News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
[dead]
Re:South Carolina bill outlaws websites that tell how to get... by dang on Saturday July 23, 2022 @02:05AM (#32200805)
Please don't post flamewar comments to HN, no matter how wrong someone is or you feel they are. We ban accounts that do that because it's not what this site is for, and it destroys what it is for.

Personal attacks are particularly not ok, so please don't post like that again.

If you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules when posting here, we'd appreciate it.

p.s. It looks like you've been using HN primarily for political and ideological battle. That's another line at which we ban accounts (even if they're not breaking the other guidelines) - for past explanations, see https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comme....

I'm not going to ban you right now because if I scroll back far enough in your commenting history I do see comments that are in line with the intention of the site, but if you'd please correct this going forward, we'd be grateful.

Note that this is in addition to what I said at the start of this comment—there are two separate issues here.

Re:South Carolina bill outlaws websites that tell how to get... by random314 on Saturday July 23, 2022 @04:49PM (#32207427)
I don't see how that comment was a personal attack. That is the core of the argument in favor of abortion rights.

PS: I didn't post that comment.

Re:South Carolina bill outlaws websites that tell how to get... by dang on Sunday July 24, 2022 @10:41AM (#32213926)
"Since you have shown you have limited capacity for empathy," for starters.
Re:South Carolina bill outlaws websites that tell how to get... by rayiner on Friday July 22, 2022 @11:56AM (#32193394)
> Since you have shown you have limited capacity for empathy, try imagining that this 10 year old girl was someone related to you. Maybe even your own daughter. Would you still be aloofly invoking the legalist stance, as if it's ridiculous to demand that laws be just? No, you would be kicking and screaming and crying because of how unfair it is.

The rule of law exists precisely because of the temptation to think with our "empathy" instead of our brains.

Re:South Carolina bill outlaws websites that tell how to get... by softcactus on Friday July 22, 2022 @12:54PM (#32194232)
See my reply to the other person who made this argument. You ignore my second half of the comment where I debunk the argument with "logic".

> The rule of law exists precisely because of the temptation to think with our "empathy" instead of our brains.

Assumptions galore are made here. First off, the rule of law exists because of power heirarchies. People create laws to protect THEMSELVES and THEIR interests. Monarchs didn't create laws for the benefit of everyone, neither do dictators. Furthermore many laws exist to augment our empathy. Speeding laws exist because many people are incapable of comprehending the danger they could pose to someone else. Animal cruelty is illegal because the majority of people understand it's wrong, and we will force that wisdom upon others who don't.

> the temptation to think with our "empathy" instead of our brains

Where do you think empathy comes from if not our brains? Empathy is a tool of reason, not orthogonal to it. Would you praise someone for only using one of their senses? Or would you think they are ridiculous for constructing a worldview based only around their sense of smell? Thinking that empathy is somehow a trait to be overcome and not a tool is the same as eating soap regardless of how it tastes, because it "smells good". Empathy allows us to consider the conditions and experiences of those outside of our immediate sphere of influence. In a democracy this is especially invaluable, since individuals make decisions that influence society at large.

The inability to see outside of your every day experience is not logical or rational, it's the exact opposite. Empirical evidence can be a great tool for analyzing macro trends, but empathy allows us to better understand the causality.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McNamara_fallacy

Re:South Carolina bill outlaws websites that tell how to get... by buscoquadnary on Friday July 22, 2022 @11:26AM (#32192992)
Laws should be made based on reason, justice, and after due consideration and we'll reasoned discussion not empathy, emotion, or crises of the moment. Doing that will only lead to poorly conceived and implemented laws that fail at their purpose and give power to demogauges and the power hungry.
Re:South Carolina bill outlaws websites that tell how to get... by softcactus on Friday July 22, 2022 @11:31AM (#32193054)
I never said laws should be based on empathy. I just said that OP had no empathy in order to make the point that taking an aloof legalist stance is stupid when it has actual real world negative impacts on others that they were incapable of considering.

My second paragraph expands upon the reason and justice aspect.

Also the current constitutional crisis we are in demolishes the legalist justification anyways. States being able to ban travel to other states for abortion, states allowing private citizens to sue others for getting abortions in other states. States limiting access to websites that are legal in other states and limiting the first amendment.

Because repealing Roe was done on an ideological basis it has caused a cascade of problems around how much power states should have, one that has been largely settled since the Civil War.

Re:South Carolina bill outlaws websites that tell how to get... by linuxftw on Friday July 22, 2022 @11:28AM (#32193023)
I don't pretend to know what is best for everyone nor dictate my morals to them. So if SC thinks they should have a law to do whatever, that's their business. If the people living there don't like it, they should work to change the law, or start lynching politicians, whichever is easier, that's for the people of SC to decide.

As for the people not in South Carolina, they should work to pass an amendment or secede from the union, those are the only legal options if you believe in how the federal government is supposed to work (maybe there's a 3rd option to kick out SC?).

Re:South Carolina bill outlaws websites that tell how to get... by softcactus on Friday July 22, 2022 @11:35AM (#32193107)
> As for the people not in South Carolina, they should work to pass an amendment or secede from the union, those are the only legal options if you believe in how the federal government is supposed to work

It's not legal to secede from the US, we fought an entire war because it was not a right of the states. Most of what you say ignores the reality of our political system, voter suppression, who draw districts, filibuster, etc. Which makes it more difficult than "just vote". Which is why the Republicans went the route of Supreme Court justice appointment, so they could legislate via the court.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federalist_Society

Re:South Carolina bill outlaws websites that tell how to get... by IIsi50MHz on Friday July 22, 2022 @09:02PM (#32199119)
Didn't Texas join the union via constitutional ammendment? One that gives them unilateral right to secede? Or do I mismemember my civics classes?