• @Smoogs
    link
    431 year ago

    Yes having your privacy and autonomy taken away, such a small part of a person’s life. Insignificant!

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      -51 year ago

      What are laws if not violations of autonomy and privacy?

      Intelligent people actually recognise that this is not a useful distinction between prohibiting abortion and any other action.

      So why can’t you?

      • @Smoogs
        link
        11 year ago

        deleted by creator

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      -251 year ago

      Ask 100 people what their reasons for moving to a specific place are, I can almost guarantee none of them will mention abortion laws. Not that they aren’t important, but abortions are relatively uncommon among the population so most people don’t even think about them

      • @AquaTofana
        link
        221 year ago

        I mean, it’s a large part of the reason I want out of Texas so badly. I have never been pregnant, nor do I ever plan to be. And I have an IUD. But I don’t want my money funding a place like Texas. I don’t want my money funding any place that’s anti-woman/anti-minority/anti-LGBTQ+/anti-immigration.

        I want my tax dollars and the money I spend in the local economy to go to treating human beings like human beings. Robust social programs and the like.

        Tbf tho, you did say miniscule, and I can only speak for myself and my husband - so literally no one. It’s just…politics can absolutely influence where a person wants to move to if they have the capabilities of making said move.

        • @NotMyOldRedditName
          link
          11
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Just give it a few more years, and your IUD will be against the law. If people aren’t wisened up or awake yet, that’ll kick em in the arse and trigger more flight to other states.

          • @AquaTofana
            link
            101 year ago

            That’s exactly what I’m worried about in places like Texas/FL/MS/MO/etc etc. I’m also mid 30s so pretty damn close to being considered a “geriatric pregnancy” if I ever were to get pregnant. Hopefully that would be enough to get left alone and no one looking into me.

            However, my heart is broken for all the young women who are born here, or who end up here through life’s circumstances and have no choice for their own bodies. I found out about that high school in South Texas for specifically pregnant teen girls, and I was so fucking distraught over it (well I still am). The “pregnancy crisis” centers that are legally allowed to spread misinformation. Ugh, it’s so fucking much here.

            Then Bexar county voting down Prop A (which would have decriminalized abortion in San Antonio) earlier this year, and I just kinda gave up on this state.

            • @NotMyOldRedditName
              link
              41 year ago

              Seems pretty crazy to me that so much was bundled into 1 prop? I imagine there’s a reason that was the case, but that really makes it easy to fight it on other grounds instead of on each individual issue. They didn’t explicitly vote down abortion, they voted down all those things.

              Maybe there’s still some hope for other states if Ohio’s single purpose measure passed?

              • @BURN
                link
                21 year ago

                American politics relies on fat attatched to other legislation. It’s the reason nothing ever gets passed anymore. There’s a million riders and if someone is unhappy with the unrelated, but still on the bill/prop, measure, they’ll still vote no.

                • @NotMyOldRedditName
                  link
                  21 year ago

                  This isn’t legislation though, it’s a proposal from the population.

                  For whatever reason they grouped things together.

                  Maybe they didn’t think they could get enough signatories to get the crime stuff through and thought abortion and weed would draw enough voters for the other stuff?

                  Maybe there’s some weird law in Texas that made them do that?

                  Whatever the reason, what Ohio did was right. 2 separate things.

                  • @AquaTofana
                    link
                    11 year ago

                    Yeah no, you’re right in that a fuckton of stuff was bundled into 1 prop. And it was the crime stuff that got voted down.

                    I’m just personally hyperfixated on the reproductive rights thing, so I didn’t see how police response to property crimes up to a certain dollar amount was more important than ensuring women could get Healthcare without having to travel out of state.

                    But you’re right in that it’s two separate circumstances, and I’m super stoked for Ohio. I really do hope this provides momentum for other red states.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              -121 year ago

              “That’s exactly what I’m worried about”

              You’re worried about something only supported by a fringe group (some conservative Catholics) and legal for your entire lifetime. Keep in mind that the only opposition that the general pro-life movement has is towards abortifacients, of which IUDs are not.

              Just because something is vaguely similar doesn’t mean that it is necessarily affected by a policy. Banning slavery, doesn’t mean that you can’t make your children do chores.

              “The 'pregnancy crisis’s centers that are legally allowed to spread misinformation” Everyone is legally allowed to spread misinformation.

              Maybe your heart wouldn’t be so broken if your head wasn’t so broken. But who am I kidding, you likely don’t actually care about this to any actionable degree, just typed out a response since the topic was broached.

      • @BURN
        link
        121 year ago

        It may not be the sole reason to move somewhere, but it’s often an explicit reason NOT to move somewhere

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          -101 year ago

          Is there evidence for this? People move primarily for job, education opportunities and existing family. Local laws don’t really factor in that much, again unless you are participating in activity that your daily life revolves around, like drugs or maybe guns if you are a real freak about them.

          • @BURN
            link
            71 year ago

            Look at the demographics. Red States have a lot of Red Voters moving in, but not a lot of blue voters. Blue states have a lot of Blue and Red voters coming in. This doesn’t only deal with abortion, but it’s a major concern.

            Anecdotally, anyone Gen Z who isn’t a raging magat I know refuses to move to states such as texas due to the regressive abortion laws. Watch the next few years as big tech finds ways to move out of those states as they can’t attract talent.

            Ex. Austin is a great city for tech. I could likely make the same salary I do in Seattle, at a lower CoL. However, due to the political climate of texas, I wouldn’t even entertain the idea of living there.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              -81 year ago

              “As they can’t attract talent”

              You realise industries built up around a workforce? It’s why you have complexes of related companies in regions because they poach each other’s workforces. They don’t just build a multi-million/billion dollar facility and hope that their workforce materialises out of thin air.

              Tech companies like any high-skill field, built up around universities that produce the talent. Unless you think UT-Austin is suddenly going to stop producing students, why do you think that tech companies are going to abandon all their investment?

              “Look at the demographics”

              Why don’t you read the US Census inflow and outflow of populations between the states? (I don’t have the software to read it on my phone rn, but I seriously doubt it supports your argument, as far as I know low COL states are attracting everyone from high COL states. The low COL states are due to low market demand from being rural and just happen to be Republican).

              If it were really true that “red states” only import “red voters”, then how come cities in “red” states become increasingly “blue” over time? Keep in mind that the majority of the population even in relatively rural states is in cities. If they were really just importing Republican voters, then one would expect the voting patterns to stay the same. Anecdotally, basically every state in the West Coast and the adjoining states have been flooded with Democratic voting Californians driven out by COL in the past several decades.

              • @BURN
                link
                51 year ago

                Tech companies went to texas for tax breaks, not because of local talent. People move for jobs. They also provided relocation stipends when they opened those offices. They literally did exactly what you say is impossible. They brought the people so they could have a workforce.

                Low COL states are primarily destinations, but blue ones are more so than red ones. People leaving blue states tend to either be red voters or blue voters moving to other blue states.

                Urban counties almost always vote blue, as they tend to have more diverse populations. They’ll continue to do so as new voters join, as young people tend to overwhelmingly vote blue.

                Blue voters aren’t moving to the Alabamas, Oklahomas, Iowas etc. they’re moving into what would be considered purple states at best. (And yes, texas is closer to a purple state than a red one now).