Paul Cameron's Latest Terrible Idea

Paul Cameron, the disgraced liar taken seriously only by the most extreme anti-gay bigots in the world after being caught faking his data on gay people repeatedly, has another absolutely terrible idea. He thinks parents should be exempt from taxes and should get extra votes for each of their children.

As Cameron sees it, parents ought not to have to pay any taxes while they are raising their children because they’re “assuring the future” and Klingenschmitt thought this was a pretty good idea because it “creates a tax incentive for people to have children and to stay home, maybe, and raise them.”

On top of that, Cameron also advocated for giving parents “their vote as a citizen plus one for for each child that they have.”

“That means a couple with, say, three children,” Cameron explained, “will have eight votes … Let’s change the politics of it so the politicians will suddenly say ‘I wanna be family-friendly because I want to come back to Washington.'”

But remember, “social engineering” is bad.

httpv://youtu.be/AyrRZcodfxU

"It may not make the world go roundBut certainly makes it worth the trip."

Fox Pays $90 Million to Shareholders ..."
"I was kinda wondering that myself.. 'It's lawsuits all the way down!' (every lawyer's wet ..."

Fox Pays $90 Million to Shareholders ..."
"And thing wingnuts will claim this just more proof that the jewish libural illuminuminati are ..."

Fox Pays $90 Million to Shareholders ..."
"You too can have abs, pects, and deltoids like Batman’s with the golf cart workout."

Crokin Declares Trump a ‘Real Life ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • D. C. Sessions

    Which parent gets to vote for the kids? I suspect that they’ll have a quick answer: the father, of course. But better yet, why not do as God intended and give him the vote for his wife as well? After all, head of family and all that.

    I think they should push hard for that as a platform.

  • dingojack

    And what if those kids are ‘anchor babies’? Would it apply to gay families that have multiple children?

    Enquiring minds are pretty sure what bigots will say….

    Dingo

  • dingojack

    You know who else gave incentives to families that had lots and lots of children….?

    Dingo

  • corwyn

    Which parent gets to vote for the kids?

    Both. He says a couple with 3 children get *8* votes.

  • Trebuchet

    From the RightWingWatch article:

    On top of that, Cameron also advocated for giving parents “their vote as a citizen plus one for for each child that they have.”

    “That means a couple with, say, three children,” Cameron explained, “will have eight votes … Let’s change the politics of it so the politicians will suddenly say ‘I wanna be family-friendly because I want to come back to Washington'”:

    So for conservatives, 2 + 3 = 8. Arithmetic, how the hell does that work?

  • beezlebubby

    Here in the US, parents already get a substantial tax exemption per dependent child. I would like to see that exemption end. If you want, selfishly, to keep piling on the overpopulation problem, you damn well ought to pay for it. At the least, I shouldn’t have to pay to assist them with financing their kids (though I sincerely don’t mind paying my school taxes).

  • dingojack

    How many votes do sperm donors get?

    Dingo

  • colnago80

    Re dingojack @ #3

    Frankenberger! I call Godwin on dingo.

  • dingojack

    Whom?

    Dingo

  • Hercules Grytpype-Thynne

    @Trebuchet:

    Not 2 + 3 = 8, 2 * (1 + 3) = 8. Each parent gets his or her own vote, plus one for each child.

  • D. C. Sessions

    Here in the US, parents already get a substantial tax exemption per dependent child.

    Which is considerably less than the deduction the child would have on its own. Much like the “marriage penalty tax” that gives a couple a lower personal deduction than it would two unmarried people living together.

    The list of things wrong with our tax code is very, very long. Deductions for kids is way down that list.

  • magistramarla

    As I remember, Augustus enacted this kind of a reward system for having babies in the early empire.

    He was trying to “clean up the morals of Rome”. He advocated for women staying home and tending to their womanly duties. He even exiled his own daughter for being immoral.

    The wingnuts would have loved him!

  • colnago80
  • abb3w

    While there are an awful lot of social conservatives who’ve spoken out against social engineering (and leaving aside the incoherence of the concept), as far as I can tell (and to my surprise) neither Gordon Klingenschmitt nor Paul Cameron ever has. It might thus be an inconsistency within conservatism overall, and hypocritical for conservative anti-engineering types to not call Cameron out over this, but it’s not a particular inconsistency here.

    If anyone can turn up where either did object to social engineering, I’ll happily accept the correction.

  • http://twitter.com/#!/TabbyLavalamp Tabby Lavalamp

    Is there a form of Tourette’s where you just shout out random names for Hitler – except “Hitler”?

  • http://timgueguen.blogspot.com timgueguen

    I’m sure the Ultraorthodox Jews, old fashioned Catholics, traditionalist Mormons, and conservative Muslims will all love this new method of voting. You know, the kind of people Gordy Klingwrap and Paul “I’m not Kirk Cameron, but we have similar ideas” Cameron don’t like.

  • dingojack

    Tabby Lavalamp = SLC Syndrome.

    Dingo

  • vmanis1

    What about votes for hamsters?

  • colnago80

    Re Tabby lavalamp @ #15

    Hardly random.

  • http://twitter.com/#!/TabbyLavalamp Tabby Lavalamp

    dingojack @17

    SCHICKLGRUBER!

  • neonsequitur

    So let me get this straight…

    It’s wrong for poor economically disadvantaged folks to crank out lots of kids for the welfare $$$, but having lots of kids for the extra votes would be a good thing?

    Yeah, that makes sense.

  • colnago80

    Re Tabby Lavalamp @ #20

    Heidler!

  • colnago80

    Re Tabby lavalamp @ #20

    Hister!

  • http://twitter.com/#!/TabbyLavalamp Tabby Lavalamp

    colnago80 @SLC

    HILTER!

  • http://www.pixelated-reality.com Alareth

    Just think, under is system the Duggars would get a total of 40 votes between them.

    Makes perfect sense to me …

  • D. C. Sessions

    Better yet, just imagine how many votes a serial rapist could rack up!

  • Michael Heath

    In the state of Michigan we don’t pay an 18 mil tax on the value of our property that’s our primary residence. Where all of that millage goes to the K-12 schools. It’s sad to find that my state agrees with Paul Cameron on this topic.

  • howardhershey

    Is this the same right wing that used to talk about welfare queens popping out welfare children to live off “our” tax money? Now he wants to encourage this bit of ‘moral hazard’? Or perhaps he knows his audience — not the “real” welfare queens, just the lighter skinned ones?

  • lorn

    Brilliant!!!!!!.

    Because the number one problem on this planet is that there simply are not enough people on it.

    7.2 Billion isn’t enough.

    Things will be sooo much better in 2100 when, if things go as they are going, there will be over 11 Billion.

    For a rundown on US and world population, they can even hook you up with a population widget:

    http://www.census.gov/popclock/

  • Nemo

    What’s with these idiots always thinking the population is on the verge of collapse? Seriously, guys, we don’t need to bribe people into having extra kids. There are plenty already.

    Or, is it just the white population they’re worried about?

  • John Pieret

    Because the number one problem on this planet is that there simply are not enough people on it.

    No, as far as they are concerned, there simply are not enough white conservative Christians on it compared to brown non-Christians, gays, atheists, [insert remaining list of all people white conservative Christians hate].

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=523300770 stuartsmith

    A tax incentive to stay home and raise your kids? If anything, it gives you a tax incentive to work longer hours and leave your kids with a minimum wage baby sitter. Staying home and raising your kids means no income, which means you don’t really pay taxes anyway. At least not the ones I assume he’s talking about. It’s like these people don’t understand how jobs work…

  • dingojack

    stuartsmith – it’s not quite that. These people don’t really understand how reality works, it’s a symptom (or a consequence) of magical thinking.

    Dingo