That's not an argument for abortion. But it could exacerbate that issue, sure.
Don't play on their playing field and accept their premises. Why he should have stepped down was that he used this as an argument for abortion and against more pro-life pregnancy centres. Not because he stated the fact that there may be additional strain on a budget as a result.
Not only that. He's implying that he's in favor of killing people on such an arbitrary basis as intelligence. In fact, he's implying that he'd be in favor of killing people who cost the state more money than they contribute, like old people, poor people, etc.
It truly is a monstrous thing to say, as if saving some money justified murder. He clearly doesn't value human life. Not a good look for a politician. Perhaps worse of all, he didn't even realize how badly saying that would be received. That kind of idiocy would put him pretty early in the eugenics line he suggests.
that's the starting point for every communist genocide.
first they start with the invalids, then the illiterate and elderly. the US military has deemed anyone under 83 IQ is not capable of net positive contributions, so there goes over 25% of society. but wait, there's more! once the bar gets raised to tax contributions, over 90% of women are net negative... any under that line who want to survive must resort to pumping out 3+ babies to keep growing the labor supply.
this is how every communist revolution operates. you're not a human, you're a production asset. and you either produce more than you consume, or you're enslaved until you do, or you're murdered.
bernie fucking sanders was kicked out of multiple communes because he refused to work, only talked politics and philosophy.
He is perfectly suited to be a Canadian politician. What he stated is government policy in Canada, the removal of "useless eaters" from society through MAID.
It truly is a monstrous thing to say, as if saving some money justified murder. He clearly doesn't value human life. Not a good look for a politician. Perhaps worse of all, he didn't even realize how badly saying that would be received. That kind of idiocy would put him pretty early in the eugenics line he suggests.
That's because the notion that every human has inherent value is fundamentally a Christian notion. It was not a feature of even the greatest civilizations pre-Christianity. In fact, the pagan Romans mocked Christians relentlessly for it, calling Christianity "the religion of women and the poor."
As our society rejects Christianity more and more, it is inevitable that more of this will pop up. You cannot destroy the foundations of a house, and expect it to stay standing. Too many people ignore the lessons of history and take the benefits of our civilization for granted. The atrocities of the twentieth century were the result of trying to create "new" and "rational" systems of morality. The same thing happened during the 18th century French Revolution, as well.
It likely would.
That's not an argument for abortion. But it could exacerbate that issue, sure.
Don't play on their playing field and accept their premises. Why he should have stepped down was that he used this as an argument for abortion and against more pro-life pregnancy centres. Not because he stated the fact that there may be additional strain on a budget as a result.
Not only that. He's implying that he's in favor of killing people on such an arbitrary basis as intelligence. In fact, he's implying that he'd be in favor of killing people who cost the state more money than they contribute, like old people, poor people, etc.
It truly is a monstrous thing to say, as if saving some money justified murder. He clearly doesn't value human life. Not a good look for a politician. Perhaps worse of all, he didn't even realize how badly saying that would be received. That kind of idiocy would put him pretty early in the eugenics line he suggests.
that's the starting point for every communist genocide.
first they start with the invalids, then the illiterate and elderly. the US military has deemed anyone under 83 IQ is not capable of net positive contributions, so there goes over 25% of society. but wait, there's more! once the bar gets raised to tax contributions, over 90% of women are net negative... any under that line who want to survive must resort to pumping out 3+ babies to keep growing the labor supply.
this is how every communist revolution operates. you're not a human, you're a production asset. and you either produce more than you consume, or you're enslaved until you do, or you're murdered.
bernie fucking sanders was kicked out of multiple communes because he refused to work, only talked politics and philosophy.
What's weird is they keep recruiting them anyway
Are we sure he's not Canadian?
He is perfectly suited to be a Canadian politician. What he stated is government policy in Canada, the removal of "useless eaters" from society through MAID.
That's because the notion that every human has inherent value is fundamentally a Christian notion. It was not a feature of even the greatest civilizations pre-Christianity. In fact, the pagan Romans mocked Christians relentlessly for it, calling Christianity "the religion of women and the poor."
As our society rejects Christianity more and more, it is inevitable that more of this will pop up. You cannot destroy the foundations of a house, and expect it to stay standing. Too many people ignore the lessons of history and take the benefits of our civilization for granted. The atrocities of the twentieth century were the result of trying to create "new" and "rational" systems of morality. The same thing happened during the 18th century French Revolution, as well.
Well said.
I am in favor of that, it isn't a reason for abortion though.