Truly the day when libertarians could no longer troll the left by suggesting that income redistribution and "sex redistribution" are similar and comparing a mass killing to the June Uprising was when free inquiry died.https://twitter.com/patrissimo/status/990760719237853185 …
-
It can also be eviscerated for being morally repugnant - either in its premises or it's conclusions. Creepy in this context seems to mean "downplaying the moral severity of rape and violence against women"
If redistributing sex means rape/violence against women, then redistributing medical care, food, housing would have to mean slavery of doctors/grocers/landlords. Do you view universal health care as enslaving doctors? If not, your inference is invalid.
-
-
My comments were as much about the "mild rape" argument as this one, as well as the argument about violence. But to answer your question: states either redistribute money or they provide public services. The entire argument is confused by conflating the two.
-
You either redistribute money, which recipients can use for whatever they want, or you create a public service everyone has access to...and the later obviously entails judgments about the necessity and cost of that service
-
That argument only sort of works if you think taxation = slavery
End of conversation
New conversation -
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.