SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
BBC reports "German Greens float sex prescriptions for disabled":
A spokeswoman for the Green Party in Germany has said disabled and seriously ill people should be able to claim back public money if they pay for sex. They would have to prove a medical need and show that they could not pay to visit sex workers otherwise. Elisabeth Scharfenberg, an MP, told the Welt am Sonntag newspaper that she "could imagine" local authorities paying for "sexual assistance". Prostitution has been legal in Germany since 2002.
[...] In the Netherlands it is already possible to claim the cost of sexual services as a medical expense.
German source. Here's a related segment from Vice if you have 17m22s to spare (it's primarily about Sensual Solutions).
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
German Green Party MP Considers Subsidized Sex for the Disabled
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 45 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Everything is worth precisely as much as a belch, the difference being
that a belch is more satisfying.
-- Ingmar Bergman
(Score: 2) by Sulla on Tuesday January 10 2017, @03:53PM
As a taxpayer, I would be pissed if the government was paying for other people to have sex. Clearly I feel my ugliness is a disability, although I am sure I would not qualify for the program.
Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 10 2017, @04:06PM
Since you are tax payer, you surely could also pay for a prostitute, so one of the given conditions would not be fulfilled.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 10 2017, @04:58PM
Since all this is about Europe, maybe the taxpayer part is just the paid sales tax, not income tax.
In most of Europe sales tax is about 20% up to 27% which in fact makes him a taxpayer paying more of their income as taxes than many others elsewhere with their income taxes.
(Score: 2) by Sulla on Wednesday January 11 2017, @03:39AM
In general I feel that federal taxes should be reserved to military (needs downsizing), temporary safety nets (really depends), and paying for good negotiators to keep us out of wars. I am probably missing a few things. At the state level there are a few more things, statewide roads and transportation, a few more safety nets maybe. At the city/county level the governmet can pay for anything the people vote for.
Further from the individual the level of government is, the less power they should have over the individuals daily life.
The social contract we exist in was invalid when they closed the frontier and there is no place for those who choose no society to escape. Parts of alaska, siberia, africa might be okay, but far from the frontier of old. Because of this less should be forced upon the individual.
At no point in my view on life do I see taxes going for people to get laid, thats just insane. I suppose paying the migrants in germany to visite prostitutes might lower the instinces of rape, but still absolutely billshit. Maybe we need the government to fund some camp followers in Seattle, Portland, and SF to keep the transients from causing problems.
We need a basic income so we can pay the lumpenprolitariate their tribute to leave the rest of those who want to contribute alone. I am including artists as people who want to contribute here. Of course those do not work and live off of basic only probably shouldn't be able to vote either. But then of course the game becomes reducing the number of those working to get more power at the ballot box.
This article really pissed me off. This bs "money grows on trees, taxes can fund anything" attitude.
Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
(Score: 3, Flamebait) by Snotnose on Tuesday January 10 2017, @04:49PM
You want pissed? I live in California and our wonderful government has decided to pay for a sex change operation. For a prisoner serving a life sentence.
Whisky Tango Foxtrot? First, taxpayers should not pay for this type of operation. Second, especially not for assholes serving a life sentence.
When the dust settled America realized it was saved by a porn star.
(Score: 2) by nobu_the_bard on Tuesday January 10 2017, @06:05PM
I guess it's this: http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-inmate-sex-reassignment-20170106-story.html [latimes.com]
Woah! California is crazy. Female convicts get necklaces and nightgowns too??
(Score: 1) by AssCork on Tuesday January 10 2017, @11:00PM
Texas here, so let me just say "AH HA HA HA HA HA!!"
Life sentences, pfft - pansies.
Just popped-out of a tight spot. Came out mostly clean, too.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 11 2017, @04:42AM
From a bumper sticker: "I will believe corporations are people when Texas executes one."
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 11 2017, @10:02AM
Why not? Explain.
(Score: 2) by VLM on Tuesday January 10 2017, @08:29PM
if the government was paying for other people to have sex.
Isn't that basically every welfare benefit for little kids?
I mean sure, its not the kids fault and spending money on the kids trying to fix them is both the right thing to do and cheaper than fixing them when they're older, but fundamentally you're having the government coordinate one demographic group paying another demographic group to fuck and have the kids the first group can't afford because of high taxes. Which works pretty well until the first group is wiped out or refuses to pay. Then things get tense.
(Score: 2) by hamsterdan on Wednesday January 11 2017, @07:14PM
I guess it's only fair since governments already have sex with citizens, maybe just not the way we like it :)