A) This is not about funding education, this is about incentivizing people not to do dumb shit. Education is not dumb unless you are Charlie Kirk

B) They are avoiding this shit in the first place, so no need, thus consistent

C) Yep, they are incentivizing people not to do dumb shit

D) This is a total extension of the arguement

E) Consistent because it does not conflict

The arguement is an analogy, that no restrictions are imposed on one thing, then they should not be imposed on another

• What you have to do,

• Take the conclusion out, and find something that is a contridictory analogy, where an incentive is imposed not to do that dumb thing

very happy to have gotten this right!