[jhawk28]

The split of pro/against is really close to 50/50. If you think that the smart people are only on one side or that only one side has "good" arguments, then you are living in a bubble. The argument over abortion was going on before Roe v Wade. Roe v Wade only prevented legislation from finding a solution.

[rwalle]

Sorry, the one who is living in a bubble is you. I wouldn't be surprised if over 80% of Google employees support abortion rights. There are many ways to show that Google employees (or generally in the tech industry) are much more liberal than the average US citizen.

[lettergram]

Here’s a citation: https://application.marketsight.com/app/ItemView.aspx?Shared...

Depends what you mean really, as much as 60% are against abortion after a fetus can feel pain (debated: 7-28 weeks), with another 20% undecided and only 20% support abortion.

Most people just don’t know how to have an informed discussion.

What overturning Roe really does is allow states to set the threshold. Roe prescribed a method of determining whether an abortion was legal — “viability”.

Now you can have Colorado having after birth abortions (seriously legislated) and Texas banning abortions after heart beat and Alabama banning all abortions.

[thatnerdyguy]

Support for overturning Roe is actually around 30%

[asveikau]

This is the thing that our "two sides to every argument" political discourse distorts. Many issues don't poll at 50/50, but perception is often that they are 50/50.

[refurb]

Pro-choice vs pro-life is pretty evenly split.

Even on the pro-choice side there is a lot of variance on when abortion should be restricted (similar to how Europe restricts abortions the closer to full gestation). Same on the pro-life side, views aren’t binary.

Considering most people don’t understand why Roe v Wade was overturned, I’m not sure opinions on whether it should have been mean much, since belief of what that means is all over the place.

[thatnerdyguy]

Personal views of pro-life/pro-choice though can be separated from the question of "Does a woman have the fundamental right to terminate a pregnancy?", which seems to have much more support. Would a significant majority choose to do that themselves? Maybe not. But it seems the majority feel women DO have that right, and should be able to make that choice themselves.

[refurb]

That’s my point. When asked “should abortion be legal?” It’s about 60/40 split.

If you asked “would you get an abortion?” The numbers are likely more skewed.

[stjohnswarts]

It's 70/30 and you know it. Americans support abortion in some form or another at 70%. The MAGA base do not, and they want other things like gay marriage, gay sex, and birth control also declared illegal.

[betwixthewires]

I've never met a person who thinks birth control should be illegal. I am sure they're out there, but this "they're coming for your morning after pill next" is scaremongering. Gay sex is probably the same. Gay marriage I think you're probably right.

[stjohnswarts]

How many devout evangelicals and catholics have you met? BC condemnation are in the majority of those religions.

[mynameisash]

> this "they're coming for your morning after pill next" is scaremongering. Gay sex is probably the same.

Justice Thomas's concurring opinion literally calls for reconsidering (ie, overturning) Griswold (contraception), Lawrence (same sex relationships), and Obergefell (same sex marriage).

It's perfectly clear that this is exactly what a not insignificant number of conservatives want to do. How is this scaremongering ?

[betwixthewires]

His opinion talks about considering whether the court overstepped it's bounds on those rulings, not whether those behaviors should or shouldn't be illegal.

[divided]

That feels like a distinction without a difference. If he and 4 others rule that the court overstepped its bounds, states will determine those behaviors to be illegal.

So if you admit he's willing to overthrow the precedent, and you agree that some states would then make those behaviors illegal, then how can you square that circle in your brain to claim it's scaremongering?

[betwixthewires]

Well if we look at everything we do in this way there's no way to make a decision on principle, we must always consider outcomes only.

I don't think there's a state that would outlaw regular birth control. Maybe 40 years ago, but today, probably not.

And really, why is it that we can vote at the federal government based on the policies we want, but saying that you should do that for certain issues in your state is undemocratic all of a sudden? What's wrong with states, constituted by their citizens, deciding how to govern themselves?

[noelherrick]

Thomas mentioned all the cases that made those protected rights. The way those cases would be overturned is if a state passed a law to prohibit them. He is sending a very clear message to legislatures that he would be receptive to hearing those cases. This is not hysteria and you are making the same arguments made about Roe. We have the roadmap, and it is very clear.

After privacy rights, Affordable Care Act, Social Security, and Medicare are all next.

[Brian-Puccio]

> The split of pro/against is really close to 50/50.

I’ve searched and I cannot find data that say half of America wants abortion made completely illegal (as it is in several states right now and will be in more shortly due to trigger laws).

Can you please share where you get your 50/50 split from?

> Roe v Wade only prevented legislation from finding a solution.

Roe only? Roe made safe abortions available to millions — it reshaped society.

If the argument against Roe is that fertilized embryos are killed, then we need to make sure in-vitro fertilization is stopped where abortion is as well.

As one anti-abortion politician said “The egg in the lab doesn’t apply. It’s not in a woman.”

[betwixthewires]

The argument around roe is quite simply that it was an overreach of constitutional authority by the federal government. Now individual states, the people of them, can decide how they want to govern themselves. That's all that's changed.

[tjr225]

> The split of pro/against is really close to 50/50.

I don’t believe you and I think you’re the one in the bubble.

Your turn.

Also; did you even read my comment before replying to it? Come on, brother. It is obvious that I am talking about Google employees.

[ra7]

> The split of pro/against is really close to 50/50.

It’s not 50/50 at Google or any of the big tech companies.

[jollybean]

Yes, it's important for people to realize the split is closer to 50/50 nation wide, some people forget that, but in tech, it's definitely not 50/50 and that's relevant as well.

[kibwen]

"As of March 2022, a broad majority of Americans oppose overturning Roe v. Wade (61%) and just over one-third (36%) support it. Opposition is highest among Democrats (74%), including a majority (56%) who strongly oppose overturning Roe. Most independents (61%) also oppose a Roe overturn."

https://www.prri.org/spotlight/most-oppose-overturning-roe-v...

[jollybean]

That's making my point though.

Those numbers are far closer to 50/50 than one would imagine in the bubble, but that's also reference to specifically overturning Roe v. Wade, not whether or not abortion should be legal, which is closer to 50/50.

Have a look at the second chart[1]

It's been 'mostly, roughly, steadily ~50/50 'ish' for about 20 years.

I think most self described progressives would be surprised by those numbers, and even the 64/36, as you brought up.

This is a 'big win' for 35% of the country, and another 15% are maybe ok with it, and a few others ambivalent.

That sentiment I think is at odds with the moral outrage felt by ~55% of the country, and it's hard to ingest.

Which makes this a big more difficult to navigate than I think we might normally assume.

I think Google's response is rational, but it's not as 'Black and White' an issue as our 'tech culture instincts' might have us believe.

[1] https://news.gallup.com/poll/1576/abortion.aspx

[divided]

The "bubble" tends to claim the numbers are 60-70% (and higher in tech companies). Polling shows the numbers between 60-70%.

No, most self described progressives would not be surprised that the numbers are where they say they are.

Literally all throughout this thread people are using these same numbers. I'm curious how far off your perception of progressives is from reality. What numbers do you think we believe are accurate?

Further, _you_ should reference the first chart you linked. It should clearly indicate to you that many who identify as pro-life do indeed support at least partial abortion rights.

85% believe abortions should be allowed in all or some circumstances. 13% believe illegal in all circumstances. Many states under conservative control will go to illegal in all circumstances, so that's the opinion of 13% controlling the freedoms of the other 85%. Not so close to 50/50, huh?

[saxonww]

It's not quite that simple, and it's also not 50/50 (right now).

https://news.gallup.com/poll/1576/abortion.aspx

There are a lot of numbers here. In short, while it has been 50/50-ish for a while, it wasn't in the 90s, and it's not right now. More people, when asked for an opinion, think abortion should be legal than not. And by about a 5-3 or 2-1 margin, more people think and have thought that Roe should be left alone, not overturned.

So I see this as a broadly unpopular decision.

[gbear605]

It’s about 70/30 nation wide, and in tech probably about 95/5.

[cultofmetatron]

50% of the country are of below average intelligence so yes.