• alyaza [they/she]@beehaw.orgM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    What’s deeply upsetting to me is that this entire comment section is willfully misrepresenting the move as “haha they want children to starve”.

    okay but they kinda do. you are giving charitability to people (Republican politicians in Congress) who have clearly demonstrated they do not deserve it and that what they want is for people to be worse off–whether they accept that or not. more children starving because free school meals are restricted to certain income groups is possibly the most straightforward cause-and-effect outcome there can be. the benefits of having them (without means testing) are also undisputable. we literally just had those for two years without issue during the pandemic.

    • Mummelpuffin@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      No, see, this is a willful mischaracterization of their ignorance. These are people who are convinced that parents who can afford their feed their children just will if they lack other options. The idea that some would simply choose not to anyways or that means testing is often faulty is further than they’ve ever actually thought about it. Still cartoonishly evil? Yeah, but it’s not “haha I sure do love kids not eating”, it’s a lack of empathy of a different sort. Telling people that they want children to starve when that’s the last thing that probably crossed their mind will never, ever sway someone’s understanding of a problem. It will only convince them that your position is based on a strawman. We need to appeal to people’s sense that they’re good people who want to do good things.