Роберт wrote:So it's basically because of the trust issues we already have with the government, then?
Nobody's freaked out about the aggregated anonomized data that this bill is going to produce, but they are freaked out because they don't trust the info to be used only for that?
I also think acting like it's happening in a vacuum is probably not a super great choice if you're planning to understand what's happening. This is being proposed by people who want to get rid of abortion entirely, in a state where they have power. You can, uhh...probably take a guess that it's not about statistics or medical reporting or any of those other things that those same lawmakers could not possibly give one fewer fuck about when abortion isn't concerned.
Generally, when politicians want to outlaw something but can't, they make it harder to do it, less appealing to do it, or increase the visibility of it in an effort to make it shameful, and typically using flimsy pretenses to support these measures. This has been happening a lot in the past year or two with abortion.
It also happened about five years ago with the bankruptcy reform
(I know a lot about that because my father is a bankruptcy attorney). All done under the pretense of preventing "abuse" and "fraud" that our well paid legislators must surely have known much about, they added needless hoops and an arbitrary test to sniff out those who allegedly were trying to con their way out of faithfully repaying their debts. I bring it up because, unlike abortion and privacy, which I do believe are constitutionally protected under the intentionally vague Ninth Amendment, Bankruptcy is actually specifically mentioned in the Constituion. It doesn't specifically guarantee it, but coupled with the the 200+ years of thusly authorized laws, it would be on par with outlawing copyrights. There was too much inertia and popular support, not to mention economic necessity, to do what they really wanted, so they added bizarre, nonsensical hoops, just as Tennessee is trying to do. So I have learned that whenever there is legislation that adds additional steps before a perfectly legal, firmly precedented, constitutional action, it probably means that something is rotten in the state of Tennessee.