So having money taken out of your paycheck before you get it is the same as having sex forced on you? You're a disgusting person, bro.
So having money taken out of your paycheck before you get it is the same as having sex forced on you? You're a disgusting person, bro.
The ol' "taxation is rape" thing, right? Except... He never said anything of the sort or even eluded to it. He used rape as an analogy. Go crucify someone else you worthless piece of trash.
Into the grave with you, human garbage.
EDIT: Actually, this was unreasonably harsh. I didn't think so at first because you came out swinging even though I had no beef with you personally and all I did was to retaliate, but for all I know you're friends with this guy or something and are just leaping to his defense? I don't know enough about the situation to justify being that mean to you.
Really, all this is about for me is that the analogy frames access to women's bodies as inherently transactional. I understand fully the point he is trying to make, but it falls flat because bodily autonomy is morally very different from financial autonomy, and the larger issue is that in order to conceive of such an analogy some very depraved, messed up thinking has to occur which requires viewing women in a pathological, predatory way.
I'm not gonna delete my original response because I don't mean to hide it. I still don't appreciate that you called me a worthless piece of trash, but neither should one wrong turn deserve another.
That's not exactly what I was saying. I was making the point that the majority doesn't have the right to impose its will onto the individual, and using rape to represent the coercive force of taxation as an emotional appeal to the reader's moral compass.
There is no difference, you just used more words. Maybe you have low emotional intelligence or something but using a serious issue and source of trauma like rape as a political prop to make some point about how you want to be an economic parasite who benefits from societal infrastructure without paying into it is in extremely poor taste.
You don't understand, I don't want just me to be tax-exempt, I want everybody to be tax-exempt. I don't believe in theft-funded, monopolized societal infrastructure. I want government, along with all initiation of force, to be abolished.
I'm sure Jonathan Swift heard much the same thing (before trigger words were a thing) when he wrote about eating Irish babies, something I think is objectively worse. However, he used it to illustrate an important point much like this author did.
When you say I have misunderstood, do you mean you didn't actually make inappropriate use of rape as a basis for comparison with taxation of all things? Because that is the only relevant issue here.
My belief is that if you were a woman and you had been raped, you would have chosen to use a different metaphor.
Rape is the theft of an incalculably valued material, but only diests believe that. Murder is the theft of one's life, and for some is the preferable outcome.