When I was growing up the internet was a place to be liberated from the world say what you want to say, be whoever you want and form genuine communities with shared interests. Now the internet feels like a tool to enslave the mind with identity echo chambers and any deviation leads you to being banned and blocked shunned and silenced within a void that is inescapable. Novel unique websites coded manually by hobbyists running servers for free in the commons allowing people access to the free flow of information under the banner of “information should be free” has largely gone away with corpratisation. I miss the days when the internet was populated largely by nerds aiming to make a better world not this controlled censored hell hole of profiteering.

  • I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    The fact that you think that’s the only reason (or even just the main reason) people get abortions shows how you, like most anti-abortionists, haven’t bothered to look at the facts and have your head so far stuck in the sand that its not even worth talking to you.

    • Foresight@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      There are other reasons but it’s largely to do with being in a capitalist system with the cost of living causing hardship straining the ability to afford a home let alone raise a family.

      • I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        So are things like non-viable pregnancies due to the inability to afford a home? How about rape? How about a minor kicked out because their parents don’t approve, is their inexperience, immaturity, and lack of support just because they can’t afford a house? What if it’s a viable pregnancy, but the baby will be brain dead and require constant care; is cost of living the only burden the parents have to be concerned about? What if there’s only a chance it’s non-viable, but delaying the abortion puts the mother at risk; at what percent chance is a person allowed to terminate the pregnancy and not put their body at risk? 50% chance of living? 10%? Less than 1%?

        These aren’t exceptions, these are the types of reasons people get abortions. Let me say it again with emphasis: These aren’t exceptions, these are the types of reasons people get abortions. It is so God damn ignorant to think the main reason people get abortions is because they’re poor and can’t afford to have kids. And to plow ahead and support anti-abortion legislation isn’t just ignorant, it’s dangerously idiotic.

        As we are already seeing in states that have banned abortion, even ones that have some half assed medical exemption, doctors just won’t perform them. Or they’ll wait to perform them until it’s much more risky; like when the patient is literally bleeding out. What doctor is going to risk getting constantly sued (and let’s just set aside how fucking asinine it is to allow lawsuits from third-parties in no way affected) because some jackass isn’t convinced it was REALLY medically necessary?

        Here’s an idea, how about we leave the decision of abortion up to doctors and their patient’s? That way, we don’t have to try and legislate around all the very legitimate reasons people get abortions. Do you think it’s immoral? Great, no one’s forcing you to get one and others having them has literally zero impact on your life.

        • Foresight@lemmy.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          Those are issues yes, however from the information I’ve looked at the majority of abortions are because of affordability. First off you can’t get pregnant just because of getting kicked out of a house, however housing should be allocated for that scenario. You’re assuming I would pass laws to ban it, your not seeking out what I intend, the point is to develop the economy and provide for people in abundance so women no longer feel the need to get an abortion because they can’t afford to raise a family.

          • I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            So you don’t want to ban it, but rather change the circumstances in society and individual people’s lives so they don’t want to get them in the first place? Congratulations! You’re pro-choice.

            • Foresight@lemmy.mlOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              1 year ago

              The fact you view politics as a zero sum sports game is the problem in pro or anti, us vs them. You’re mistaken I’m against the practice I just go about it a different way.

              • I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                6
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                You can be against abortion and still be pro-choice. No one is pro-abortion. You want to go about it in a way that changes the circumstances in people’s lives so they choose not to have an abortion. So you do think the person’s choice matters. And you can see circumstances for why someone would choose to abort. But note how you don’t want to take actually away their choice, just change the circumstances so they don’t make that choice. That’s because…

                You’re pro-choice.

                • Foresight@lemmy.mlOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  5
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  No I’m against the practice and I don’t believe in the ideology of liberalism I am not pro-choice choice is an illusion presented from the environment.

                  • I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    6
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    You don’t want to institute a ban, but would rather influence people’s choices. That’s pro-choice, dumbass. Anyways you cut it, that’s pro-choice.