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

Google says US employees can relocate to states with abortion rights

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 448 posts

Re: Google says US employees can relocate to states with abortion rights

#291

Post by nkrisc »

alfor wrote: post #276
mikeyouse wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I literally have a friend-of-a-friend right now being denied an abortion for a fetus with severe Anencephaly. There’s a group thread trying to figure out where she can travel to in order to terminate. These fucking monsters want her to carry this non viable fetus for 5 more months to deliver a guaranteed stillborn baby with 0 chance of survival. Can you even imagine the trauma that would inflict on the mother? The nu…

She is in the the 1% of case that make sense. The laws are based on a moral code that protect the most vulnerable.

I’ll say it: the mother’s rights trump those of the fetus when they conflict.

If we accept the right of bodily autonomy then the fetus has no right to the mother’s blood and sustenance.

If the state denies pregnant women bodily autonomy then it must assume the responsibility to care for them. Stats that ban abortion should cover all costs of pregnancy, at minimum.

You know, small government stuff.

Re: Google says US employees can relocate to states with abortion rights

#292

Post by jimkleiber »

unmole wrote: post #219
jimkleiber wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm confused at how that follows what you were saying. I thought you were saying businesses try to act in their rational self-interest and I was trying to highlight how political issues could be in their rational self-interest. I don't think the effects of one's actions, such as those of Disney's, would negate whether the company intended to do something to help their own company.

My comment was flippant, I apologise. What I meant was taking sides on divisive hot button issues is fraught with peril. The probability of blowback is high. Even if a large proportion of employees held a particular political position, I'd imagine only a small number of activist employees would be disgruntled by the company choosing to stay out of it.

It's ok, I appreciate the apology and as with any internet interaction, realize it's hard for me to know what's going on in your life beyond the screen so I hope all is well.

Oh, I strongly agree that it could be riskier and most companies would probably prefer to appear apolitical, especially with those charged topics. I was a part of a global organization that seemed to take much pride in saying it was apolitical, but had many many many views on how society should be organized, so I think yes, the corporate culture can strongly discourage the appearance of being involved in politics or religion or sex or some taboo topics and to also discourage not just appearance but action as well.

Re: Google says US employees can relocate to states with abortion rights

#293

Post by stjohnswarts »

betwixthewires wrote: post #246
stjohnswarts wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's 70/30 and you know it. Americans support abortion in some form or another at 70%. The MAGA base do not, and they want other things like gay marriage, gay sex, and birth control also declared illegal.

I've never met a person who thinks birth control should be illegal. I am sure they're out there, but this "they're coming for your morning after pill next" is scaremongering. Gay sex is probably the same. Gay marriage I think you're probably right.

How many devout evangelicals and catholics have you met? BC condemnation are in the majority of those religions.

Re: Google says US employees can relocate to states with abortion rights

#294

Post by KMag »

jimkleiber wrote: post #272
KMag wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd agree with that, but unfortunately, that makes it even harder for maximalists on either side to communicate.

Lol I agree. I think people who take maximalist positions often speak the most distantly about how they feel, using a lot of second or third person pronouns and focusing on how people certainly are and not how they might feel.

Part of that may be that feelings are a very difficult basis for constructive conversation if you disagree strongly. Even if you feel strongly, presenting your position as not emotionally based at least helps move the conversation forward.

Re: Google says US employees can relocate to states with abortion rights

#295

Post by ryandrake »

narrator wrote: post #176

The migration pattern in the nation seems to be: 1. Going to your super cool tech job in California when you get out of college. 2. After that, you get older and want to buy a house and settle down, and not pay state income tax, and so you move out to a red state to work remote and turn it blue with all the love of diversity picked up in California. Strict abortion laws might serve as somewhat of a barrier to this so…

On the other hand, a lot of these "red states" are really hostile to Californians moving in, too. We're low-key looking to move now that remote work is a thing, and I have direct knowledge of communities that overtly don't want political progressives moving in. One home seller's agent brought up that the seller is demanding what they called a "California Tax." The asking price is what it is, but if the buyer is from California, they want 20% more. And it's not because they think we are all rich and can afford it. These places just don't want us around.

Re: Google says US employees can relocate to states with abortion rights

#296

Post by [deleted] »

alfor wrote: post #276
mikeyouse wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I literally have a friend-of-a-friend right now being denied an abortion for a fetus with severe Anencephaly. There’s a group thread trying to figure out where she can travel to in order to terminate. These fucking monsters want her to carry this non viable fetus for 5 more months to deliver a guaranteed stillborn baby with 0 chance of survival. Can you even imagine the trauma that would inflict on the mother? The nu…

She is in the the 1% of case that make sense. The laws are based on a moral code that protect the most vulnerable.

[deleted]

Re: Google says US employees can relocate to states with abortion rights

#297

Post by FireBeyond »

stjohnswarts wrote: post #81
kjfdpoisfjkds wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Will they dial down investment in nations with far worse human rights or is this just virtue signaling?

It's far harder to move citizens between countries and would basically be impossible on a large scales like this. Currently people are free to travel between states but who knows in 5-10 years? They may make women take pregnancy tests at the borders of states.

Somewhat. They're free to travel, now, as you say, but Missouri now has the crime of "conspiracy to commit abortion" to cover you getting in your car to drive out of state, or booking a flight out of state...

Re: Google says US employees can relocate to states with abortion rights

#298

Post by bogota »

rybosome wrote: post #177
imdan wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We're headed to a dark place.

It’s happening. I think it’s going to get way worse than most people believe.

Yep. They have already started talking about reversing marriage rights and contraception as well. It’s funny that an unelected body is now going to destroy the US and revert things that are clearly the majority opinion of the population.

Im glad I have dual citizenship because It does feel like the next 4 years is going to be a very sharp downturn (socially) in the US.

Re: Google says US employees can relocate to states with abortion rights

#299

Post by refurb »

thatnerdyguy wrote: post #67
jhawk28 wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The split of pro/against is really close to 50/50. If you think that the smart people are only on one side or that only one side has "good" arguments, then you are living in a bubble. The argument over abortion was going on before Roe v Wade. Roe v Wade only prevented legislation from finding a solution.

Support for overturning Roe is actually around 30%

Pro-choice vs pro-life is pretty evenly split.

Even on the pro-choice side there is a lot of variance on when abortion should be restricted (similar to how Europe restricts abortions the closer to full gestation). Same on the pro-life side, views aren’t binary.

Considering most people don’t understand why Roe v Wade was overturned, I’m not sure opinions on whether it should have been mean much, since belief of what that means is all over the place.

Re: Google says US employees can relocate to states with abortion rights

#300

Post by dillondoyle »

unmole wrote: post #118
hericium wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> pulled out (...) to avoid reputational damage to their brands. French retailer Auchan did not move out of Russia and I have some friends who stopped shopping there and are quite vocal about how noone should shop there.

Because the company decided that the risk of reputational damage was smaller than the value of their Russian operations? The fact that they decided to stay put doesn't mean they support the invasion. Don't anthropomorphize corporations.

Don't have to give them human emotions or qualities to make an ethical decision and advocate with the power of ones $
Post reply on HN