Comment

For the record, I did not argue for no welfare. I said that the argument was stupid. Its perfectly logical to say “I’m anti-murder but not pro-welfare.”

Imo, we need welfare, especially for babies and children.

Hell, you can give a lot of reasons. Theres even one for feminists. I forget the exact wording I heard, but it hinges on the lack of mens reproductive rights, and women being equal to men.

Men are considered smart enough and responsible enough to not fuck unless they want to risk children. Women are not stupid, they are just as smart and responsible as men.

source

Sort:hotnew top

webadict@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
Your post history indicates that you hate minorities, so that doesn’t feel like a point you believe in, but I don’t think you believe in anything, so there is that.

source
- Blamemeta@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
  Wtf are you talking about? What comment have I made that hates minorities?
  
  Fucking “indicates”, is that the new version of dogwhistle?
  
  source
gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

Its perfectly logical to say “I’m anti-murder but not pro-welfare.”

Only if you ignore the context that said “murder” being stopped will result in the need for welfare. In that case you’re 100% right

Too bad reality doesn’t ignore context as easily as cuckservatives such as yourself

source
AnonTwo@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

For the record, I did not argue for no welfare.
.
Its perfectly logical to say “I’m anti-murder but not pro-welfare.”

I dunno, I'd say if you say both in the same sentence, you probably haven't actually cared enough to consider wellfare to counteract your "anti-murder" stance

So it's perfectly fair to say that what you are arguing would lead to unnecessary death just from your negligence to follow through.

source