Inside the U.S. Government-Bought Tool That Can Track Phones At Abortion Clinics (404media.co) 219
Slashdot reader samleecole writes: Privacy advocates gained access to a powerful tool bought by U.S. law enforcement agencies that can track smartphone locations around the world. Abortion clinics, places of worship, and individual people can all be monitored without a warrant.
An investigation into tracking tool Locate X shows in the starkest terms yet how it and others — based on smartphone location data sold to various U.S. government law enforcement agencies, including state entities — could be used to monitor abortion clinic patients. This comes as more states contemplate stricter or outright bans on abortion...
An investigation into tracking tool Locate X shows in the starkest terms yet how it and others — based on smartphone location data sold to various U.S. government law enforcement agencies, including state entities — could be used to monitor abortion clinic patients. This comes as more states contemplate stricter or outright bans on abortion...
Leave your phone at home (Score:5, Insightful)
If you are worried about being tracked, DO NOT BRING YOUR CELLPHONE.
We cannot stop them from tracking us as we go about our daily lives, but we can choose to not carry our tracking devices when we want to avoid being tracked.
Jokes on them. (Score:3, Funny)
That's why I always take my landline when on abortion excursions. I can never be tracked that way. Fools!
Re:Jokes on them. (Score:4, Insightful)
Of course, and there are no federal prohibitions on abortion anyway, so "U.S. law enforcement" would have no use for it in that context.
"... but rather concentrate on tracking parents going to school board meetings to inquire and protest against all the woke non-sense taught in schools in the USA nowadays."
So you're even worse than the gaslighters that wrote the article.
Re:Jokes on them. (Score:5, Informative)
Are parents who threaten violence merely "outspoken" now?
Re: (Score:2)
Don't censor their free speech!
Re:Jokes on them. (Score:5, Informative)
Actually they do track people going to abortion clinics. Just not necessarily the patients:
https://www.usnews.com/news/be... [usnews.com]
Re: Jokes on them. (Score:3)
They tracked a particular phone, and among the places it went was an abortion clinic for two hours. Whoever wrote the headline figured they would get additional clicks if they specifically labeled it as a device for tracking phones inside of abortion clinics. Then either the submitter or the editor changed it to suggest it's a device for tracking phone in one particular clinic.
It's basically the telephone game, editorial edition.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wik... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
That only works if you pull the battery. Phones still ping towers, even when off or in airplane mode.
Not all phones (Score:3)
So what about the license plate readers? (Score:5, Insightful)
This is one tier to a multi-prong strategy. You can't solve this with individual actions. It requires... collective action (duh duh duuuuuuun!).
You're up against large, well funded systems. Systemic problems cannot be solved with individual action. We're not teenagers anymore, we're adults. It's time to act like it.
Re: (Score:2)
Remove your license plate before you go to the clinic. That doesn't mean the moment you leave your house. When you get close, then you remove it. Lessens the chance of a copy stopping you. When you leave, drive a short distance then put it back on.
Wear some prosthetics over your face to throw off facial readers. Wear a mask and sunglasses if you have to.
Re: (Score:2)
No they won't. Abortions will remain legal, and there will be more than ever. The number of abortions annually has increased since the Dobbs decision.
Re: (Score:2)
No they won't. Abortions will remain legal, and there will be more than ever. The number of abortions annually has increased since the Dobbs decision.
50 million deaths globally. Every year. Year after year. That’s a World War 2 death toll, every two years. More than any virus, disease, or conflict has ever caused, and likely ever will.
40% of abortions in America, are from repeat customers.
Not exactly statistics you defend with a “more than ever” mentality. Immoral behavior is “more than ever” too. Should we clap for more?
Re: (Score:2)
or the facial recognition.
I think the idea is that cell phone tracking can be used to determine if a woman goes to an out-of-state abortion clinic, whereas those other things you've mentioned would require the neighboring pro-choice state to be a tattle-tale. Presumably, a state where abortion is banned isn't going to have any legitimate clinics, so the facial recognition, license plate scanners and jackbooted thugs with a badge won't provide any information beyond that a woman traveled outside of the state.
Of course, unless you're
Not necessarily (Score:2)
It doesn't even have to be accurate it just has to establish probable cause. Once that's done you can do a formal criminal investigation. From there you can get somebody's purchase history and you can use that to determine whether or not they were pregnant and wheth
Re:So what about the license plate readers? (Score:4, Insightful)
Conspiracy? You mean law enforcement is "conspiring" to catch criminals? It doesn't matter whether you think someone is classified a criminal, that is a decision you have no real say in. So, yes, law enforcement agencies are engaged in a very large and grand "conspiracy" to catch them.
The abortion example is actually a good one. As is the tracking of parents suspected of violence. You might not think one or either are criminal. But you might be surprised how many other things can be criminalized if someone has reason to.
Lets be clear, access to these tools is not tightly controlled. They require no warrant. There is no reason to think states that make it illegal to have an abortion couldn't use them to track people who are pregnant to catch any that do. And expecting self-restraint from law enforcement is a bad bet.
Re: (Score:2)
They're doing such a great job that they should change the org name to Planned Not Parenthood. Birth rates keep falling. Eventually they'll be out of a job!
Re:Leave your phone at home (Score:5, Informative)
Leave your phone at home and take a cab/rideshare if you have an EV, at least for the last leg of the trip.
Any car where you get OTA updates or have an emergency assist function built in could be (and almost certainly is) tracking you too. At the very least, they're logging the IP you connected from whenever it manages a connection, which can be run though a GIS database to figure out where you were at the time.
Because yes, in a place where the government has or is trying to criminalize abortion, if they're not already actively hunting you that's only because they haven't figured out the tools just yet... and start being paranoid NOW, because many of those tools are potentially useful retroactively. You don't know what your car manufacturer (or mobile phone provider, or the owner of the mobile network you connected through) are logging, how long they keep those logs, and how friendly they are to government 'requests'.
And vote Democrat straight-ticket in the upcoming election. You know which party is far, far more likely to get off on tracking you down and punishing you.
Re: (Score:2)
wouldn't ride share apps require taking a tracking device with you?
Re: (Score:2)
Leave your phone at home and take a cab/rideshare if you have an EV, at least for the last leg of the trip.
What's the EV got to do with things? Are you under the impression that modern connected cars are technologies limited to just EVs?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Leave your phone at home (Score:5, Insightful)
So what? Which party has criminalized abortions and is actively pursuing methods for tracking women's bodies just to be sure they didn't sneak one in?
Worrying about the Democrats putting you in jail for an abortion is stupid. You can worry about them tracking you AFTER you've dealt with the people who going to use such data to incarcerate you.
Re: (Score:2)
So a housewife who wants to have kids should never have sex on the off chance they have a medical emergency after the first 6 weeks?
A rape victim should always politely decline to be assaulted?
You really are incredibly ignorant and stupid. Perhaps you should actually get some education yourself. Crawl back into your basement and let the adults talk.
Re:Leave your phone at home (Score:5, Insightful)
People want to have sex, and most of the time *don't* want to have kids.
Sometimes things happen, either because of stupidity or chance.
They still don't want kids. It's not on anyone else to tell them what to do about it.
I'm tired of the left hiding behind this, "Oh but in rape and incest cases" "For the life of the mother"
No. It's a woman's right, up until the baby can be cared for outside of her body by the State, to have an abortion.
Anything else borders on breeder slavery.
Re:Leave your phone at home (Score:5, Informative)
No. It's a woman's right, up until the baby can be cared for outside of her body by the State, to have an abortion.
I absolutely agree.
But the reason the left keeps bringing up rape/incest/medical issues is because they are very real, and the laws that have been passed since Dobbs all (well, most) claim to offer protection-- but it's an illusion. In Florida, for example, you have to have two doctors willing to sign a form that says the mother WILL DIE without an immediate abortion. But carrying a dead child around won't be a direct threat to the mother's health for a month or two-- so until she's actually at risk of death, signing that form would cost both doctors their medical license, and probably land them in jail.
This is all because we have people writing laws who believe that people are carrying out abortions postpartum (there's a law against that too).
Re: (Score:3)
Ways to reduce abortion:
- encourage birth control, and none of the non-functional abstinence only classes. Remember the big fight against abortion only started once SCOTUS said birth control was legal across the country, so the anti-abortion folks still have a strong anti-birth control core.
- make adoption cheaper and easier - but I don't see those holding pro-life signs in front of medical clinics signing up to adopt.
- make family leave more common, more ability to stay home to care for a child means remo
Re: (Score:2)
Actually a lot of pro lifers are affiliated with churches and other religious orgs that run orphanages and place children with families. Christians are very likely to foster and/or adopt:
https://bipartisanpolicy.org/b... [bipartisanpolicy.org]
That doesn't mean that there's complete overlap between the aforementioned anti-abortion crusaders and those arranging adoptions, but there is significant overlap.
Re:Leave your phone at home (Score:5, Interesting)
No. It's a woman's right, up until the baby can be cared for outside of her body by the State, to have an abortion.
I think we made a mistake to talk about abortion as a woman's "right".
We should be talking about giving the government the power to force a woman to carry a pregnancy to term. Its her decision to end it or continue it, not politicians, lawyers, judges or anyone else. Government doesn't have any right to force a woman to carry a pregnancy to term whether the United States constitution says so or not.
Re: (Score:2)
But most Americans (and interestingly enough Europeans) don't agree with such policy. At best you're going to get legal abortions in the first trimester if you put it up to any kind of vote in Congress. That would put the United States in line with most of the Western world.
Re:Leave your phone at home (Score:4, Insightful)
Most abortions are elective procedures not carried out under duress. It's at best disingenuous to instantly bring up rape/incest/health-of-the-mother when discussing abortion policy in general while failing to address the majority of actual reasons for abortions.
Re: (Score:2)
I like how you think you can educate away medical conditions. Don't we call that witchcraft?
Re:Leave your phone at home (Score:4, Insightful)
Don't forget, at various points foreign aid that included family planning education would be banned, because one of the parties was scared that it might encourage abortion or birth control. And it wasn't the democrats.
Re: Leave your phone at home (Score:2)
... says the incel.
Re: (Score:2)
That is a bit extreme. Just switching it off before it becomes obvious where you are going and removing the battery is quite enough. (You have a removable battery, right?)
Re: (Score:2)
Opsec should really be the last thing that someone seeking an abortion should have to worry about.
Re: (Score:2)
True. But abortion is a red herring in this instance. Abortion is just one example where details about your location/activities/associations may be used against you by zealots.
Re: (Score:2)
No mod points, but absolutely correct.
So far there is no law requiring your cell phone to be with you at all times. I don't know how much longer that will last.
Re: (Score:2)
"So, your cell phone was unnaturally still. This gave us probable cause to run your plates and facial id through the camera system. Now we want to know why you were at ."
Also don't take your car: ALPRs are everywhere (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
We cannot stop them from tracking us
I was reading this old piece of paper somewhat recently, it said something about "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures."
Re: Leave your phone at home (Score:2)
I have a better idea: don't let the government wield total autocratic control over our lives
if only there was a way.. (Score:2)
Seriously? (Score:2)
What about automatic license plate readers or even facial recognition? You are a fool if you think individuals can thwart a police state.
Re: Seriously? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
>Sorry, but NOBODY is going to carry around a WORKING faraday cage for shit like this.
We're already in a world where Faraday pouches for phones are a thing. I don't know how effective they are against a nearby WAP, but they'll easily block your cellular signal even if they're not made very well.
Re: if only there was a way.. (Score:2)
If you live in a totalitarian state ... (Score:2)
... you need to learn to view the state as an enemy and how to protect yourself. The approach here is not only to switch your phone off, but to remove its battery. (You bought one with removable battery, right?)
Also remember who is responsible (Trump put those judges on the supreme court) and do _not_ trust any of the supporters of evil. They will just rat you out.
Orwellian Talibanjelicals (Score:2)
Red states compete with each other to be the scariest, and not just on Halloween.
Stop giving applications location permission. (Score:2)
Don't give every random app permission to track your location, especially background location permission. That's where this data is coming from. App makers make extra money by selling GPS data on their users to data brokers that sell it to companies like this.
The land of the free. (Score:2)
Just wanted to leave that subject title here.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't forget inalienable rights. Americans like to insist that rights are god given or somesuch and also clearly demonstrate that's not the case by bestowing and revoking them based on fashion.
Simple solution (Score:2)
If we do like Handmaid's Tail, then the women won't be allowed to carry phones. So they can't be tracked. Duh.
Monomaniacal focus on abortion (Score:2, Insightful)
So the government bought a tool that can track where any cellphone has been at any time historically, and apparently the only concern worth talking about is the ability to track people at abortion clinics? REALLY?
OK, I'll play - is the government interested in tracking patients at abortion clinics or anti-abortion protesters outside the abortion clinic? Before you answer, remember that the current, pro-abortion ('pro-choice', if you prefer) administration has a history of putting protesters who do nothing m
Re: (Score:2)
Article produced with support from Capitol Forum (Score:3)
“The Capitol Forum [slashdot.org] is an investigative news and legal analysis company dedicated to informing policymakers, investors, and industry stakeholders on how policy affects market competition.”
Is 404 Media Affiliated w/ /.? (Score:2)
Seriously, this same user, who's name is the same as one of their founds . . . seems to submit stories several times a week.
I mean, anyone can submit anything they want, and an editor can approve them, but it's a . . . bit much. Awfully blatant self-promotion.
Blessed... (Score:2)
Another of the reasons I don't have a smartphone (Score:2)
Get rid of your smartphone. At the very least, put it in 'airplane' mode when not actively
We Need a Monarch (Score:3)
This series of posts certainly demonstrates the inability to have an adult conversation. It will be completely drowned out by people screaming media slogans at one another.
Has anyone noticed that kids everywhere in the United States are way behind where they should be for their grade? That we have a retirement system that is expensive and leaves almost everyone with an insecure retirement. That we have the most expensive health care in the world, and some of the worst outcomes. That we lead the world in COVID deaths. That students are coming out of college crippled by debt that they never manage to discharge as it gets rolled over from "low interest" student loans to credit cards. That we have millions of people camping out because they can't find a place to live. That the pay of most workers has declined in the last 35 years when adjusted for inflation. That for all the talk about reducing emissions, we aren't reducing emissions at even close to the rate needed to ever halt global warming much less by 2050. That a small number of companies control virtually all of our essential services and don't do a very good job of delivering them.
In short we have a government that is completely failing to organize a society that serves us well. And the people asking to represent us don't even make a pretense of representing us. They just do celebrity poses and call one another names.
I am not sure it matters whether we are headed for a police state. If we are there is nothing we can do about it. They are impervious to typical citizens holding them accountable. Unless they offend someone with a war chest of money, they are safe.
What we are seeing is the Hamiltonian prediction that we are incapable of self-government. Maybe we should take Hamilton's advice and get ourselves a King. At least we would know who is finally in charge and who to blame. A King who knows that if we get too upset with how things are going, we will chop off his head.
Re: No need for the scare words (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
https://www.archives.gov/found... [archives.gov]
Re:No need for the scare words (Score:5, Insightful)
abortion is NOT a right
But bodily autonomy is as is the right to privacy.
Re:No need for the scare words (Score:5, Insightful)
But bodily autonomy is as is the right to privacy.
The pro-life side asserts that abortion violates the bodily autonomy of the fetus, which has the same legal and moral status as an infant.
The pro-abortion side asserts that the fetus does not have independent personhood, and an abortion is morally equivalent to an appendectomy.
The right to privacy does NOT mean "It's hard to figure out if someone has done <x>, so <x> can't be a crime". (This is the justification for the Roe vs Wade decision). It DOES mean "The government can't investigate for whether or not you have done <x> unless it has probable cause to think you did, assuming <x> is a crime under current law". It also means the government can't keep track of your activities without probable cause, or more lilely a warrant.
Re: (Score:3)
"The pro-life side asserts that abortion violates the bodily autonomy of the fetus,"
While ignoring the bodily autonomy of the mother.
The *compromise* (which these people won't agree with) is *reasonable* abortion laws.
The compromise.
Instead, they want the mother to be a breeder slave. That's their "compromise" and end goal.
So no, I don't care what they say anymore, they are simply dead wrong, now, given what has ACTUALLY happened in the NEWS under THEIR POLCIES PEOPLE ARE DEAD!!!!
Re:No need for the scare words (Score:4, Insightful)
The compromise is no abortion laws at all. We don't have laws governing basically any other medical procedure. But in point of fact, Canada has exactly zero abortion laws on the books and it works fine. Abortion rates are not wildly out of control. Women get abortions because they need them, not because they're a fun weekend out. Doctors won't provide an abortion if it's not somehow necessary. There is not a rash of third-trimester abortions where the baby could actually live outside of the womb. It simply does not happen.
Trust women to know if they need abortions. Trust doctors to do the medically necessary work. That's it. There's no magic.
We need to stop calling one side 'pro-life' because they're absolutely not. They'll let women die. They'll let babies that have already been born die. They'll let a woman's reproductive future be compromised, for chrissakes. There are now dozens (hundreds? Thousands?) of stories of women that wanted abortions but because they couldn't get them, they can *no longer have any future children*. If this was for the sake of babies being born and growing families, surely that would be a consideration, but it's not.
It's a punishment to women for having sex and not cranking out an infinite number of children. The so-called 'pro-life' side won't be satisfied until they can control a woman's entire reproductive future without pesky things like her consent getting in the way.
Re: (Score:2)
The pro-life side asserts that abortion violates the bodily autonomy of the fetus
Adult rights overrule rights of a child in virtually every other legal situation, to say nothing of a fetus. If the two rights clash then there will be one clear winner.
Re: (Score:2)
Fetuses are not children.
Re:No need for the scare words (Score:4, Interesting)
The pro-life side asserts that abortion violates the bodily autonomy of the fetus, which has the same legal and moral status as an infant.
Makes no sense. A fetus literally has no bodily autonomy and is complete dependent on only the mother, so they assert that the Mother's rights to bodily autonomy should be ignored? A fetus and infant are not even remotely the same thing.
Re: (Score:2)
The pro-life side asserts that abortion violates the bodily autonomy of the fetus, which has the same legal and moral status as an infant.
You can expect the Supreme Court to adopt that reasoning and make legal abortion unconstitutional.
Re: (Score:2)
The pro-life side asserts that abortion violates the bodily autonomy of the fetus, which has the same legal and moral status as an infant.
There are no rights without obligations. If a fetus has rights, then it has obligations. Or someone else has to shoulder these obligations.
E.g. the state could provide full support for maternal leave. However, the same "Handmaid Tale" pushers are proposing to make the life of single women as hellish as possible by _removing_ all possible supporting structures. Not kidding.
Not anymore it's not (Score:2)
So if you're a right winger celebrating the death of roe congrats You're also celebrating the death of literally all of your constitutionally protected privacy rights.
Re: (Score:2)
One of the things that doesn't get talked about enough is the way they overturned Roe v Wade was by striking down the constitutional protections for privacy. That was pretty much the only way to do it. So if you're a right winger celebrating the death of roe congrats You're also celebrating the death of literally all of your constitutionally protected privacy rights.
Also, abortion is an issue that also affects the male as he could be held financially responsible for the child. This doesn't get talked about much and the people in power making these decision seem happy to ignore it. The argument that the child could be simply given up for adoption ignores what the woman has to go through to bring a child to term and the lasting effects that has on her body -- even if everything goes well. It's a complicated issue.
Re: (Score:2)
So if you're a right winger celebrating the death of roe congrats You're also celebrating the death of literally all of your constitutionally protected privacy rights.
What they're celebrating is the death of women [imgur.com]. Just like has happened in Georgia [gpb.org].
Re: (Score:2)
There is no “death” of Roe. It was merely handed over to the States to decide. If you don’t support that, then you don’t support States Rights. At all. Ever.
Abortion is a national issue, not a state issue. It affects women equally across the country. Your argument is the same one the South tried to use to justify slavery.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, next step bring back slaver. I mean it was a states right thing.
Re: (Score:3)
to end a human life without even telling her partner.
Where you show your true colours. It never was about the life of the fetus, it was about the man not being consulted on the matter.
But seriously:
* Both the man and the woman could have chosen to use contraception without telling the partner; chemical, mechanical, and surgical contraception is available to both.
* Women can use an intrauterine device. While its usually acts by preventing fertilization, one if its possible mechanisms is to prevent the implantation of the blastocyst, which occurs 5-9 days after
Re: (Score:2)
Becoming impregnated, is not an independent action of an individual.
Good to know we're excluding rape in all this. After all, why should a promising college student [nbcnews.com] who is is consumed with worry, anxiety, fear, and depression after he raped a woman have his life ruined for 20 minutes of action [stanforddaily.com]. Who the fuck cares about the woman he raped. It's his life we're talking about.
Re: (Score:2)
unless you like supporting the immoral concept of a woman having the “autonomous” right to end a human life without even telling her partner.
There is nothing immoral about that concept. Every cell in your body is "human life".
Re:No need for the scare words (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
abortion is NOT a right (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Roe v Wade was the second poorest reasoned decision authored by SCOTUS, eclipsed only by Dred Scott v Sandford and followed closely behind by The Butchers' Benevolent Association of New Orleans v. The Crescent City Live-Stock Landing and Slaughter-House Company; Paul Esteben, L. Ruch, J. P. Rouede, W. Maylie, S. Firmberg, B. Beaubay, William Fagan, J. D. Broderick, N. Seibel, M. Lannes, J. Gitzinger, J. P. Aycock, D. Verges, The Live-Stock Dealers' and Butchers' Association of New Orleans, and Charles Cavar
Roe v Wade was the second poorest reasoned decisio (Score:3)
Roe v Wade was the second poorest reasoned decision authored by SCOTUS
Who cares except lawyers? Supreme Courts rationale for their decision is irrelevant. They are trained to make an argument for whatever conclusion they have. Their skills as lawyers have nothing to do with the quality of their judgment or the decision they made. You can admire the skill of their argument, but it has no real meaning. If another group of bright justices from Harvard and Yale wants to make a decision they can come up with an argument. Its quality is irrelevant.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: No need for the scare words (Score:2)
Actually not paying for a child is a right afforded to women. They just need to put it up for adoption and walk away.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually not paying for a child is a right afforded to women. They just need to put it up for adoption and walk away.
This ignores what women actually have to go through to bring a child to term and the lasting effects that can have on her body, even when everything goes well. Pretty sure men would have a problem if pregnancy did half that to their bodies.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: No need for the scare words (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What else to you call requiring a woman to carry a pregnancy to term, whether she wants to or not?
Re:Slashdot, you've got to stop this kind of BS (Score:5, Insightful)
Technology does not stand alone, it matters because of what we do with it today and could do with it tomorrow.
The abortion angle is a pertinent topical issue. You can strip the politics off it if you don't want to talk about which party is the threat... there's still a threat enabled by this technology.
Re: (Score:2)
I thought it was kind of bizarre to name specifically, and only, abortion in the headline. There are a thousand things this will be used for. Some of the uses may even be legitimate. They have so many other ways to enforce abortion bans that the bans are really their own issue. In and of themselves.
What's the point of conflating the two things? It muddies the importance of both messages. It's like when people talk about "climate justice" trying to frame climate change as a racial issue.
Re: (Score:2)
This kind of article is a warning to the brownshirts to not have their phones one them during upcoming operations
The political situations will hit boiling points at Nov 5 & Jan 20
The rest of us can just know that your phone is being tracked 24/7 and any person or group movement can be tracked & mapped
The Feds in the crowd can be identified, fake bombers also
2000 mules in every area
Map a persons regular pattern and flag a realtime alert when out of normal event happens.
Think parole conditions for ev
Re: (Score:2)
I totally concur. Why the downvotes, marney only spoke the truth. I've noticed this creeping politicization on other tech sites. eg, North Korea, Iran, Russia, China hacking hospital computers. No mention of the underlying defective product allowed. If you call them out on their BS then you risk getting banned.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
The current state of abortion law and politics in the US means that discussion of abortion is more likely to increase votes for Democrats.
Putin is fine sowing chaos in general, and the GRU certainly loves to rile up both sides to drive in social wedges towards that cause... but Putin also gets cooperation and adoration from Trump. With Trump, Putin will have a much easier time with Ukraine and will weaken NATO (and the US).
I seriously doubt you're seeing Russian agitprop right now using abortion as a wedge
Re:What, you mean GPS? (Score:4, Insightful)
When Vice Media went bankrupt, a bunch of the now-unemployed journalists formed 404 Media [wikipedia.org].
You're either a troll or a dumbass who doesn't know how to use Google.
Re: (Score:2)
Today's the sabbath, so you should probably be stoned to death.
You're the sort of person who says "Thou Shalt Not Murder", and then calls for bombing of abortion clinics.
You are truly the walking stupid.
Re: (Score:2)
Removing a blastocyst is not murder. This is not a Christian argument against abortion because the Bible is very vague on the issue, while being written in a time when abortion was known about and practiced. So to have modern churches demand that being pro-life is a fundamental truth about Christianity, more important than even providing charity to the poor, is suspect.
Re: (Score:2)
For those writing articles, can you explain why abortion places and places of worship, somehow do not contain “individual people”?
The point is you can track based on location or based on individual. It's not hard to figure out if you aren't trying to troll.
Re: (Score:2)
If it's during or after the 6th month of pregnancy [biblegateway.com] then maybe.
Re: (Score:2)
Check the Bible, there is no word on abortion in it. It is an entirely made-up controversy spun by the Religious Right because it gets their sheep to contribute to the leeches.