Trying to argue with conservatives.
All that they’re great at is detouring, distancing, playing down, doubling-tripling down, disassociating, strawmen and more illogical fallacies. They can’t take up an honest debate unless there are rules in place that gives them any outs from being pressed when confronted with questions they can’t give truthful answers to.
I was going to say what you did. I’m more conservative than a lot of people in the Fediverse, but the way things are going, I’m sliding toward liberalism again. There’s a lot of stuff where I think the conversation needs to be boiled down to extremes: Will you help people, or will you harm them? You don’t have an option of inaction - inaction is harmful. If you have the power to help another person, you should be under a moral imperative to do so. And right now, I see a lot of conservatives who sugarcoat things, and fail to realize that the people they’ve picked to represent them see the cruelty as the point.
For what it’s worth, that goes beyond liberalism and into leftist belief. Liberal has been traditionally used to refer to the left in the US since the US has two right wing parties, but is center to center right literally everywhere else (like Canada).
who determines what helps people and harms them?
them, or you?
because a lot of ‘help’ actually does harm. and vice versa
what if helping another person comes at harm to you? there is a reason bystanders are not suppose to run into burning buildings or saving drowning people… because the most likely outcome is they themselves will also burn/drown. professionals who are trained to rescue people are a different story.
Fine, but it’s pretty obvious that if you take money away from people that have been reliant on it not to starve, you’re going to have people starving.