Would you Date Someone Living Off Disability?

[I<3Liberty]

I got into a PEACEFUL argument with some people on this topic.

Would you date a person whom refuses to work because they get more through gov-issued disability? Better yet, would you marry this person even though they refuse to work or take on the homemaker-type duties?

If the answer is "no" would you consider yourself a heartless libertarian? You can imagine where this argument went (I was the only libertarian in the room.)

 

[oyarde]

What kind of dis. ? Govt. ? Can they work ? , well, then no, but I am quite a few years past dating .

 

[Natural Citizen]

I got into a PEACEFUL argument with some people on this topic.

Would you date a person whom refuses to work because they get more through disability? Better yet, would you marry this person even though they refuse to work or take on the homemaker-type duties?

If the answer is "no" would you consider yourself a heartless libertarian? You can imagine where this argument went (I was the only libertarian in the room.)

Well. You threw a monkey wrench into my initial thought when you added on the "refuse to work or take on the homemaker-type duties" part. I was initially thinking of it as refusing employment but once you begged the other question it assumes that the person just doesn't want to work kind of thing.

I'll tell you this though. If we ever get nailed by a solar flare or something there will either be a lot of unmarried people or a lot of married people. Which ones do you think would make it? Given the premise of the question you ask.

 

[fr33]

I could date someone with a disability but when you added they won't do anything around the house I decided NO. You've described someone who will not do anything at all even though they could.

 

[I<3Liberty]

What kind of dis. ? Govt. ? Can they work ? , well, then no, but I am quite a few years past dating .

It's all theoretical.

Entirely gov-issued, so SSI, Access card, and the works.

In this scenario, it's not specified whether they can or cannot work, they just refuse to because they get more through disability. Note: even if they couldn't work part-time, they still want to get married and have kids despite not being capable or willing to support them through a nurturer/caregiver role or through financial means.

I also said that I wouldn't and mentioned that I disagree with gov-issued disability. Now, I'm "a cold heartless libertarian."

 

[eduardo89]

It's all theoretical.

Entirely gov-issued, so SSI, Access card, and the works.

In this scenario, it's not specified whether they can or cannot work, they just refuse to because they get more through disability. Note: even if they couldn't work part-time, they still want to get married and have kids despite not being capable or willing to support them through a nurturer/caregiver role or through financial means.

I also said that I wouldn't and mentioned that I disagree with gov-issued disability. Now, I'm "a cold heartless libertarian."

Absolutely not. Also wouldn't marry a woman who does not wan to be a housewife.

 

[oyarde]

It's all theoretical.

Entirely gov-issued, so SSI, Access card, and the works.

In this scenario, it's not specified whether they can or cannot work, they just refuse to because they get more through disability. Note: even if they couldn't work part-time, they still want to get married and have kids despite not being capable or willing to support them through a nurturer/caregiver role or through financial means.

I also said that I wouldn't and mentioned that I disagree with gov-issued disability. Now, I'm "a cold heartless libertarian."

So a tax tick .No.

 

[mad cow]

Do the rest of your buddies in the room realize that one could get kicked off the gravy train if they married someone with a job?

 

[nesheiwatnet]

ee

 

[I<3Liberty]

Now that we all agree, do you believe there's a difference between refusing to date this type of person, yet sticking with a spouse that has been diagnosed with cancer and is unable to work. I was told there is no difference and that supporting the later, but not the former is "discrimination."

Once again, THIS IS JUST THEORETICAL and these peeps are hardcore lefties. They want disability to be given to everyone that wants it (even aliens) and have a Jill Stein-like belief when it comes to working. In other words, refusing disability and making people work is considered "workfare."

 

[eduardo89]

Now that we all agree, would you agree that there's a difference between refusing to date this type of person, yet sticking with a spouse that has been diagnosed with cancer and is unable to work.

Huge difference. If one cannot see it, they are most likely either acting stupid or are stupid.

I was told there is no difference and that supporting the later, but not the former is "discrimination."

What's wrong with discrimination?

 

[fr33]

Now that we all agree, do you believe there's a difference between refusing to date this type of person, yet sticking with a spouse that has been diagnosed with cancer and is unable to work. I was told there is no difference and that supporting the later, but not the former is "discrimination."

Once again, THIS IS JUST THEORETICAL and these peeps are hardcore lefties. They want disability to be given to everyone that wants it (even aliens) and have a Jill Stein-like belief when it comes to working. In other words, refusing disability and making people work is considered "workfare."

Sure I agree. There's a big difference. You've entered into a contract with that spouse and do have obligations.

 

[I<3Liberty]

Huge difference. If one cannot see it, they are most likely either acting stupid or are stupid.

Sure I agree. There's a big difference. You've entered into a contract with that spouse and do have obligations.

Exactly. That's the point I tried to make, but they didn't agree and kept going on about why I'm wrong. They also said it wasn't very "Christian of me" to disagree with disability and to "discriminate."

I'm just like...

 

[James Madison]

Aren't all relationships discriminatory?

I pose these questions to your 'friends':

1. Would you date a man who's shorter than you?
2. Would you date a man who lives with his parents?
3. Would you date someone who is pro-life?
4. Would date someone who is a conservative?
5. Would you date a man with Down Syndrome?
6. Would you date a man with Cerebral Palsy?
7. Would you date a 'man' who is transgender?
8. Would you date a man who is morbidly obese?
9. Would you date a paraplegic?
10. Would you date a man who is seriously lacking in 'that' department?
11. Would you date ANYONE that asked you out?

Because if not, then STFU.

 

[Carlybee]

No, not if they are just doing it because they can. I know people who need to be on disability and have been turned down so I have no respect for parasites. I have worked hard all my life and have never been on welfare, unemployment or any type of assistance. I know some people who have been in situations where they had no choice temporarily or because they had a legitimate disability, but if I can work I would certainly expect my mate to. Not to mention I prefer people with ambition.

 

[Cabal]

I got into a PEACEFUL argument with some people on this topic.

Would you date a person whom refuses to work because they get more through gov-issued disability? Better yet, would you marry this person even though they refuse to work or take on the homemaker-type duties?

If the answer is "no" would you consider yourself a heartless libertarian? You can imagine where this argument went (I was the only libertarian in the room.)

It would really depend on the details, context, and reasoning (setting aside the issues of attraction and compatibility for the sake of argument).

From the way you're describing this hypothetical person, the primary reason underlying their behavior in this matter is little more than laziness, not an actual inability to find an alternative. So that's not boding well, right off the bat. I would perhaps try to explain to this person, assuming I was otherwise interested in a relationship with them, my thoughts and philosophies about the subject, and try to help them understand my position, as well as help them to find alternatives. If they continued to "refuse" even after that effort, I would probably not continue associating with them, let alone date/marry them.

Would I then consider myself heartless? Of course not. I don't have to lower my standards in order to maintain a large heart.

 

[I<3Liberty]

Aren't all relationships discriminatory?

I pose these questions to your 'friends':

1. Would you date a man who's shorter than you?
2. Would you date a man who lives with his parents?
3. Would you date someone who is pro-life?
4. Would date someone who is a conservative?
5. Would you date a man with Down Syndrome?
6. Would you date a man with Cerebral Palsy?
7. Would you date a 'man' who is transgender?
8. Would you date a man who is morbidly obese?
9. Would you date a paraplegic?
10. Would you date a man who is seriously lacking in 'that' department?
11. Would you date ANYONE that asked you out?

Because if not, then STFU.

Haha! Those questions probably wouldn't have gone over too well. Yes, almost every relationship of any sort discriminates to some degree, but the fact that this form of discrimination intertwines the touchy issues of welfare and workfare is what really got them worked up. It would have been a very different argument if the scenario was more like "Would you date a hardcore pro-life anarchist?"

Would I then consider myself heartless? Of course not. I don't have to lower my standards in order to maintain a large heart.

Exactly. They'd just be like a little child that refuses to grow up. The heartless person is probably the one marrying the guy or girl that's going to sit around doing nothing, refuse to support the family (financially or through caregiver and housekeeping duties), and refuse to be a good role model and father or mother figure for the kids. I even question how realistic this scenario would be because if someone isn't ambitious enough to support him/herself, how is this person going to muster the ambition to even date or maintain a relationship?

No, not if they are just doing it because they can. I know people who need to be on disability and have been turned down so I have no respect for parasites. I have worked hard all my life and have never been on welfare, unemployment or any type of assistance. I know some people who have been in situations where they had no choice temporarily or because they had a legitimate disability, but if I can work I would certainly expect my mate to. Not to mention I prefer people with ambition.

In a way, it kind of encourages parasites because they often do receive more from disability than they would working lower-paying jobs. I do think we have a moral responsibility to help people with a legitimate need, but I'd rather see NGOs and churches take this over. Not only do NGOs and churches prevent parasites from taking advantage of people's generosity, they're also much more efficient. Of course, that alternative never flies with lefties and starts a whole different argument.

 

[MelissaWV]

I could date someone with a disability but when you added they won't do anything around the house I decided NO. You've described someone who will not do anything at all even though they could.

Correct, and they are choosing disability because it pays well in this hypothetical scenario.

They are lazy and dishonest. No thank you.

 

[Czolgosz]

Would you Date Someone Living Off Disability?


Under 25 and crazy in bed? Maybe.

 

[Danke]

Do you have any contact info?