rubyblue0 t1_j9ptyz4 wrote
So, what’s his point? That murdering children isn’t so bad because it saves tax payer money, so let’s be more lenient on child murderers?
Grogosh t1_j9py1gc wrote
His point is his stance on doing nothing to help children is cost effective in multiple ways
[deleted] t1_j9s47ow wrote
[removed]
ThrillSurgeon t1_j9stgdx wrote
Often, profit determines behavior.
cedped t1_j9tea0b wrote
That would be the case if humans were logical and not emotional beings. We often go to significant lengths and lose a shitton of money and resources just to fuck with someone we hate. What you also refer to by profit is basically greed.
ItIsYourPersonality t1_j9u0mww wrote
What’s the point of having any government at all if we’re just going to let capitalism decide policy. Just let the free market do it at that point, we don’t need politicians.
I’d rather politicians do their job, but if that’s too much work for them we can just eliminate their jobs.
finnlaand t1_j9v41w6 wrote
If that child grows up working and paying taxes its an even better investment.
Jonruy t1_j9qx979 wrote
He was trying to take a swipe at abortion, he just did so in a way that was so bad that even all the other Republicans aged to censure him.
If you start at the position that an unborn fetus is indistinguishable from a child, then an abortion is the same as fatal child abuse. Therefore, if abortion can be pitched as something that saves welfare policies by not having to pay for unwanted children, then so can infanticide. Checkmate, Atheists.
overlyambitiousgoat t1_j9s9xtb wrote
Thank you! I was trying to figure out where in the hell he thought he was going with that line of argument.
gravescd t1_j9uvxa3 wrote
I would 100% believe that a Republican lawmaker came out as pro-child murder. It's really not a stretch anymore.
Nithorius t1_j9t1wr8 wrote
The argument makes no sense because even if it was the case that fatal child abuse is a benefit on society, there are no policy prescriptions that could come from that. If you leave abusers alone and they don't end up killing their kid, well now you have more potential criminals to deal with (because children who are abused don't tend to turn out well), and that also has a cost.
Not to mention the fact that someone who is fked up enough to kill their child when they could just abandon them instead (which is also illegal but not as bad) is probably a threat to society in many other ways.
Sinhika t1_j9uxdhf wrote
Instead, he came out sounding like a Nazi, confirming to all but deluded MAGA-hats that the Republicans have gone completely off-the-rails fascist and literally espouse genocide.
[deleted] t1_j9r0rul wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_j9skwg4 wrote
[removed]
Pulguinuni t1_j9tjpfo wrote
He’s been an anti-choice advocate for years, is not the first time he’s been censored. Apparently he was tryin, and has in the past, to compare abortion with child abuse, his intention backfired and never got his whole point across.
He is an awful human being.
Efficient-Ad-3302 t1_j9t2bn9 wrote
If that’s the case, dude is definitely hiding something.
SpaceTabs t1_j9tsb1w wrote
He probably saw the huge list of reports on child maltreatment in Alaska native communities and said not my constituents.
[deleted] t1_j9tl1x2 wrote
[removed]
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments