Which is to say: almost everyone ends up “paying for” government expenditures that they “disagree” with. Why do opponents of abortion deserve special privileges to not fund abortion-related programs? If you want abortion outlawed, use the legislative/legal process
-
-
Show this thread
-
I know there are principled tax resisters who risk criminal penalties out of a sense of moral duty. But I don’t think most abortion opponents fall into that category. Rather, they demand a special exemption be carved out to suit their own particular moral objections
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Don’t you oppose funding for all those things?
-
I don't demand amendments on the ground that I should individually be exempt from funding certain government programs simply because I "disagree" with them.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Bangarang GFYI!!!
End of conversation
-
-
-
Despite who they're frames, most of those expenditures tie back to core government functions: Defense, international diplomacy, law enforcement. How does funding abortion fit into those categories?
-
*"How they're framed" is what that should say.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
The threat of violence for non-compliance isn't a single-issue phenomenon. I know people who have espoused anger at their tax dollars going to drone strikes.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Because both the Left and the Right have forgotten that government is supposed to be limited and get out of one's way and instead have chosen to use government to force their lifestyles/ideologies on others.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Great! So we agree! Stop funding them all!
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I oppose funding all of those things and more.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
That should also change. We should get to direct where our tax dollars go. I would really like to see what gets solved when all those trillions are spent in a way the public wants.
-
you mean millions the other billions will just go into pockets like usual
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
We give aid to over 150 Nations. Israel is strategically located & we also benefit from them. Very few nations give us a return on our aid to them
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I think one can distinguish between taxable funding for programs that are products of the legislative process (e.g. war, drug laws), which even if I disagree with are the product of representation. But abortion is an individual act that I, as a taxpayer, get no say over.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Nobody consents to any of this
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Most of your examples cited can be considered for the common good. Not the case with abortion unless there is an over population issue.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Congress places caveats or limitations on how federal dollars are spent all them time. The Hyde Amendment (like other prohobitions) is business as usual, and has been for decades
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Those are acts by the government itself, which acts you can oppose by your vote. Abortion is the act of a private person which I cannot oppose by my vote. I should not have to fund the immoral action of a private individual.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.