51–60 of 153 posts
> facilities that use various tactics to dissuade or delay pregnant people from getting an abortion. These "tactics" include the heinous acts of providing emotional support, helping give mother's in need access to local resources, providing food and clothing, and more despicable alternatives to the ending of a child's life.
.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are 20 countries in the world where suicide is considered illegal, which is a weird concept on its own. Here’s the map: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_legislation . Now, if we talked about assisted suicide…
> Marijuana Illegal, straight to jail, and morally bad > Assisted Marijuana Totally legal and morally good
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This conversation is about ethics. Google has no ethical obligation to help GitHub outcompete Gitlab; but it does have an ethical obligation to prevent anti-abortion centers from using Google services to trick young women into a lifetime of difficulty and poverty by misrepresenting themselves as medical providers. And what is more, we have an ethical obligations as Google's users and customers to force Google to beha…
Abortion is a complex and controversial issue. Google does not have an obligation to only show pro-choice material when searching abortion, because that would be a form of censorship and bias that would violate its own principles of neutrality and diversity. I am not persuaded by your argument that these search results will harm users.
From my point of view, as someone who is pro life, it’s fine; it’s like showing anti-suicide line when you look for “how to kill myself” Sure the person wants to kill himself but should he .
If these ads were to tout the support they provided for the obvious alternative they would be comparable. They are, instead, deceivers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This conversation is about ethics. Google has no ethical obligation to help GitHub outcompete Gitlab; but it does have an ethical obligation to prevent anti-abortion centers from using Google services to trick young women into a lifetime of difficulty and poverty by misrepresenting themselves as medical providers. And what is more, we have an ethical obligations as Google's users and customers to force Google to beha…
Abortion is a complex and controversial issue. Google does not have an obligation to only show pro-choice material when searching abortion, because that would be a form of censorship and bias that would violate its own principles of neutrality and diversity. I am not persuaded by your argument that these search results will harm users.
Your twisted words here aren't helping your argument. In this situation someone is looking for healthcare options and they are being shown options for scam services that have no intention to ever provide any healthcare.
Just as if someone was searching for prescription medication and it directed them to sites that sold what appeared to be medication and instead were just sugar pills made to look like real medication.
Same concept. Same form of deceit.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
False equivalence. Killing something and trying to stop someone from killing something is not the same.
Abortion is not killing, abortion is healthcare. Yes, I realize one's set of values will create disagreement on this, I'm not trying to build consensus here, but can't let such a statement about "killing" go uncommented on.
As a counter, abortion seems to show up more strongly when searching for anti-abortion. That may be appropriate - and its fine to point out possible bias but I think the article is perhaps not really researching this in an impartial way.
Nobody's ever in urgent need of an anti-abortion.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
False equivalence. Killing something and trying to stop someone from killing something is not the same.
Abortion is not killing, abortion is healthcare. Yes, I realize one's set of values will create disagreement on this, I'm not trying to build consensus here, but can't let such a statement about "killing" go uncommented on.
> facilities that use various tactics to dissuade or delay pregnant people from getting an abortion. These "tactics" include the heinous acts of providing emotional support, helping give mother's in need access to local resources, providing food and clothing, and more despicable alternatives to the ending of a child's life.
I know that 1 hour or 1 day after conception there is no child yet. 10 weeks later we have human with already developed central nervous system.
It all comes down to defining when a group of cells became human. IMHO calling 1 day group of cells human is a lie. The same apply to 10 week fetus - it is human and calling it otherwise is a lie.
What I would expect to get scientific help there to pinpoint that transition moment.