The Boy Scouts are a private club.
If the people's representatives choose to appropriate money for the Special Olympics, what's the problem?
Are you really so red-assed about a widow's mite for differently-abled folks that we have to cut that down?
False dilemma
The Boy Scouts are a private club.
If the people's representatives choose to appropriate money for the Special Olympics, what's the problem?
Are you really so red-assed about a widow's mite for differently-abled folks that we have to cut that down?
Lol Chris.
Meanwhile, in SC, the USG supports orphanges that discriminate against Catholics and Jews.
I guess the solution there is to abolish support for orphanages, right?
It doesn't serve the general welfare. Making re ed kids feel better about themselves doesn't promote better re ed adults, just look at Blake.
False equivalence. Special Olympics isn't there to provide food and shelter for misplaced or orphaned kids.
It depends on whether or not those people would become burdens on the state otherwise.
Close to 5 percent of the US population has a diagnosed cognitive disability. If you count all other disabilities, the percentage gets north of 12%.
That's a lot of affected families.
The Special Olympics, true, only touches a fraction of that.
But it's obtuse to suggest that support for intellectual disabilities, in toto, does not promote general welfare.
Oh I bet derp gives you a high five for det one
It promotes welfare of specific people. It doesn't promote general welfare. I get no direct benefit from it. Do you?
Oh sematic warfare. No way didn't see that coming from dmc
Special Olympics doesn't address it. It only provides a playground.
Winehole is making a semantic argument. Get back in your gimp suit and stfu
Has touched my family. I'm grateful for the help my relatives got and so are they. And so am I.
The better we treat each other, the better we all are.
You're infatuated with me. Do you want my autograph?
Then you should be willing to fund it yourself.
A widows mite. Gives people joy , a sense of accomplishment and participation.
Why are you so red-assed about the crumb we give this?
I do.
And so do you.
Write a letter to your congressman if you don't like it, I don't care what you think.
I am fine with the Special Olympics. I also will note that you moved the goalpost from Special Olympics to people with cognitive learning disabilities in general. It's one thing to spend money to address these issues, but Special Olympics doesn't make the participant any better than they were. It just makes them feel better emotionally, and it makes the parents feel better. That's not unimportant but it's not something taxpayers should fund.
There are plenty worthy causes that aren't funded by federal dollars, and calling it small change doesn't change the fact that all the concern expressed here and elsewhere could instead be dollars into an account to pay for it.
You also fund Northrop and General Dynamics and the border wall if it's built. You ok with that? Write a letter if not.
In fact, write a letter about DeVos defunding Special Olympics. That's what the OP is about anyhow.
Devos pandering to the Christian Taliban, the Dominionists, the billionaires who are degrading public education
Defining the general welfare as what you personally need is preposterous. So is criticizing a particular program because it does not tend to solve all related issues.
Just say you don’t want to pay for it because you don’t like it. Pretending there’s some bigger principle at stake is bull .
It’s not like we’re discussing a revenue stream that crowds out other priorities.
Heartwarming event, no? I feel I'm much better off watching a Special Olympics highlight than reading about our military (hallowed be thy name) spending 1.5 trillion on another toy that doesn't benefit me directly.
Some defense contractor needs the extra 18 million for their bottom line. And keeping defense contractors as flush as humanly possible has always been the highest national priority.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)