I can’t say I’m surprised; but I’d be interested to know what the justification someone who thinks that the childless are so disconnected from the future that they need more taxation and less representation in the context of the administration of the state would give for choosing the religion that has(with the occasional formalized exception, like certain conversion instances, and a number of…less formalized…ones) reserved all clerical, command, and the substantial bulk of theological and educational roles specifically to such people for the better part of a millennium.
I’m sure it’s different somehow, because reasons; but it seems more than a trifle incongruous.
Or at least until the next census. Because children are counted for for the census. People on the right the often try to figure out how to keep undocumented immigrants from being counted in the census, thereby giving “blue” areas more representation. They justify this because the undocumented aren’t eligible to vote. But they never try keep non-voting children from being counted.
Yeah, the emphasis on birthrate is just a dog whistle for people worried about “replacement theory.” I can’t help but being reminded of these guys: Lebensborn - Wikipedia
More and more, it feels like they’re not even trying to hide the Nazi ideology.
I feel like this sort of thing has come up before in US history. Maybe there should be some sort of compromise on the issue. Maybe children should only be counted as 3/5ths of a person. For reasons.
Many of the same anti-tax extremists are also anti-immigration, despite the fact that immigrant workers both help replenish the Social Security and disability funds and make up the bulk of the trained care-giving workforce in the U.S. Conservatives over age 50 are operating on a mass delusion.
They are very anti-legal immigration. They love illegal migration, since it gives them a pool of workers who can be paid under the table (avoiding payroll taxes) and under minimum wage, and who won’t report illegal business practices to authorities.
Perhaps, Rick said, whether Vance actually had carnal knowledge of one or more couches is immaterial. Rick suggested Vance making love to a couch may best be viewed as what Werner Herzog has described as the “ecstatic truth” — in Herzog’s words, “a kind of truth that is the enemy of the merely factual,” encompassing falsehoods that “make some essence of the man visible.”
