3 ms·

We don't know they even did, that's the point really - why would they omit asking a lawful question when asked for comment - the article if it can be believed s

We don't know they even did, that's the point really - why would they omit asking a lawful question when asked for comment - the article if it can be believed said they deported her on visa grounds and nothing else. "At one point a US border official asked Gourley, who was wearing a loose-fitting dress, whether she was pregnant." That is not asking about abortion, that may simply be a question to determine where she is held as if she was pregnant a small room may not be appropriate and may need medical attention - do you see the problem here? They're misleading And before anyone comments on the next bit of the article, a recent abortion would mean any weight gain (it isn't mentioned but the last question could easily be just because she is overweight) is still evident and may still require attention if in distress, which I imagine being detained might be - the rest can easily be attributed to horrific incompetence and negligence but that is expected.

10u152 4y ago
Honestly I think the abortion question might have just been added by the journalist to make a good headline.
- throwaway67743 4y ago
  Correct, they conflate pregnancy questions with abortion just because it's a hot topic right now, this probably happened 1000s of times this year as children born on US soil are Americans so it is a valid question whatever the ethics but that wasn't reported - honestly I'm just sick of seeing this garbage and I for one want to see on HN: fair, balanced, checked news.
- phs318u 4y ago
  Proving you haven't bothered to read the article. The woman herself is directly quoted as having been asked that specific question. I find it ironic that you're making stuff up to accuse a journalist of making stuff up. Whether it happened or not is still open to question (is Gourley a believable person?), but it's not open to the accusation you're making.
  - throwaway67743 4y ago
    Believable is an impossible test, they don't offer enough information about her or even about the incident to determine whether she's being honest or not
phs318u 4y ago
You've selectively quoted from the article. The full passage follows: ===== At one point a US border official asked Gourley, who was wearing a loose-fitting dress, whether she was pregnant. The same question was repeated as she was moved between rooms. When she again told the US officials she was not pregnant, Gourley was asked whether she had had an abortion. “She was walking me from one room to the next, and she asked the pregnancy question again,” Gourley told Guardian Australia. “I don’t know if she had forgotten, or she wanted to work out if I was lying or something. “I said no, and she looked at me again and said, ‘Have you recently had an abortion?’ ===== Unless Gourley is directly lying, she herself (not the journalist) has stated quite unequivocally that the she was asked 'Have you recently had an abortion?', following on from being asked twice about whether she was pregnant. In addition to selectively quoting, you've assumed motivation on behalf of the CBP person asking the question - that the purpose of the pregnancy question was related to concern about Gourley's medical condition. However the fact of the "pregnancy question" also comes from Gourley, which you're accepting was asked. Did she then make up the "abortion question"? You seem to be trying to have it both ways. That the pregnancy question (as reported by Gourley herself) happened but was merely out of concern, and that the abortion question (also as reported by Gourley herself) did not.
- throwaway67743 4y ago
  If immediately assume CBP were malicious and not just useless then sure, but that isn't a good story, what's better is to make it sound like they removed her for violating an abortion law, which if they did and it was a lawful question, wouldn't have bothered hiding when asked for comment, if it was unlawful then internal investigations will need to be done

10u152 4y ago

Honestly I think the abortion question might have just been added by the journalist to make a good headline.

throwaway67743 4y ago
Correct, they conflate pregnancy questions with abortion just because it's a hot topic right now, this probably happened 1000s of times this year as children born on US soil are Americans so it is a valid question whatever the ethics but that wasn't reported - honestly I'm just sick of seeing this garbage and I for one want to see on HN: fair, balanced, checked news.
phs318u 4y ago
Proving you haven't bothered to read the article. The woman herself is directly quoted as having been asked that specific question. I find it ironic that you're making stuff up to accuse a journalist of making stuff up. Whether it happened or not is still open to question (is Gourley a believable person?), but it's not open to the accusation you're making.
- throwaway67743 4y ago
  Believable is an impossible test, they don't offer enough information about her or even about the incident to determine whether she's being honest or not

phs318u 4y ago

You've selectively quoted from the article. The full passage follows: ===== At one point a US border official asked Gourley, who was wearing a loose-fitting dress, whether she was pregnant. The same question was repeated as she was moved between rooms. When she again told the US officials she was not pregnant, Gourley was asked whether she had had an abortion. “She was walking me from one room to the next, and she asked the pregnancy question again,” Gourley told Guardian Australia. “I don’t know if she had forgotten, or she wanted to work out if I was lying or something. “I said no, and she looked at me again and said, ‘Have you recently had an abortion?’ ===== Unless Gourley is directly lying, she herself (not the journalist) has stated quite unequivocally that the she was asked 'Have you recently had an abortion?', following on from being asked twice about whether she was pregnant. In addition to selectively quoting, you've assumed motivation on behalf of the CBP person asking the question - that the purpose of the pregnancy question was related to concern about Gourley's medical condition. However the fact of the "pregnancy question" also comes from Gourley, which you're accepting was asked. Did she then make up the "abortion question"? You seem to be trying to have it both ways. That the pregnancy question (as reported by Gourley herself) happened but was merely out of concern, and that the abortion question (also as reported by Gourley herself) did not.

throwaway67743 4y ago
If immediately assume CBP were malicious and not just useless then sure, but that isn't a good story, what's better is to make it sound like they removed her for violating an abortion law, which if they did and it was a lawful question, wouldn't have bothered hiding when asked for comment, if it was unlawful then internal investigations will need to be done