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

U.S. Marshals Spied on Abortion Protesters Using Dataminr

theintercept.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 268 posts

Re: U.S. Marshals Spied on Abortion Protesters Using Dataminr

#211

Post by pfffr »

derelicta wrote: post #3
pfffr wrote: post #2

[flagged]

And what's the difference? Does that make it okay?

Obviously not, but it is important to distinguish who is actually being targeted. Like, obviously? Leftist activism has long been the target of government surveillance and infiltration. It would seem that the true threat is more from the right, so why is the left/post-left/anarchist groups/civil rights activism the subject of greater scrutiny?

Semantics matter. I was just pointing out a fact for people just commenting who had not read the article and may have assumed the title was accurate, which it is not.

I have been opposed to all government surveillance programs and technologies, and would guess that I have been researching them longer than you have been alive (i assume you are young since you are so quick to jump to conclusions)

Re: U.S. Marshals Spied on Abortion Protesters Using Dataminr

#213

Post by xyzzyz »

mullingitover wrote: post #141
rayiner wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why restrict your analysis to such a narrow scope? Abortion was illegal in every state in the US by 1910. It’s also still illegal in my home country, which is a Muslim country on the other side of the planet from the US. Opposition to abortion is longstanding across completely different cultures and religions. It’s not credible to say it’s something that arises from evangelical Christianity or a late 20th century pol…

> Abortion was illegal in every state in the US by 1910. Let's be clear about what was illegal, because the radical definition, 'life begins at fertilization', is a recent innovation[1]: > Abortion was not always a crime. During the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, abortion of early pregnancy was legal under common law.[22] Abortions were illegal only after "quickening," the point at which a pregnant woman…

This is not a consensus view by legal scholars. While a consensus view is that abortion of a quick fetus had clearly been seen as a “heinous crime” in common law, many argue that abortion in general has also been seen as unlawful, just not as serious of a crime as abortion of a quick child. Blackstone, for example, discusses an example where a doctor gives a women a potion the purpose of which is to induce abortion, but which results in killing the woman. Blackstone explains that this is common law murder, because it is done with malice aforethought, that is, abortion intent. In other circumstances, doctors giving people potions that kill them was not seen as murders.

See page numbers 18 here

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/19-1392_6j37.pdf

Re: U.S. Marshals Spied on Abortion Protesters Using Dataminr

#214

Post by defrost »

rayiner wrote: post #197
redeux wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof … The United States government, which is what we’re discussing is absolutely a secular body. The various religions or non-religions of the citizenry are irrelevant, constitutionally.

The first part just means that Congress cannot regulate established state churches ( https://live-bri-dos.pantheonsite.io/activities/handout-c-ma... ), while the second states that Congress cannot prohibit people from practicing their religion. What the first amendment doesn’t do is exclude moral beliefs rooted in religion from being the basis of public policy. If the government can regulate conduct that kills living…

> The first part just means that Congress cannot regulate established state churches

Err, no, that's a common misunderstanding.

The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment prohibits government from encouraging or promoting ("establishing") religion in any way.

It's there to forbid the creation of an official state religion (eg: the Church of England being created to replace the Catholic church back in the day).

See:

https://www.aclu.org/other/your-right-religious-freedom

Re: U.S. Marshals Spied on Abortion Protesters Using Dataminr

#215

Post by UncleMeat »

robomartin wrote: post #146
wolverine876 wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I do realize that a good percentage of the HN college-educated audience is in the grips of ideology that was pounded into their heads. That stereotypes / strawpersons and dismisses everyone with a different perspective before they even speak (and yet complain about polarization). That's a good sign that you have no idea what they're talking about, not being exposed to other points of view. The oppression you discus…

>> I do realize that a good percentage of the HN college-educated audience is in the grips of ideology that was pounded into their heads. > So you pidgeon-hole and dismiss everyone who might have a different perspective before they even speak Oh, no, you are wrong. They speak plenty. Just try posting even moderate perspectives here on HN and see what reactions you get. Facts are, well, facts. Try it. Go ahead. Create…

> Facts are, well, facts.

This is funny coming from somebody who said "The fact that university students will riot when someone their puppeteers do not agree with comes to give a presentation at their school" is funny. The number of disinvitations is in the tens per year, out of thousands of degree granting institutions and roughly zero riots.

Oh nooooo. Those indoctrinated college students.

You are the one making shit up.

Re: U.S. Marshals Spied on Abortion Protesters Using Dataminr

#216

Post by kelnos »

_8j50 wrote: post #203
Dig1t wrote: post #45

So many people are okay with unconstitutional things as long as it supports their side and beliefs. It is genuinely unsettling. Personally, I don’t care about the underlying thing the protests are about, the important aspect is that if you allow unconstitutional government action like this, eventually it will be used against you. A decade from now we have no idea what the political climate will be. If the precedent i…

Buying data from private companies is not unconstitutional so long as the company selling it to the government didn't break laws. As with so many american issues, just amend the fucking constitution! I swear this country needs to stop everything and do a constitutional convention (can be done, never be done before).

That "just" is doing a lot of work there.

Even with a constitutional convention, you still need 3/4 of the states (38 of them) to ratify anything, which I don't think is feasible today. Hell, I'm not even sure the delegates to a hypothetical constitutional convention could even agree enough on what to propose for ratification.

Re: U.S. Marshals Spied on Abortion Protesters Using Dataminr

#217

Post by kelnos »

jandrese wrote: post #97
Dig1t wrote: post #45

So many people are okay with unconstitutional things as long as it supports their side and beliefs. It is genuinely unsettling. Personally, I don’t care about the underlying thing the protests are about, the important aspect is that if you allow unconstitutional government action like this, eventually it will be used against you. A decade from now we have no idea what the political climate will be. If the precedent i…

I get what you're saying, but on the other hand abortion protesters have a habit of assassinating doctors that perform abortions.

Ignoring whether your assertion is true or not for a second, solving this problem doesn't require violating anyone's constitutional rights.

Re: U.S. Marshals Spied on Abortion Protesters Using Dataminr

#218

Post by kelnos »

rayiner wrote: post #136
gadders wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd be very surprised if there were zero atheists that were anti-abortion.

Albania has been officially atheist since 1967. But abortion was not legalized until 1995. The idea that American “evangelical Christians” invented opposition to abortion is typical American ignorance and myopia. Various levels of opposition to abortion is the norm across the world—for pretty obvious reasons. The rights-based view of abortion is what’s actually unusual and unique to Christian and post-Christian socie…

Who are the loudest voices advocating for abortion bans, though? Of the legislators who write and vote for abortion ban bills, what is their reasoning and background? At least in the US, it sounds like the loudest of those voices are coming from a religious place, mostly from a Christian perspective. I'll grant you that it's certainly more than just "evangelical" Christians, but I consider that an irrelevant distinction. (Note that I'm not arguing that there are no non-Christians who are anti-abortion, just that they don't seem to be the ones pushing these laws through.)

Either way, I think if you're going to engage in some American-bashing, you should probably cite some sources to back up your claims.

Re: U.S. Marshals Spied on Abortion Protesters Using Dataminr

#219

Post by prepend »

FireBeyond wrote: post #202
prepend wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> abortion protesters have a habit of assassinating doctors that perform abortions What’s the prevalence of this occurring? Wikipedia calls out 7 in the US [0] with the most recent in 2015. This this seems like profiling protesters as assassins is about as rational as profiling members of a certain religion as terrorists. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-abortion_violence

> What’s the prevalence of this occurring? Wikipedia calls out 7 in the US Your very own link says 11: > In the United States, violence directed towards abortion providers has killed at least eleven people Also, perhaps not assassination but violence makes things look far worse than you handwaving it as a non-issue: > there have been 17 attempted murders, 383 death threats, 153 incidents of assault or battery, 13 wou…

> Your very own link says 11

Thanks for the correction, you’re right. I miscited the number in the 90s with the total number. 11 seems the most accurate for deaths of abortion healthcare workers.

> hand waving

Not at all. I think this is a serious issue and we should have zero murders. My point is that saying abortion protesters are assassins (or even violent) is not an accurate assumption based on the very low level of violence to protesters.

I think we should use language and logic accurately even if we disagree with the cause. It’s not right to lump all abortion protestors with the criminals who harm healthcare workers just like it’s not right to lump all BLM protestors with rioters who burn stuff down or all followers of Islam with terrorists. The rates of non-violent to violent are different among all three groups but all extremely low. I’ll defend all three groups even though I’m against the first, for the second, and ambivalent to the third.

But I don’t want to fall into the logical trap of getting sloppy with my generalizations because I want to stop a certain behavior.

Re: U.S. Marshals Spied on Abortion Protesters Using Dataminr

#220

Post by kelnos »

rayiner wrote: post #137
trasz4 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have an inalienable right to express any view on flat earth in the US. But it doesn't matter if the state law is enforcing religious rules, like in the case of abortion ban.

Abortion bans aren’t “religious rules.” Abortion has been banned in officially atheist countries, like Stalinist Russia and communist Albania. Conversely, the notion of a “right to abortion” or a “right to bodily autonomy” is for all practical purposes a religious view. It’s a belief about the nature of human society and the value of human life in its various stages.

If that's the case, a right to freedom of speech is a similarly "religious view". I don't really see the distinction you're trying to make.
Post reply on HN