41–50 of 148 posts
My question is about the timing(why now?) and not on "who is the good/bad guy" here.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Going" downhill? https://www.vox.com/2015/12/1/9827886/abortion-clinic-attack... "Since 1977 there have been eight murders, 17 attempted murders, 42 bombings, and 186 arsons targeted at abortion clinics and providers across the United States. In some cases, a small group of clinics have been targeted multiple times."
I mean, that is terrible, but abortion clinics commit millions of murders each year according to pro-lifers, so your comment falls on deaf ears.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_statistics_in_the_Uni...
This video is absurd. The headline on the video "Abortion is never medically necessary", but then goes on to state that "removal of an ectopic pregnancy" doesn't count because it's not an abortion. Umm, OK. She's really just defined all of the "medically necessary abortions" as not abortions.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In France it's illegal to show a picture of a downs person who is happy, just in case it makes a woman think twice about aborting one.
This... this is fascinating. Do you have any good sources?
https://www.lemonde.fr/cinema/article/2017/11/15/l-ecole-de-...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It had nothing to do with politics. Surely you can see that this is impossible. There is no component of a video like this which has "nothing to do with politics."
No, it's not. Please re-read my post. I said that "the fact check itself" is not political. I did not defend the political bias of the video itself. You would also do well to actually read the article, especially the screenshot of the fact-check. You'll notice that the fact-check, per my post, simply addresses the facts of the issue and does not make a single political statement. Edit: You also modified my statement…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your inflammatory pseudo-counter-argument doesn't change the fact that abortion in cases of non-life-threatening births remains morally problematic. The personhood debate is nontrivial and unless, like e.g., Peter Singer, you're willing to (excuse the pun) throw the baby out with the bathwater, justification for mid-to-late-term abortions is quite difficult and rife with edge cases.
However forcing someone to carry a baby to term is also morally problematic. Even non-life-threatening births carry risks of bodily harm.
Pregnancy is the equivalent of pressing a magical button and teleporting another person against their will into your body.
If this magical button existed in its literal form it would obviously wouldn't be legal for the person who chose to teleport you into their body to then kill you at a whim.
I am not from US so can someone explain why the antiabortion thing seem rise in this last year? Is there some elections and some party is trying to gain votes or some social media trend? My question is about the timing(why now?) and not on "who is the good/bad guy" here.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Going" downhill? https://www.vox.com/2015/12/1/9827886/abortion-clinic-attack... "Since 1977 there have been eight murders, 17 attempted murders, 42 bombings, and 186 arsons targeted at abortion clinics and providers across the United States. In some cases, a small group of clinics have been targeted multiple times."
Are you accusing everybody who is pro-life of doing or supporting this? Because that's really what it sounds like.
I am pro-life, with the exception of medical emergencies. I'm not going to argue about that. Seeing the discourse going downhill like this hurts, since it's just one more broad-brush tool to use against a different side.
I agree. The discourse in your country doesn't seem to revolve about facts any more. At the moment it's just political. I'm wondering why this is on HN at all. We all know whatever is going to be said about this topic is going to be political eventually. (wow fastest downvote ever, I just posted this, like 5 seconds, and it already got a downvote :)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Going" downhill? https://www.vox.com/2015/12/1/9827886/abortion-clinic-attack... "Since 1977 there have been eight murders, 17 attempted murders, 42 bombings, and 186 arsons targeted at abortion clinics and providers across the United States. In some cases, a small group of clinics have been targeted multiple times."
Are you accusing everybody who is pro-life of doing or supporting this? Because that's really what it sounds like.
-One person lamented discourse relating to abortion "going downhill".
-Someone pointed out that its hard to say its going downhill when its been happening since the 70s.
Your takeaway:
"SO YOU THINK ALL PEOPLE WHO ARE PRO LIFE DO THIS?"
Its simply impossible to have those inputs and create this output without having a massive, obvious agenda. Maybe take that elsewhere?