this post was submitted on 09 Jul 2023
19 points (91.3% liked)

Technology

33611 readers
375 users here now

This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.


Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.


Rules:

1: All Lemmy rules apply

2: Do not post low effort posts

3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff

4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.

5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)

6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist

7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/1874605

A 17-year-old from Nebraska and her mother are facing criminal charges including performing an illegal abortion and concealing a dead body after police obtained the pair’s private chat history from Facebook, court documents published by Motherboard show.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

I agree that these people did a crime.

I just don't think their crime should be illegal.

If this was about murdering a full-grown adult and not aborting a fetus, nobody would be talking about privacy concerns. Guaranteed.

[–] [email protected] 28 points 1 year ago (1 children)

How do you know they committed a crime. After reading the article I don’t know. It looks totally as if it’s possible that she just had a miscarriage.

Maybe there’s just a prosecutor eager for convictions.

Maybe she was trying do avoid exactly this kind of trouble.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago

She took abortion drugs.....

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Also, there's no general agreement or scientific pointing of where life and consciousness is started on a fetus so, if the government job is to conserve the life of a individual, a fetus life still matters and shouldn't be taken by neither the parents or anyone else.

Brazil (ironically enough) has a good constitution about about abortion where's it is strictly prohibited unless some cases apply like: the baby has developed no brain, the baby has originated from a sexual assault case or the process of giving birth or the pregnancy itself represents a risk of death for the mother. It is simple, states that life's have the same values as well as showing the individual rights matter.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Why do you think a life created by sexual assault is less valuable than a life created otherwise? Isn’t the resulting life the same?

Thinking this through might help you understand the tradeoffs behind most abortions. Pregnancy is dangerous, childbirth is dangerous, parenting is incredibly difficult.

A child could push a family into poverty and devastate siblings’ futures. How do you evaluate the harm caused by that against the harm caused by being forced to carry a child produced by sexual assault?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

A child could push a family into poverty and devastate siblings’ futures.

A child can also be put up for adoption btw.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Which often means shoving them into massively underfunded institutions, that are full of corruption and abuse, making it a less than ideal alternative.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago

Less ideal than being dead?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You're joking, right? First, abortions aren't mentioned in the Brazilian constitution - you'd have to look at specific legal codices, such as the Civil Code or the Penal Code. Second, that's the bare minimum, not "pretty good".

[–] [email protected] -3 points 1 year ago

The objective is supposed to be to find the situations where abortion would be fair a fair trade-off of lives and rights, not to try to speedrun the abortion rank; it makes no sense you're saying it is bare minimum when the objective is to reduce it as it is inherently bad.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Would you be ok with someone aborting a 39 week old fetus? What about a 40 week old fetus? What about during labour?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago

Slippery slope fallacy detected