• protist@retrofed.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    21 hours ago

    You missed the part where there are people who don’t/can’t take care of themselves in this scenario

    • Carrotwurst@programming.devOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      20 hours ago

      Nope, I spoke of collective freedom and ability. Read the statement again with some thought.

      I didn’t say “the more freedom you want for yourself, the more you must take care of yourself”. I spoke of freedom any one person wants to have for everyone, meaning themselves and others (including people with disabilities OR people they don’t like). And I said you’d also need ableness in proportion to the level of freedom you want. If you aren’t able and can’t take care of yourself, it would be in your best interest to support systems that enable getting you the kind of support you need (though you don’t have to, if you want to grant everyone the freedom to refuse to support you). And if one is so disabled that they can’t do anything for themselves, they probably aren’t too concerned about abstract societal freedoms to begin with.