My inbox is going to get raped with hate mail this week. Here is the column.
A few of the comments already posted:
You don’t get to make these decisions. You don’t have a reproductive system. So maybe you should just shut up and pay your taxes.
Ouch.
When was I asked for consent to fund wars? Where is my consent for penile implants being funded by Medicare? What if I don’t consent to obesity or smoking related treatments? What if I were to believe testicular or ovarian cancers are God’s punishment? We don’t get to pick and choose which individual, LEGAL, medical procedures our tax dollars fund. To pretend otherwise is rather hypocritical.
What if I don’t consent to obesity or smoking related treatments? What if I were to believe testicular or ovarian cancers are God’s punishment?
We don’t get to pick and choose which individual, LEGAL, medical procedures our tax dollars fund. To pretend otherwise is rather hypocritical.
I legitimately cannot tell if she's agreeing with me or not.
"So maybe you should just shut up and pay your taxes"
HAHAHA! These are the types of people that make it so easy for the Government to tax, people are so blind.
But anyway, I aupport abortions, just not state funded ones....
My Blog: http://www.anarchico.net/
Production is 'anarchistic' - Ludwig von Mises
From what I can tell she is strawmanning you saying you support the wars and penile implants funded by medicare. Probably thinks you're a neocon.
That first comment is pretty scary though.
When she says "right to life" I think she means you have a positive obligation to keep everyone alive. People always put up these crazy what-if situations to prove you have to force people to provide a "safety net." These scenarios can be imagined on to infinity however, giving anyone a reason to rob everyone. I wish I could articulate this argument better any reading on this would be great.
Also "shut up and pay your taxes" always gives me a good chuckle. I could either laugh it off or cry about it because hearing that kinda makes me sad.
I assumed it was either that or she supported what I was saying.
Hahaha I know, same here. Between that and telling me that I somehow don't have a reproductive system, the entire comment gave me a good laugh.
"Between that and telling me that I somehow don't have a reproductive system"
I'd say, "OUCH!"
Didnt' catch that she just called you dickless! (she probably just meant female reproductive system.) Hilarious!
I really wish I could comment back to her, but I'm not sure if I'm allowed to. Plus I don't want all of the crazies knowing my Facebook account.
"I legitimately cannot tell if she's agreeing with me or not." - BA
Oh she is defnitely disagreeing with you, using the 'other people ae getting screwed, including me, in a like manner, so where do you get off complaining" argument.
Both commenters are arguing the same points, but using different justifications.
The first commenter claims that you don't get to make these decisions because "you don't have a reproductive system". I'll give her the benefit of the doubt and assume she meant you don't have a womb. What's funny is that a majority of Congressmen are in the same boat as you. Yet they're making the decisions. Her argument therefore doesn't follow.
The second commenter is also arguing for you to "just shut up and pay your taxes". She's doing it in a different way though. At best, she's appealing to collectivism. By referring to all the different medical programs that everyone pays for, whether they consent or not, she might be arguing that "we're all in this together'. Of course, that raises the question of whether we should be. At worse, she's appealing to authority, without the inconsistency of the first commenter. "You're not making these decisions, so you have no right to protest them." How nice.
If I were you, I'd personally respond to the first commenter and invite her to try to make me "just shut up and pay [my] taxes". I'd do this because it's obvious that she's trying to intimidate you into actually shutting up. So is the second commenter, but in a less directly confrontational way. By making such a response, you'd indicate that you're not going to shy away from these things in the future, no matter how much she wants you to do otherwise.
To the second commenter, I might simply ask her why we must be all in this together. She probably won't respond, but it'll at least show her that her rhetorical tactic has failed.
The keyboard is mightier than the gun.
Non parit potestas ipsius auctoritatem.
Voluntaryism Forum
xahrx:Oh she is defnitely disagreeing with you, using the 'other people ae getting screwed, including me, in a like manner, so where do you get off complaining" argument.
+1
And, I might add, that I would ask her why it is at all hypocritical to suggest that just because you "can't" [currently] choose where tax monies go that you "shouldn't" be able to do so. That part doesn't make sense to me. Everything else I might add has been addressed already, methinks.
This comment was just added:
Likewise, if 1 million people vote to send armed men to your house unless you pay for pizza and soda, then you will pay for it. It’s the same with paying for other people’s abortions. As a slave and chattel of the state, you must cough up whatever is required. It’s part of living in the Land of the “Free”, see. Those who don’t pay King George… err… Obama are immoral criminals.
It’s the same with paying for other people’s abortions.
As a slave and chattel of the state, you must cough up whatever is required. It’s part of living in the Land of the “Free”, see. Those who don’t pay King George… err… Obama are immoral criminals.
Woohooo!