This post is locked. You won't be able to comment.

You EVIL CIS SCUMS, every single one of transhwumen's cosmetic surgeries is LITERALLY saving lives! PAY UP!!!

submitted by [deleted] from (reddit.com)

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]RedEyedWarriorGay | Male | 🇮🇪 Irish 🇮🇪 | Antineoliberal | Cocks are Compulsory 19 insightful - 1 fun19 insightful - 0 fun20 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Unfortunately, in a country with a woke government, you will be paying for these surgeries through your taxes. Whether you like it or not. The taxpayer should not have to pay for these surgeries. And no, I will never donate money towards a transgender cause.

[–]mvmlego 2 insightful - 7 fun2 insightful - 6 fun3 insightful - 7 fun -  (4 children)

I'm curious: what's your position of taxpayer funding of controversial procedures in general? Is it simply a matter of whether you think the procedure is good, or do you think that the goodness of the procedure has to be balanced against the number of people objecting to it (and/or how severely they object to it)?

EDIT: Why are people giving this Fun votes? (Current score: 2I, 3F.) What point do you people think that I'm trying to make with this comment? I'm bringing attention to an interesting area of principle that affects plenty of important topics, including transgender issues, abortion, and euthanasia. I get that people sometimes use the Fun votes as a quick way to express disagreement, but I don't see what there was to disagree about in the original comment.

[–]RedEyedWarriorGay | Male | 🇮🇪 Irish 🇮🇪 | Antineoliberal | Cocks are Compulsory 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I think the procedure has to be good. Personally, I think only necessary procedures should be covered. Procedures that save lives, procedures that help people become independent or procedures that alleviate or eliminate pain. I even support tax payer funded mental health services in the form of counselling. Anything cosmetic should be paid by the patient. Anything necessary or controversial should be dealt with on a case-by-case basis.

However, I think these things should be covered by getting a private insurance plan. Only people who can’t afford health insurance should get free healthcare. This reduces the cost on the taxpayer. Half the hospitals of a country should be public and the other half should be privately owned.

[–]mvmlego 2 insightful - 6 fun2 insightful - 5 fun3 insightful - 6 fun -  (2 children)

Thank you for explaining your viewpoint. How would you apply those principles to the subject of euthanasia? Undoubtedly, it can be a procedure that eliminates pain, but it's also a procedure that many consider to be morally wrong to various extents. Presumably, this would fall under your category of controversial procedures that need to be handled on a case-by-case basis. What exactly does that handling process look like? Is the question of whether it should be taxpayer-funded simply a matter of whether it is, in the majority's opinion, a good procedure?

[–]RedEyedWarriorGay | Male | 🇮🇪 Irish 🇮🇪 | Antineoliberal | Cocks are Compulsory 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I support passive euthanasia. Passive euthanasia is when you pull the plug, or don’t give medication to someone to keep this person alive. If someone wants to die, there’s no point keeping him on life support. So yeah, if the patient wants to die, let his next of kin pull the plug. Active euthanasia, where you give lethal medication to someone to kill him, is another story. I’m not sure if I’m okay with this. I definitely don’t want to fund this.

[–]mvmlego 2 insightful - 7 fun2 insightful - 6 fun3 insightful - 7 fun -  (0 children)

I don't think I got my point across, in that I was wondering what you think about how a given society should decide whether or not to fund controversial things, with euthanasia being the operative example. Still, I won't pester you any more. I appreciate your reply, and I happen to hold rather similar views on euthanasia, myself.