Let me be very clear: Safe, free and legal abortion is a fundamental right that is much bigger an issue than „choice“. A society that allows the cruelty of forced birth is not a free society. Not for anyone with a womb. Not for men either. This fight is a collective one.


@malteengeler I disagree strongly with the ruling, but given the court’s decision, is it still correct to call abortion (or more general, bodily autonomy) a “right”?

@jerry@infosec.exchange Bodily autonomy is not a right, or else there would not have been forced medical procedures either.

Can't have it one way here, another way there. Either bodily autonomy is a right or it isn't.

@divVerent curious which forced medical procedures you're thinking of??? Not saying I disagree, just can't think of any.

@jerry@infosec.exchange As one example, the US force lots of vaccinations on immigrants and school children, while school is mandatory. Many of which have questionable benefit (e.g. the disease is not around anymore, or there is only a coin toss chance the vaccine actually matches the disease). And recently it became commonplace for even employers to demand access to a person's medical data. Five years ago this kind of invasion into privacy would have been unthinkable.

Such things should be everyone's personal decision and there should be no requirement to reveal them in a relationship of power such as employment. If needed for disease control, then this info should at the very least go through a neutral third party to ensure privacy.

(Yes, I did get my shots - however I insist on people being allowed to make their own decisions again)

@jerry@infosec.exchange Another example are that incidents where employers force an employee into abortion can be found e.g. on notalwaysright. Apparently some employers use pressure tactics like "you know, it would be better for your career if you could do something about this, erm, situation". Technically this is illegal, but hardly enforceable. If we recognized bodily autonomy as a human right, we would be doing more about this too.

Human rights are "unalienable", as the US constituation so nicely puts it.
That means it is right to protect them and wrong to deny them, independent of whether they are denied by law or inspite of it.

@Mr_Teatime @malteengeler
The inalienable rights are expressly enumerated as “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness”. Unfortunately it isn’t what we, the layperson, think it should be. The body charged with interpreting what those rights are just excluded abortion.

You agree it’s wrong, I agree it’s wrong, but knowing it’s wrong will be little solace to the woman sitting in a prison cell. Our interpretation of rights don’t count for a hill of beans in the legal system.

My toot was meant to justify to continue calling abortion a right.
Because fundamental rights are defended (or not...) by law, not defined.

It's still a right because it's the right thing to do. If I was in North Korea, I'd still be calling free speech a "right", too.

This is about justice, and the decision of law to deny it.


Sign in to participate in the conversation
Infosec Exchange

A Mastodon instance for info/cyber security-minded people.