine wanting a child but then discovering that the child will be stillborn or worse: born with debilitating defects that you aren't capable of dealing with?

If you want children then go have children. If you don't want children... then why should you be forced to?

> my default is that you really shouldn’t be killing your offspring or cutting up your insides unless you are removing something like cancer or shrapnel.

Indeed! Sometimes the baby is literally dying for reasons outside of your control. But without Roe v Wade then we cannot legally abort. A dying fetus can cause sepsis and death to the mother. That's certainly "something like cancer or shrapnel" in my book.

I had a lot of head-burying opinions too until I had a long and deep conversation with a female friend about politics. She had the patience to listen to what I had to say with the knowledge and experience necessary to provide alternate views. I suggest that you ask the women around you what they think. Don't stop at one or two. Really listen to them. Listen to their perspectives and their opinions. Try to put yourself in their shoes.

You will find that their perspectives and opinions differ from yours. You might even find that they enjoy things that you think should be sacred. You're not wrong and neither are they. But what is wrong is to force your morals and opinions onto them.

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

#130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Does a black person require their every biological process be maintained by the body of another? If yes, then OK your comparison makes sense.
Post reply on HN