4 ms·

> We already have a system in place for every organisation to give part of their money for the public good: taxes. Yes, but without any personal discretion or

by lutusp 13y ago

> We already have a system in place for every organisation to give part of their money for the public good: taxes. Yes, but without any personal discretion or choice. For example, I personally think a woman's access to birth control and abortion is an essential right, but because this is by no means a popular viewpoint, I donate directly to charities that support my views. Taxes aren't a way to support specific, desirable public goals, they only maintain the status quo. If your view had merit, Bill Gates would try to pay taxes to encourage redesign of condoms to improve Third World family planning outcomes (one of Gates' current projects). But Gates knows this won't work -- as far as a vocal minority of American are concerned, family planning is the work of the devil. > As a democratic society, supposedly we already have mechanisms in place to decide how to spend this money for the public good. You have a distorted idea of democracy. Democracy is not a centralized decision-making process in which various views are amalgamated into a single choice of action for all. Not to oversimplify, but democracy respects the rights of individuals and diverse groups to act in a way that doesn't interfere with any other group's similar rights. On this basis, private charity accurately represents democracy much better than centralized taxation does.

smartistone 13y ago
the problem, of course, is that everyone just would donate to their favorite charity: themselves
humanrebar 13y ago
Ironically, it would have been more on the nose for you to briefly empathize with a different position on birth control for the sake of this argument. There is a very small minority (even among Catholics) that believe that birth control is immoral, let alone that government should impose that moral view. Nowhere in the near future will there be popular support, even within select states or counties, for banning birth control. So what's the issue? One of them is that there are cases before the Supreme Court, including one involving Hobby Lobby, regarding whether private businesses should be forced to pay for birth control (by means of tax penalties) over moral objections. The "vocal minority" in question is struggling to maintain their freedom of personal discretion in this respect. In arguing that people should have personal choice, you are indirectly agreeing with the very same minority you caricature.
- lutusp 13y ago
  > Nowhere in the near future will there be popular support, even within select states or counties, for banning birth control. If you live in the U.S., you're out of touch with popular opinion. The majority are in favor of birth control, but there is certainly popular opposition to birth control. http://content.usatoday.com/communities/ondeadline/post/2012/03/religious-rallies-across-usa-protest-birth-control-mandate/1#.UxGVWTmx27s http://content.usatoday.com/communities/ondeadline/post/2012... > In arguing that people should have personal choice, you are indirectly agreeing with the very same minority you caricature. That's absurd and a troll. Obviously anyone who speaks in favor of free speech would have to receive the same reply from you, on the ground that free speech is by definition a tolerance for unpopular views.
  - humanrebar 13y ago
    To be clear, according to Gallup [1], over 85% of American Catholics have no issue with birth control. Not that this is solely a Catholic thing, but it's an illustrative example. Even in the link you provided, there is nobody protesting legal birth control. They are protesting being forced to pay for other peoples' birth control. If birth control was an out-of-pocket expense, there would be no issue here. I was simply trying to point out that the government is willing to put people out of business and litigate them all the way to the Supreme Court to mandate free birth control. You seem concerned that the government could trample over your conscience as well, and we should all be concerned about that, but it's ironic that you chose this particular issue as an example, considering current events. [1] http://www.gallup.com/poll/154799/americans-including-catholics-say-birth-control-morally.aspx http://www.gallup.com/poll/154799/americans-including-cathol...
    - lutusp 13y ago
      > Even in the link you provided, there is nobody protesting legal birth control. Transparently false -- the people in the story are protesting legal birth control. > They are protesting being forced to pay for other peoples' birth control. That's this week's explanation. These people are against birth control, and they con't care what form it takes. > I was simply trying to point out that the government is willing to put people out of business and litigate them all the way to the Supreme Court to mandate free birth control. Yes, just the same way the government put people out of business and litigated all the way to the Supreme Court to mandate an end to slavery. You very clearly have no idea what you sound like.

by lutusp 13y ago

smartistone 13y ago

the problem, of course, is that everyone just would donate to their favorite charity: themselves

humanrebar 13y ago

Ironically, it would have been more on the nose for you to briefly empathize with a different position on birth control for the sake of this argument. There is a very small minority (even among Catholics) that believe that birth control is immoral, let alone that government should impose that moral view. Nowhere in the near future will there be popular support, even within select states or counties, for banning birth control. So what's the issue? One of them is that there are cases before the Supreme Court, including one involving Hobby Lobby, regarding whether private businesses should be forced to pay for birth control (by means of tax penalties) over moral objections. The "vocal minority" in question is struggling to maintain their freedom of personal discretion in this respect. In arguing that people should have personal choice, you are indirectly agreeing with the very same minority you caricature.

lutusp 13y ago
> Nowhere in the near future will there be popular support, even within select states or counties, for banning birth control. If you live in the U.S., you're out of touch with popular opinion. The majority are in favor of birth control, but there is certainly popular opposition to birth control. http://content.usatoday.com/communities/ondeadline/post/2012/03/religious-rallies-across-usa-protest-birth-control-mandate/1#.UxGVWTmx27s http://content.usatoday.com/communities/ondeadline/post/2012... > In arguing that people should have personal choice, you are indirectly agreeing with the very same minority you caricature. That's absurd and a troll. Obviously anyone who speaks in favor of free speech would have to receive the same reply from you, on the ground that free speech is by definition a tolerance for unpopular views.
- humanrebar 13y ago
  To be clear, according to Gallup [1], over 85% of American Catholics have no issue with birth control. Not that this is solely a Catholic thing, but it's an illustrative example. Even in the link you provided, there is nobody protesting legal birth control. They are protesting being forced to pay for other peoples' birth control. If birth control was an out-of-pocket expense, there would be no issue here. I was simply trying to point out that the government is willing to put people out of business and litigate them all the way to the Supreme Court to mandate free birth control. You seem concerned that the government could trample over your conscience as well, and we should all be concerned about that, but it's ironic that you chose this particular issue as an example, considering current events. [1] http://www.gallup.com/poll/154799/americans-including-catholics-say-birth-control-morally.aspx http://www.gallup.com/poll/154799/americans-including-cathol...
  - lutusp 13y ago
    > Even in the link you provided, there is nobody protesting legal birth control. Transparently false -- the people in the story are protesting legal birth control. > They are protesting being forced to pay for other peoples' birth control. That's this week's explanation. These people are against birth control, and they con't care what form it takes. > I was simply trying to point out that the government is willing to put people out of business and litigate them all the way to the Supreme Court to mandate free birth control. Yes, just the same way the government put people out of business and litigated all the way to the Supreme Court to mandate an end to slavery. You very clearly have no idea what you sound like.