5 ms·

The split of pro/against is really close to 50/50. If you think that the smart people are only on one side or that only one side has "good" arguments, then you

The split of pro/against is really close to 50/50. If you think that the smart people are only on one side or that only one side has "good" arguments, then you are living in a bubble. The argument over abortion was going on before Roe v Wade. Roe v Wade only prevented legislation from finding a solution.

cultofmetatron 4y ago
50% of the country are of below average intelligence so yes.
stjohnswarts 4y ago
It's 70/30 and you know it. Americans support abortion in some form or another at 70%. The MAGA base do not, and they want other things like gay marriage, gay sex, and birth control also declared illegal.
- betwixthewires 4y ago
  I've never met a person who thinks birth control should be illegal. I am sure they're out there, but this "they're coming for your morning after pill next" is scaremongering. Gay sex is probably the same. Gay marriage I think you're probably right.
  - stjohnswarts 4y ago
    How many devout evangelicals and catholics have you met? BC condemnation are in the majority of those religions.
  - mynameisash 4y ago
    > this "they're coming for your morning after pill next" is scaremongering. Gay sex is probably the same. Justice Thomas's concurring opinion literally calls for reconsidering (ie, overturning) Griswold (contraception), Lawrence (same sex relationships), and Obergefell (same sex marriage). It's perfectly clear that this is exactly what a not insignificant number of conservatives want to do. How is this scaremongering ?
    - betwixthewires 4y ago
      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.
      - divided 4y ago
        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?
        betwixthewires 4y ago
        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?
        divided 4y ago
        Yes, Justice Thomas mentions some of the most major 14th amendment rulings and says they were ruled wrongly. One conspicuously missing ruling was Loving v Virginia. The one that prevented states from banning interracial marriage. Does this sound like someone standing on principle? Or perhaps more like someone who doesn’t care about others’ rights but don’t touch his own? Several states have already had debates in their state houses about outlawing some forms of birth control (Louisiana and Missouri off the top of my head). This was prior to the decision, now they will be more emboldened. The Texas governor when asked if he could go further and outlaw birth control simply responded “I don’t know.” You wildly underestimate how extreme these people are and how little they care about what the majority want. To answer your final paragraph, there is a very long history of _certain_ particular states in a _certain_ region in America with a _certain_ evangelical Christian makeup who has been trampling rights for centuries. These people argued states should decide slavery and Jim Crow laws as well. Being blunt, history has proven over and over you’re on the wrong side of this. And, for what it’s worth, until gerrymandering is fixed there is a tremendous problem with letting the minority political party in the state govern. For instance, in Wisconsin over the last 3 elections, Democrats have been +4%, +8%, -3%. One would expect their state house to slightly favor Democrats. Republicans have held a +29%, +27%, and +23% edge. Almost every red state is like this. This is how you have relatively purple states like North Carolina, Texas, and Florida take absurdly hard right positions that in no way represents their populations. The Texas GOP just days ago released their platform calling for a state-level electoral college for all state-wide positions so they can maintain control of governor, secretary of state, attorney general, etc. without coming remotely close to winning the popular vote. Hope that helps explain how it is very much the DEFINITION of undemocratic and what’s wrong with it.
  - noelherrick 4y ago
    Thomas mentioned all the cases that made those protected rights. The way those cases would be overturned is if a state passed a law to prohibit them. He is sending a very clear message to legislatures that he would be receptive to hearing those cases. This is not hysteria and you are making the same arguments made about Roe. We have the roadmap, and it is very clear. After privacy rights, Affordable Care Act, Social Security, and Medicare are all next.
jollybean 4y ago
Yes, it's important for people to realize the split is closer to 50/50 nation wide, some people forget that, but in tech, it's definitely not 50/50 and that's relevant as well.
- gbear605 4y ago
  It’s about 70/30 nation wide, and in tech probably about 95/5.
- kibwen 4y ago
  "As of March 2022, a broad majority of Americans oppose overturning Roe v. Wade (61%) and just over one-third (36%) support it. Opposition is highest among Democrats (74%), including a majority (56%) who strongly oppose overturning Roe. Most independents (61%) also oppose a Roe overturn." https://www.prri.org/spotlight/most-oppose-overturning-roe-v-wade-widespread-confusion-over-a-post-roe-world/ https://www.prri.org/spotlight/most-oppose-overturning-roe-v...
  - jollybean 4y ago
    That's making my point though. Those numbers are far closer to 50/50 than one would imagine in the bubble, but that's also reference to specifically overturning Roe v. Wade, not whether or not abortion should be legal, which is closer to 50/50. Have a look at the second chart[1] It's been 'mostly, roughly, steadily ~50/50 'ish' for about 20 years. I think most self described progressives would be surprised by those numbers, and even the 64/36, as you brought up. This is a 'big win' for 35% of the country, and another 15% are maybe ok with it, and a few others ambivalent. That sentiment I think is at odds with the moral outrage felt by ~55% of the country, and it's hard to ingest. Which makes this a big more difficult to navigate than I think we might normally assume. I think Google's response is rational, but it's not as 'Black and White' an issue as our 'tech culture instincts' might have us believe. [1] https://news.gallup.com/poll/1576/abortion.aspx https://news.gallup.com/poll/1576/abortion.aspx
    - divided 4y ago
      The "bubble" tends to claim the numbers are 60-70% (and higher in tech companies). Polling shows the numbers between 60-70%. No, most self described progressives would not be surprised that the numbers are where they say they are. Literally all throughout this thread people are using these same numbers. I'm curious how far off your perception of progressives is from reality. What numbers do you think we believe are accurate? Further, _you_ should reference the first chart you linked. It should clearly indicate to you that many who identify as pro-life do indeed support at least partial abortion rights. 85% believe abortions should be allowed in all or some circumstances. 13% believe illegal in all circumstances. Many states under conservative control will go to illegal in all circumstances, so that's the opinion of 13% controlling the freedoms of the other 85%. Not so close to 50/50, huh?
thatnerdyguy 4y ago
Support for overturning Roe is actually around 30%
- asveikau 4y ago
  This is the thing that our "two sides to every argument" political discourse distorts. Many issues don't poll at 50/50, but perception is often that they are 50/50.
- refurb 4y ago
  Pro-choice vs pro-life is pretty evenly split. Even on the pro-choice side there is a lot of variance on when abortion should be restricted (similar to how Europe restricts abortions the closer to full gestation). Same on the pro-life side, views aren’t binary. Considering most people don’t understand why Roe v Wade was overturned, I’m not sure opinions on whether it should have been mean much, since belief of what that means is all over the place.
  - thatnerdyguy 4y ago
    Personal views of pro-life/pro-choice though can be separated from the question of "Does a woman have the fundamental right to terminate a pregnancy?", which seems to have much more support. Would a significant majority choose to do that themselves? Maybe not. But it seems the majority feel women DO have that right, and should be able to make that choice themselves.
    - refurb 4y ago
      That’s my point. When asked “should abortion be legal?” It’s about 60/40 split. If you asked “would you get an abortion?” The numbers are likely more skewed.
ra7 4y ago
> The split of pro/against is really close to 50/50. It’s not 50/50 at Google or any of the big tech companies.
Brian-Puccio 4y ago
> The split of pro/against is really close to 50/50. I’ve searched and I cannot find data that say half of America wants abortion made completely illegal (as it is in several states right now and will be in more shortly due to trigger laws). Can you please share where you get your 50/50 split from? > Roe v Wade only prevented legislation from finding a solution. Roe only? Roe made safe abortions available to millions — it reshaped society. If the argument against Roe is that fertilized embryos are killed, then we need to make sure in-vitro fertilization is stopped where abortion is as well. As one anti-abortion politician said “The egg in the lab doesn’t apply. It’s not in a woman.”
- betwixthewires 4y ago
  The argument around roe is quite simply that it was an overreach of constitutional authority by the federal government. Now individual states, the people of them, can decide how they want to govern themselves. That's all that's changed.
rwalle 4y ago
Sorry, the one who is living in a bubble is you. I wouldn't be surprised if over 80% of Google employees support abortion rights. There are many ways to show that Google employees (or generally in the tech industry) are much more liberal than the average US citizen.
tjr225 4y ago
> The split of pro/against is really close to 50/50. I don’t believe you and I think you’re the one in the bubble. Your turn. Also; did you even read my comment before replying to it? Come on, brother. It is obvious that I am talking about Google employees.
lettergram 4y ago
Here’s a citation: https://application.marketsight.com/app/ItemView.aspx?SharedFor=director%40bigdatapoll.com&SharedBy=34090&id=3f4c32f0-197f-48e1-a9de-aea10180190b https://application.marketsight.com/app/ItemView.aspx?Shared... Depends what you mean really, as much as 60% are against abortion after a fetus can feel pain (debated: 7-28 weeks), with another 20% undecided and only 20% support abortion. Most people just don’t know how to have an informed discussion. What overturning Roe really does is allow states to set the threshold. Roe prescribed a method of determining whether an abortion was legal — “viability”. Now you can have Colorado having after birth abortions (seriously legislated) and Texas banning abortions after heart beat and Alabama banning all abortions.

cultofmetatron 4y ago

50% of the country are of below average intelligence so yes.

stjohnswarts 4y ago

It's 70/30 and you know it. Americans support abortion in some form or another at 70%. The MAGA base do not, and they want other things like gay marriage, gay sex, and birth control also declared illegal.

betwixthewires 4y ago
I've never met a person who thinks birth control should be illegal. I am sure they're out there, but this "they're coming for your morning after pill next" is scaremongering. Gay sex is probably the same. Gay marriage I think you're probably right.
- stjohnswarts 4y ago
  How many devout evangelicals and catholics have you met? BC condemnation are in the majority of those religions.
- mynameisash 4y ago
  > this "they're coming for your morning after pill next" is scaremongering. Gay sex is probably the same. Justice Thomas's concurring opinion literally calls for reconsidering (ie, overturning) Griswold (contraception), Lawrence (same sex relationships), and Obergefell (same sex marriage). It's perfectly clear that this is exactly what a not insignificant number of conservatives want to do. How is this scaremongering ?
  - betwixthewires 4y ago
    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.
    - divided 4y ago
      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?
      - betwixthewires 4y ago
        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?
        divided 4y ago
        Yes, Justice Thomas mentions some of the most major 14th amendment rulings and says they were ruled wrongly. One conspicuously missing ruling was Loving v Virginia. The one that prevented states from banning interracial marriage. Does this sound like someone standing on principle? Or perhaps more like someone who doesn’t care about others’ rights but don’t touch his own? Several states have already had debates in their state houses about outlawing some forms of birth control (Louisiana and Missouri off the top of my head). This was prior to the decision, now they will be more emboldened. The Texas governor when asked if he could go further and outlaw birth control simply responded “I don’t know.” You wildly underestimate how extreme these people are and how little they care about what the majority want. To answer your final paragraph, there is a very long history of _certain_ particular states in a _certain_ region in America with a _certain_ evangelical Christian makeup who has been trampling rights for centuries. These people argued states should decide slavery and Jim Crow laws as well. Being blunt, history has proven over and over you’re on the wrong side of this. And, for what it’s worth, until gerrymandering is fixed there is a tremendous problem with letting the minority political party in the state govern. For instance, in Wisconsin over the last 3 elections, Democrats have been +4%, +8%, -3%. One would expect their state house to slightly favor Democrats. Republicans have held a +29%, +27%, and +23% edge. Almost every red state is like this. This is how you have relatively purple states like North Carolina, Texas, and Florida take absurdly hard right positions that in no way represents their populations. The Texas GOP just days ago released their platform calling for a state-level electoral college for all state-wide positions so they can maintain control of governor, secretary of state, attorney general, etc. without coming remotely close to winning the popular vote. Hope that helps explain how it is very much the DEFINITION of undemocratic and what’s wrong with it.
- noelherrick 4y ago
  Thomas mentioned all the cases that made those protected rights. The way those cases would be overturned is if a state passed a law to prohibit them. He is sending a very clear message to legislatures that he would be receptive to hearing those cases. This is not hysteria and you are making the same arguments made about Roe. We have the roadmap, and it is very clear. After privacy rights, Affordable Care Act, Social Security, and Medicare are all next.

jollybean 4y ago

Yes, it's important for people to realize the split is closer to 50/50 nation wide, some people forget that, but in tech, it's definitely not 50/50 and that's relevant as well.

gbear605 4y ago
It’s about 70/30 nation wide, and in tech probably about 95/5.
kibwen 4y ago
"As of March 2022, a broad majority of Americans oppose overturning Roe v. Wade (61%) and just over one-third (36%) support it. Opposition is highest among Democrats (74%), including a majority (56%) who strongly oppose overturning Roe. Most independents (61%) also oppose a Roe overturn." https://www.prri.org/spotlight/most-oppose-overturning-roe-v-wade-widespread-confusion-over-a-post-roe-world/ https://www.prri.org/spotlight/most-oppose-overturning-roe-v...
- jollybean 4y ago
  That's making my point though. Those numbers are far closer to 50/50 than one would imagine in the bubble, but that's also reference to specifically overturning Roe v. Wade, not whether or not abortion should be legal, which is closer to 50/50. Have a look at the second chart[1] It's been 'mostly, roughly, steadily ~50/50 'ish' for about 20 years. I think most self described progressives would be surprised by those numbers, and even the 64/36, as you brought up. This is a 'big win' for 35% of the country, and another 15% are maybe ok with it, and a few others ambivalent. That sentiment I think is at odds with the moral outrage felt by ~55% of the country, and it's hard to ingest. Which makes this a big more difficult to navigate than I think we might normally assume. I think Google's response is rational, but it's not as 'Black and White' an issue as our 'tech culture instincts' might have us believe. [1] https://news.gallup.com/poll/1576/abortion.aspx https://news.gallup.com/poll/1576/abortion.aspx
  - divided 4y ago
    The "bubble" tends to claim the numbers are 60-70% (and higher in tech companies). Polling shows the numbers between 60-70%. No, most self described progressives would not be surprised that the numbers are where they say they are. Literally all throughout this thread people are using these same numbers. I'm curious how far off your perception of progressives is from reality. What numbers do you think we believe are accurate? Further, _you_ should reference the first chart you linked. It should clearly indicate to you that many who identify as pro-life do indeed support at least partial abortion rights. 85% believe abortions should be allowed in all or some circumstances. 13% believe illegal in all circumstances. Many states under conservative control will go to illegal in all circumstances, so that's the opinion of 13% controlling the freedoms of the other 85%. Not so close to 50/50, huh?

thatnerdyguy 4y ago

Support for overturning Roe is actually around 30%

asveikau 4y ago
This is the thing that our "two sides to every argument" political discourse distorts. Many issues don't poll at 50/50, but perception is often that they are 50/50.
refurb 4y ago
Pro-choice vs pro-life is pretty evenly split. Even on the pro-choice side there is a lot of variance on when abortion should be restricted (similar to how Europe restricts abortions the closer to full gestation). Same on the pro-life side, views aren’t binary. Considering most people don’t understand why Roe v Wade was overturned, I’m not sure opinions on whether it should have been mean much, since belief of what that means is all over the place.
- thatnerdyguy 4y ago
  Personal views of pro-life/pro-choice though can be separated from the question of "Does a woman have the fundamental right to terminate a pregnancy?", which seems to have much more support. Would a significant majority choose to do that themselves? Maybe not. But it seems the majority feel women DO have that right, and should be able to make that choice themselves.
  - refurb 4y ago
    That’s my point. When asked “should abortion be legal?” It’s about 60/40 split. If you asked “would you get an abortion?” The numbers are likely more skewed.

ra7 4y ago

> The split of pro/against is really close to 50/50. It’s not 50/50 at Google or any of the big tech companies.

Brian-Puccio 4y ago

> The split of pro/against is really close to 50/50. I’ve searched and I cannot find data that say half of America wants abortion made completely illegal (as it is in several states right now and will be in more shortly due to trigger laws). Can you please share where you get your 50/50 split from? > Roe v Wade only prevented legislation from finding a solution. Roe only? Roe made safe abortions available to millions — it reshaped society. If the argument against Roe is that fertilized embryos are killed, then we need to make sure in-vitro fertilization is stopped where abortion is as well. As one anti-abortion politician said “The egg in the lab doesn’t apply. It’s not in a woman.”

betwixthewires 4y ago
The argument around roe is quite simply that it was an overreach of constitutional authority by the federal government. Now individual states, the people of them, can decide how they want to govern themselves. That's all that's changed.

rwalle 4y ago

Sorry, the one who is living in a bubble is you. I wouldn't be surprised if over 80% of Google employees support abortion rights. There are many ways to show that Google employees (or generally in the tech industry) are much more liberal than the average US citizen.

tjr225 4y ago

> The split of pro/against is really close to 50/50. I don’t believe you and I think you’re the one in the bubble. Your turn. Also; did you even read my comment before replying to it? Come on, brother. It is obvious that I am talking about Google employees.

lettergram 4y ago

Here’s a citation: https://application.marketsight.com/app/ItemView.aspx?SharedFor=director%40bigdatapoll.com&SharedBy=34090&id=3f4c32f0-197f-48e1-a9de-aea10180190b https://application.marketsight.com/app/ItemView.aspx?Shared... Depends what you mean really, as much as 60% are against abortion after a fetus can feel pain (debated: 7-28 weeks), with another 20% undecided and only 20% support abortion. Most people just don’t know how to have an informed discussion. What overturning Roe really does is allow states to set the threshold. Roe prescribed a method of determining whether an abortion was legal — “viability”. Now you can have Colorado having after birth abortions (seriously legislated) and Texas banning abortions after heart beat and Alabama banning all abortions.