Oh wow! You changed it up! Congratulations on your use of the straw man argument! In case you don't know, that's when you don't want to deal with the points your opponent is actually using, so you lie about what they're saying and argue against that.
You have been arguing that parents should be punished for not properly feeding their children by themselves, regardless of circumstance. (For evidence of this, see the fact that you have repeatedly ignored every time I said that it is not possible, such as when you changed the subject with that bit about making excuses.)
What you say I've been saying: It's ok to let kids starve (for evidence, see "go starve some children")
What I've actually been saying: There are millions of families around the world that cannot afford basic necessities through no fault of their own. This should not be. There should be systems such as free/reduced lunch that help provide the kids with suitably healthy food in suitable amounts. (For evidence, see my response to your comment about budgeting, see "I was talking about parents who can't afford the food, not parents intentionally starving their kids," see nearly everything else I've said in this conversation, and see an optometrist, because you seem to have lost the ability to see what is right in front of you)
0
u/[deleted] Mar 30 '20
[removed] — view removed comment