Comment by eplanit | Hacker News Reader

Comment by eplanit | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

That reductionist argument is old and tired, and devoid of any truth. Just a clump of cells? Is it just as likely to grow into being a giraffe? or an oak tree? just some blob? Left unkilled, it grows to what it is -- a human being.[1]

A fetus is not a life? WTF? "Science" says it's a forming human. Are you anti-science?

When one turns on an enemy, the first thing is to dehumanize them. Doing horrible things (dismembering, killing) to a non-human is much easier. The tactics of the Left regarding abortion are very similar as what one does when ginning up a society for war: you convince them through repeated messaging that "they" they aren't human beings -- they're something less, and they're a problem for us.

I used to be a Democrat, and it was the callous tone the the Left took on re: abortion that was a factor in me deciding that the hypocrisy was too much. I support unrestricted first trimester abortions, and am of the now-rejected Bill Clinton philosophy that they should be safe, legal, ... and rare. It's very telling that it's the "rare" part that the Left takes exception with. Now, it's only conservatives who quote Clinton on that.

Add to that, 80% of abortions are black and brown babies[2], yet the organization known as "Black Lives Matter" is silent on the topic -- more hypocrisy.

[1] https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fetus

[2] https://aapsonline.org/planned-parenthood-abortions-over-80-...

> It's very telling that it's the "rare" part that the Left takes exception with.

The Left doesn’t. The “rare” was a reference to government providing sex education, contraception availability, and social support to attack the demand side so that even with abortion being ssfe, legal, and readily available at need, it would be rare that it would be sought.

> Now, it's only conservatives who quote Clinton on that.

While the right may quote it, they also oppose each and everything it stood for. In fact, that was the left-wing part of the formulation (and the part Clinton, as a center-right Democrat, was least sincere about, hence his cheerful collaboration with Republicans in destroying the social safety net.).

> It's very telling that it's the "rare" part that the Left takes exception with. Now, it's only conservatives who quote Clinton on that.

This is complete nonsense. It's not "the left" that opposes teaching proper sex ed, easy and affordable access to contraception, or providing economic assistance for the mothers who cannot care for a child. Or, for that matter, reducing the economic inequality that leads to that problem in the first place.

Actually, it is true: "When Bill Clinton gave the country “safe, legal, and rare” in 1992...They translated into language the inchoate sentiments of millions of Americans so exactly that they had to hear it only once for it to become their firmly held position on abortion....Now, after a quarter century of mighty service...the phrase is being vigorously expunged from the pro-abortion-rights conversation, including from the plank of the Democratic Party (in 2012) and the official position of Planned Parenthood. "

[1] https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/12/the-brilli...

Maybe you should include this later bit of explaining context?

> "Young feminists living in the age of dwindling access to abortion aren’t interested in a mantra that implies there is something shameful about the procedure"

Reply on news.ycombinator.com