this post was submitted on 09 Jul 2023
2197 points (97.9% liked)

Technology

34975 readers
123 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
[–] Whirlybird@aussie.zone 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I don't need to know her life to know that an abortion was legal for her for the first 20 weeks of the pregnancy.

Abortion is not a privacy issue. How is it a privacy issue?

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You'd need to know her life in order to know what was possible for her to do during that time frame. There are myriad reasons why she might not have been able to get an abortion during that time period, not least of which that the entire state of Nebraska has only one place that performs them. That place might be far away from where she lives, she might have to take time off work or be fired etc etc.

I already told you how it's a privacy issue: it's a medical procedure and as such it's nobody's business than your own or that of your doctor.

[–] Whirlybird@aussie.zone 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

That's not at all how things work. Just because it's a medical procedure doesn't mean that "privacy" means that it should be allowed at a federal level. You don't just get free reign to medical procedures federally because of "privacy".

Also the abortion is taking a tablet or 2 btw - like what she did here. You can DIY your own abortion with a few tablets up to like 8 weeks old.

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Free reign? Like it's a fucking privilege to get doctor-approved medical assistance?

I'm done with your dumb and probably disingenuous arguments against basic bodily autonomy and medical privacy. Have the day you deserve.

[–] Whirlybird@aussie.zone 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Can you explain how abortions should be legal at a federal level because of privacy?

That’s the point I’m making. Abortion isn’t a privacy issue. It’s an elective procedure 99% of the time, and it has nothing to do with privacy whatsoever.

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

It's a common and often necessary medical procedure and as such, you have it backwards: you need to supply a compelling argument for banning something medically advantageous and sometimes life-saving.

As for privacy, it's none of the government's business which medically approved treatment women receive or don't receive.