Conversation

Notices

1. Moon (moon@shitposter.club)'s status on Wednesday, 20-Sep-2023 10:07:12 JST Moon

   in reply to

   • 🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱
   • Owl 🦉
   @freemo @lonelyowl I see the point you're making but ultimately they are making an argument against all government power. as long as facebook is used and they store the messages, at least in the USA the government absolutely has the power to get a warrant and get that data. the irony is this woman got caught not because of government forcing facebook to store her private messages forever to stop crime, but because facebook already was storing her private messages forever because facebook's entire business model is built on top of surveillance.
   • Disinformation Purveyor :verified_think: likes this.
   • Moon (moon@shitposter.club)'s status on Wednesday, 20-Sep-2023 10:07:13 JST Moon

     in reply to

     • 🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱
     • Owl 🦉
     @freemo @lonelyowl their argument is that because state governments have attacked abortion, if the government can read your emails then they could punish you for trying to get an abortion. the reason this is a stupid argument is 1. you could use this argument for any law that anybody disagrees with that everyone else thinks is a good idea 2. the case in question, a woman was caught talking about abortion on facebook and the state government subpoenaed facebook and she went to jail. the problem is the real reason wasn't she wanted to get an abortion, it's because she gave birth, killed the kid and disposed of the corpse, it didn't actually have anything to do with abortion. and 3. the government already knows if you had an abortion because they already track all your finances and travel so what'sd the difference. it all just falls apart if you scrutinize it, it's really just an appeal to liberal fears.
   • 🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱 (freemo@qoto.org)'s status on Wednesday, 20-Sep-2023 10:07:13 JST 🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱

     in reply to

     • Owl 🦉

     @Moon

     It probably isnt the best of arguments, but I dont think its as bad as you do.. like #1 I agree on (and partly why its a bad argument).. #2 obviously using that particular case is questionable at best, and the mother was in the wrong. But I think saying it has nothing to do with abortion is not entierly fair. It is related to abortion int he sense that it never would have happened if abortions were legal. So clearly there is some relationship there. #3 is half valid... like year they do, but no need to make it easier.

     @lonelyowl

   • 🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱 (freemo@qoto.org)'s status on Wednesday, 20-Sep-2023 10:07:14 JST 🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱

     in reply to

     • Owl 🦉

     @Moon

     Wait, what exactly do people use "women won't be able to keep abortion plans secret from the government" to aruge?

     @lonelyowl

   • Moon (moon@shitposter.club)'s status on Wednesday, 20-Sep-2023 10:07:15 JST Moon

     • 🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱
     • Owl 🦉
     @lonelyowl @freemo they are all BS left-wing oriented pragmatic arguments like "women won't be able to keep abortion plans secret from the government" which is a stupid argument on multiple levels if you actually think about it