214 How can they be the future?

Interesting discussion between Steve, one of the writers of Outside the Beltway blog, and reader, Ken. Steven points out the silliness of caring about the effects of deficit spending on “future” generations (article in San Francisco Chronicle) while at the same time, aborting them (they aren’t really people and thus have no rights) so they have no future in which to pay taxes. And technically, those people (3 or 4 generations out) also have no rights today.

“Now my guess is that the editorial board at the SFGate.com (the San Francisco Chronicle) are liberal. From this it is probably fair to surmise that the person(s) responsible for that editorial feel that abortion should be legal. Yet it seems strange to invoke fairness to future generations when looking at tax/budget policies. I mean in one case, the argument is that the fetus is not a person and hence has no rights. People three or four generations from now also do not exist, and thus also have no rights. The idea that something is "unfair" to them is just patently ridiculous...using the above reasoning. Seems like a pretty substantial consistency problem, but maybe I'm wrong.”

Ken is not happy and calls Steve and idiot; Steve shreds his arguments and calls Ken a “logically challenged stooge.”