432

Kamala Harris gives abortion rights advocates the debate answer they've longed for in Philadelphia (apnews.com)

submitted 1 month ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

23 comments fedilink hide all child comments

When President Joe Biden gave bumbling remarks about abortion on the debate stage this summer, it was widely viewed as a missed opportunity — a failure, even — on a powerful and motivating issue for Democrats at the ballot box.

The difference was stark, then, on Tuesday night, when Vice President Kamala Harris gave a forceful defense of abortion rights during her presidential debate with Republican Donald Trump.

Harris conveyed the dire medical situations women have found themselves in since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the national right to abortion in 2022. Harris quickly placed blamed directly on Trump, who recalibrated the Supreme Court to the conservative majority that issued the landmark ruling during his term.

Women, Harris told the national audience, have been denied care as a result.

“You want to talk about this is what people wanted? Pregnant women who want to carry a pregnancy to term, suffering from a miscarriage, being denied care in an emergency room because health care providers are afraid they might go to jail and she’s bleeding out in a car in the parking lot?” Harris said.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] tromars@feddit.org 3 points 1 month ago

My guess would be that the word „lying“ implies the intent to claim something untrue, which is hard to prove (not saying this isn’t the case here), opposed to „falsely claiming“ which includes situations where you actually believe what you’re saying even though it’s objectively false.

[-] LillyPip@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 month ago

The law doesn’t make that distinction, though. ‘Untruth’, falsely claimed’, and ‘lied’ are all the same under the law. The only thing those laws care about is whether your words were true. If I call you a liar in a headline and I can prove you actually lied, you have no case.

Weasel words don’t protect them from lawsuits, it’s just another part of the degradation of journalism and the fact that whitewashing and softening their language gets them more clicks & eyeballs, because it’s less likely to offend people who disagree.

[-] WoahWoah@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

The supreme court says the law does make a distinction if it's a public figure. Better check your hypotenuse, science bitch.

[-] LillyPip@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 month ago

With public figures, the bar to meet slander/libel includes that it must have been done with ‘actual malice’ – not anything different about which words were used.

Private figures must show that the defendant acted "negligently.“

Public figures must show that the defendant acted with "actual malice."

The bar for bringing such a case is even higher for public figures than private people, but it’s still not about the word ‘lie’ vs ‘untruth’.

If you’re aware of a single case where synonyms like that mattered, I’d love to know.

this post was submitted on 11 Sep 2024

432 points (99.1% liked)

politics

19098 readers

4753 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News