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.

  • 🇰 🌀 🇱 🇦 🇳 🇦 🇰 ℹ️@yiffit.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I agree that these people did a crime.

    I just don’t think their crime should be illegal.

    If this was about murdering a full-grown adult and not aborting a fetus, nobody would be talking about privacy concerns. Guaranteed.

    • brainrein@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      30
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      How do you know they committed a crime. After reading the article I don’t know. It looks totally as if it’s possible that she just had a miscarriage.

      Maybe there’s just a prosecutor eager for convictions.

      Maybe she was trying do avoid exactly this kind of trouble.

    • Milk@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      We’d still be talking about the privacy part because it’d be still more concerning than the death of one random dude.

    • Whirlybird@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Would you be ok with someone aborting a 39 week old fetus? What about a 40 week old fetus? What about during labour?

    • wizardbeard@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      1 year ago

      For what it’s worth, the fetus was viable outside the womb 4 weeks before they did this. Viable at 24 weeks, aborted at 28. Pretty fucked up imo

    • Milk@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      Also, there’s no general agreement or scientific pointing of where life and consciousness is started on a fetus so, if the government job is to conserve the life of a individual, a fetus life still matters and shouldn’t be taken by neither the parents or anyone else.

      Brazil (ironically enough) has a good constitution about about abortion where’s it is strictly prohibited unless some cases apply like: the baby has developed no brain, the baby has originated from a sexual assault case or the process of giving birth or the pregnancy itself represents a risk of death for the mother. It is simple, states that life’s have the same values as well as showing the individual rights matter.

      • MyEdgyAlt@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Why do you think a life created by sexual assault is less valuable than a life created otherwise? Isn’t the resulting life the same?

        Thinking this through might help you understand the tradeoffs behind most abortions. Pregnancy is dangerous, childbirth is dangerous, parenting is incredibly difficult.

        A child could push a family into poverty and devastate siblings’ futures. How do you evaluate the harm caused by that against the harm caused by being forced to carry a child produced by sexual assault?

        • Whirlybird@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          A child could push a family into poverty and devastate siblings’ futures.

          A child can also be put up for adoption btw.

          • Raistlin@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Which often means shoving them into massively underfunded institutions, that are full of corruption and abuse, making it a less than ideal alternative.

            • Whirlybird@aussie.zone
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              Nah I’m ok. If she wanted an abortion she should have gotten one in the 20 weeks where she’s legally allowed to. Doesn’t seem like a hard thing to do.

        • Milk@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          1 year ago

          It is not less valuable but the way it was created was against the individual rights of the mother.

          I agree abortion laws are about trade-offs as I showed in my example and that’s why abortion shouldn’t be legal in the cases I stated. Abortion shouldn’t be legal for anyone cause, if it was in a consensual relationship, the mother assumed the risk of pregnancy.

          The only lives that are less valuable are those which deliberately risk or take way the others’ lives.

          Also, thanks for being respectful.

          • Gabu@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            The only lives that are less valuable are those which deliberately risk or take way the others’ lives.

            By choosing to be alive, you’re impacting all present and future generations, causing the deaths of potentially billions of humans and countless other animals. Do you see how your attempted distinction doesn’t actually exist?

      • Gabu@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        You’re joking, right? First, abortions aren’t mentioned in the Brazilian constitution - you’d have to look at specific legal codices, such as the Civil Code or the Penal Code. Second, that’s the bare minimum, not “pretty good”.

        • Milk@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          The objective is supposed to be to find the situations where abortion would be fair a fair trade-off of lives and rights, not to try to speedrun the abortion rank; it makes no sense you’re saying it is bare minimum when the objective is to reduce it as it is inherently bad.