4 ms·

Nice zinger. What sorts of contradictions do you mean?

cammikebrown 3y ago
Maybe he means practicing what you preach? The party of “small government” is well known for not doing that.
itake 3y ago
A popular one today is the pro-life movement only being pro-life until birth and then refusing to save children's lives (e.g. gun control or adopting unwanted children).
- Vecr 3y ago
  I don't agree with the position, but that's not correct. You have to think of the concept of evil as something a person does, at least partially independent of context. Shooting children with a gun is evil. Aborting a baby is evil. Selling guns is not evil. Not adopting a child is not evil (or not in almost all situations).
  - itake 3y ago
    > evil as something a person does Proverbs 22:9 The generous will themselves be blessed, for they share their food with the poor. People have the choice to share their blessings: Choosing to not share food is evil, Choosing to not share food and your home with a child with no parents is evil, Choosing to not protect children (by banning guns) is evil.
- Georgelemental 3y ago
  > adopting unwanted children Pro-life people do this literally all the time. Consider how many Christian adoption services are out there, for example. > gun control Most people who oppose gun control would argue that it costs more lives than it saves. --- Please don't straw-man your political opponents like this. At least get to know what they actually believe, before arguing against it.
  - defrost 3y ago
    > Most people who oppose gun control would argue that it costs more lives than it saves. They'd be wrong. There's been no significant gun incidents | mass shootings, et al. of any real note in Australia since uniform gun regulation was introduced (matching the unregulated states and territories to those with regulation) following a world record breaking (at the time) mass shooting. I'm in Australia, I have licenced weapons, my neighbour shoots ULR targets at 5,000 yards. Gun regulation is great when properly implemented and it has demonstrably saved lives in this context. You'd be correct to argue that uniform USofA wide simple clear evenly applied gun regulation would very likely be impossible due to the extreme difficulty of getting all states aligned and pulling in the same direction. That's a different argument about a different challenge though.
    - Georgelemental 3y ago
      > They'd be wrong. That may be so, but either way they are sincere.
  - itake 3y ago
    I'm not saying zero Christians adopt, but adoption is a small minority [0] (5% adopt) and in decline [1]. [0] - https://adoption.org/who-adopts-the-most https://adoption.org/who-adopts-the-most [1] - https://www.christianitytoday.com/news/2023/may/adoption-foster-care-church-goers-children-lifeway-study-re.html https://www.christianitytoday.com/news/2023/may/adoption-fos... > Most people who oppose gun control would argue that it costs more lives than it saves. In countries that have banned guns, how many children die from school shootings each year? --- > At least get to know what they actually believe, before arguing against it. I was raised in Catholic family and switched to protestantism from age 15 - 21. My Catholic Grandmother has 20 children + grandchildren. Not a single family has chosen adoption in 3 generations. My Protestant Grandmother has 2 children, neither chose adoption. Can you please help me understand my knowledge gaps? I have provided what data I could find and shared my personal experiences on this topic.
    - pton_xd 3y ago
- pton_xd 3y ago
  How is the inverse any more consistent? Save the children, at any cost! Unless they're still in the womb, then feel free to murder them.
  - deadbolt 3y ago
    It's pretty consistent if you don't believe a fetus is a child.
    - Vecr 3y ago
      Right, but they both cancel out.
  - itake 3y ago
    Lets solve the children being shot in schools or being denied food and housing, before we tackle the children in the womb. Whats the point of saving them in the womb if they will just get murdered in daycare?
    - Jensson 3y ago
      There are orders of magnitudes more abortions than there are children who starve to death or get shot to death in USA, they aren't comparable at all if you actually believe abortion is murder. I don't think abortion is murder, but I don't think your argument here works against them, to them saving a thousand fetuses from getting aborted is worth more than saving one child that got shot.
huytersd 3y ago
Small government except when it’s things that oppose their views. Government staying out of people lives except when it opposes their views.
droopyEyelids 3y ago
Libertarians have yet to formulate a coherent argument about how land can be property without injustice
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

Maybe he means practicing what you preach? The party of “small government” is well known for not doing that.

A popular one today is the pro-life movement only being pro-life until birth and then refusing to save children's lives (e.g. gun control or adopting unwanted children).

Vecr 3y ago
I don't agree with the position, but that's not correct. You have to think of the concept of evil as something a person does, at least partially independent of context. Shooting children with a gun is evil. Aborting a baby is evil. Selling guns is not evil. Not adopting a child is not evil (or not in almost all situations).
- itake 3y ago
  > evil as something a person does Proverbs 22:9 The generous will themselves be blessed, for they share their food with the poor. People have the choice to share their blessings: Choosing to not share food is evil, Choosing to not share food and your home with a child with no parents is evil, Choosing to not protect children (by banning guns) is evil.
Georgelemental 3y ago
> adopting unwanted children Pro-life people do this literally all the time. Consider how many Christian adoption services are out there, for example. > gun control Most people who oppose gun control would argue that it costs more lives than it saves. --- Please don't straw-man your political opponents like this. At least get to know what they actually believe, before arguing against it.
- defrost 3y ago
  > Most people who oppose gun control would argue that it costs more lives than it saves. They'd be wrong. There's been no significant gun incidents | mass shootings, et al. of any real note in Australia since uniform gun regulation was introduced (matching the unregulated states and territories to those with regulation) following a world record breaking (at the time) mass shooting. I'm in Australia, I have licenced weapons, my neighbour shoots ULR targets at 5,000 yards. Gun regulation is great when properly implemented and it has demonstrably saved lives in this context. You'd be correct to argue that uniform USofA wide simple clear evenly applied gun regulation would very likely be impossible due to the extreme difficulty of getting all states aligned and pulling in the same direction. That's a different argument about a different challenge though.
  - Georgelemental 3y ago
    > They'd be wrong. That may be so, but either way they are sincere.
- itake 3y ago
  I'm not saying zero Christians adopt, but adoption is a small minority [0] (5% adopt) and in decline [1]. [0] - https://adoption.org/who-adopts-the-most https://adoption.org/who-adopts-the-most [1] - https://www.christianitytoday.com/news/2023/may/adoption-foster-care-church-goers-children-lifeway-study-re.html https://www.christianitytoday.com/news/2023/may/adoption-fos... > Most people who oppose gun control would argue that it costs more lives than it saves. In countries that have banned guns, how many children die from school shootings each year? --- > At least get to know what they actually believe, before arguing against it. I was raised in Catholic family and switched to protestantism from age 15 - 21. My Catholic Grandmother has 20 children + grandchildren. Not a single family has chosen adoption in 3 generations. My Protestant Grandmother has 2 children, neither chose adoption. Can you please help me understand my knowledge gaps? I have provided what data I could find and shared my personal experiences on this topic.
  - pton_xd 3y ago
pton_xd 3y ago
How is the inverse any more consistent? Save the children, at any cost! Unless they're still in the womb, then feel free to murder them.
- deadbolt 3y ago
  It's pretty consistent if you don't believe a fetus is a child.
  - Vecr 3y ago
    Right, but they both cancel out.
- itake 3y ago
  Lets solve the children being shot in schools or being denied food and housing, before we tackle the children in the womb. Whats the point of saving them in the womb if they will just get murdered in daycare?
  - Jensson 3y ago
    There are orders of magnitudes more abortions than there are children who starve to death or get shot to death in USA, they aren't comparable at all if you actually believe abortion is murder. I don't think abortion is murder, but I don't think your argument here works against them, to them saving a thousand fetuses from getting aborted is worth more than saving one child that got shot.

huytersd 3y ago

Small government except when it’s things that oppose their views. Government staying out of people lives except when it opposes their views.

droopyEyelids 3y ago

Libertarians have yet to formulate a coherent argument about how land can be property without injustice

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]