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

401–410 of 448 posts

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

#401

Post by rsynnott »

carrionpigeon wrote: post #193
kibwen wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The US broadly has very permissive abortion laws compared to most of Europe According to Wikipedia: "Most countries in the European Union allow abortion on demand during the first trimester, with Sweden and the Netherlands having more extended time limits." That's the same as what was once guaranteed in the US under Roe.

It's still like that in most of the US. And until today, abortion into the 2nd trimester was legal in the entire US, minus some delta in one state as this case reached the Supreme Court. Also, some consideration is needed for lack of abortion access in some states though abortions themselves were technically legal. Still, 2nd trimester abortions are very uncommon to be legal in Europe. Is there any evidence to sugges…

Second trimester abortions, except where medically required (in which case they are legal in most European countries) are also very, very rare.

And this decision is arguably the canary in the coal mine; note Thomas’s concurrence. Things could get very, very dark in the more right-wing US states.

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

#402

Post by irrational »

anon9001 wrote: post #130

This is the n'th tech company today that's made an announcement similar to this. Even Disney is going to transport workers to abortion-legal states as needed as "health benefit". It's certainly a perk and good on Google for this one, but we're headed to a dark place if your best shot at human rights is to retain employment by a big tech company.

I guess this could be one way Amazon could help solve its staffing woes. A perk of working at their warehouses is a free abortion.

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

#403

Post by andsoitis »

_gabe_ wrote: post #385
andsoitis wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When does a human life start? When you take your first breath.

So if you need the assistance of a mechanical ventilator are you no longer human since you can't breathe on your own? Why would taking your first breath suddenly transform you from nonhuman to human? Further, is it ok for a hospital to stop attempting to save people once they flatline? After all, if we measure humanity according to this metric, then they ceased to he a human once they could no longer breathe.

the question was when does life start, not what constitutes being considered alive / a human being in general.

if you subsequently stop breathing, after your life has started, that's a different situation with different rules.

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

#404

Post by refurb »

woodruffw wrote: post #384
refurb wrote: post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A fetus not a child, but concluding that it deserves no protection isn’t a foregone conclusion. I mean people who injure a pregnant woman and it results in fetal death are criminally charged. So in that case we do consider it worthy of protection under the law.

Fetal death in those cases corresponds (or ought to correspond) to a projection of the actual victim’s wishes: harm to the fetus is exactly coextensive with harm to the pregnant person’s future plans for it.

So a fetus only deserves protection if someone wants it?

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

#405

Post by jquery »

ch4s3 wrote: post #392
dillondoyle wrote: post #327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure but I think the thrust of OP is correct. single payer alone is close to 70% now. medicare itself is very very popular in that age group. People are easily scared and those that already have good care are afraid of losing it. Look at death panels. but the general idea of healthcare as a fundamental right and a national system of health are very popular.

> single payer alone is close to 70% now. Thats only when you don't get into the details of the implementation, and things like the need to pay for it with something like a European style VAT tax. When you dig in to the details in the polls, support plummets. This isn't a critique of the idea, just noting the on the details almost no Americans actually support doing what it would take to implement. > Look at death pa…

"when we fearmonger, support plummets"

yeah I'm not surprised.

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

#406

Post by frollo »

gedy wrote: post #31

Why only US states? I don't remember this for Google's offices in Mexico, Ireland, et al.

Probably because you can move between U.S. states without a visa, which is required to permanently work in another country. I feel like Google could do something similar between it's different offices in the Schengen area, but moving from Ireland to Mexico or from USA to Italy is going to require a lot more work and paperwork than most people are willing to put in, especially if there's a simpler option already available.

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

#407

Post by ch4s3 »

jquery wrote: post #405
ch4s3 wrote: post #392

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> single payer alone is close to 70% now. Thats only when you don't get into the details of the implementation, and things like the need to pay for it with something like a European style VAT tax. When you dig in to the details in the polls, support plummets. This isn't a critique of the idea, just noting the on the details almost no Americans actually support doing what it would take to implement. > Look at death pa…

"when we fearmonger, support plummets" yeah I'm not surprised.

This is IMHO akin to the false consciousness argument and probably wrong. I think when people say they want A but not if they personally have to pay a lot for A, then it seems like we should take them at their word. This isn’t a value judgment or to say that single payer wouldn’t on the whole be for example for a 20% VAT, but Americans by very large margins say they don’t want that. I think it’s really important to be honest about these things when have discussions about public policy. Trying to mislead with survey data, telling white lies, and hiding costs ultimately undermines your position. People will find out, and it negatively influences their opinion of your position.

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

#408

Post by nyolfen »

trhway wrote: post #170
nyolfen wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think that in-vitro fertilization would soon become not an option in the "life at conception" states. Probably eggs freezing too. do you have an actual reason for thinking this will happen? this is detached from reality, both of these procedures are meant to create babies which are carried to term, which is the fundamental goal of pro-life policies

At everyday level - dismissing extra fertilized eggs is killing new life according to the "life-at-conception". And IVF, contraception, eggs freezing, etc. gives more power/freedom to women which is abomination to the conservative forces. And it isn't some utility level power/freedom like guns or speech, it is the most fundamental power domain for any biological life - the power to determine the genetic makeup of the…

you should try talking to somebody who believes these things instead of projecting darwinian strategy fantasies onto them

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

#409

Post by betwixthewires »

divided wrote: post #398
betwixthewires wrote: post #391

Earlier quoted context omitted.

His opinion talks about considering whether the court overstepped it's bounds on those rulings, not whether those behaviors should or shouldn't be illegal.

That feels like a distinction without a difference. If he and 4 others rule that the court overstepped its bounds, states will determine those behaviors to be illegal. So if you admit he's willing to overthrow the precedent, and you agree that some states would then make those behaviors illegal, then how can you square that circle in your brain to claim it's scaremongering?

Well if we look at everything we do in this way there's no way to make a decision on principle, we must always consider outcomes only.

I don't think there's a state that would outlaw regular birth control. Maybe 40 years ago, but today, probably not.

And really, why is it that we can vote at the federal government based on the policies we want, but saying that you should do that for certain issues in your state is undemocratic all of a sudden? What's wrong with states, constituted by their citizens, deciding how to govern themselves?

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

#410

Post by trhway »

nyolfen wrote: post #408
trhway wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At everyday level - dismissing extra fertilized eggs is killing new life according to the "life-at-conception". And IVF, contraception, eggs freezing, etc. gives more power/freedom to women which is abomination to the conservative forces. And it isn't some utility level power/freedom like guns or speech, it is the most fundamental power domain for any biological life - the power to determine the genetic makeup of the…

you should try talking to somebody who believes these things instead of projecting darwinian strategy fantasies onto them

it would be pointless. Most people don't recognize their deep internal biological drivers, and by its nature the

>darwinian strategy fantasies

are effects emerging at biological species [sub]population levels, not at an individual level.

For example, you may have noticed that statistically speaking prochoice people and their children are more educated while having less children than the prolifers. That is a typical manifestation of K- vs r-selection differences. The opening of "Idiocracy" is a nice funny commentary on that.

Post reply on HN