Hacker News Reader

Comment by zdragnar | Hacker News Reader

That isn't about women's rights. One side argues it is about womens rights, that abortion is merely a medical procedure.

The other side argues that the fetus (usually called "unborn") have independent heartbeats and unique DNA, and as such have their own right to life. That is why they use the term "pro-life".

View on HN

If it really were about children's rights, then they would also be all for supporting families economically and putting resources into education. But they do not. The most probable explanation is still control over female reproduction.

This conversation could be a whole lot less acrimonious if we were to acknowledge the core conservative position: the intact nuclear family is the primary locus of children's rights.

Why bother trying to understand your opponents position in good faith when it is so much faster and satisfying to just slander them?

This seems to be the crux of our entire political situation as a country (has been for awhile, though certainly feels amplified the past 15 years).

Because that represents a fundamental misunderstanding of the conservatives' view of what a "right" is. Social welfare programs are a necessary intrusion upon the rights of the taxpayers to the fruit of their labor, and the specific balance that they have chosen isn't to your liking.

Ask, talk to, or overhear any of the people in texas who support the bill, and not one of them will give a damn about, or even consider as an issue, "control over female reproduction". That is your concern, not theirs.

“If you were really against murder, you would support more money going to schools.”

Reply on news.ycombinator.com