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.
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.
I am in favor of that, it isn't a reason for abortion though.