(link is to the Supreme Court’s opinion document)

You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
3 points
*

Let’s re-examine your statement by switching out a couple of words that keep the idea of “why should they get <x>?” to show how it would sound with any other context.


I <had to lose my eye to a car wreck> - why should we force <carmakers to build vehicles with seatbelts> for what is already the most entitled generation ever?

They <want to drive> - they can <drive in a car without a seatbelt just like I did>. Otherwise where does it stop? Are they going to <mandate airbags in cars> next?

Why not? It’s the same principle.


Do you understand now? If not, try changing what’s in the <x> to being related to “cancer treatment” or “the 40 hour work week” or “social security.”

Just because something before was bad and we made it better, doesn’t mean we should not do it just because it won’t help everyone.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Politics

!politics@beehaw.org

Create post

In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it’s a political happening, you can post it here.


Guidelines for submissions:
  • Where possible, post the original source of information.
    • If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
  • Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
  • Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
  • Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
  • Social media should be a source of last resort.

These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.


Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community’s icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

Community stats

  • 1.9K

    Monthly active users

  • 1.7K

    Posts

  • 14K

    Comments