Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Equality is that those that produce/raise the future are taxed at a lower rate than those that do not.
Where do you assume that people are taxed at different rates based on being married or not?
The rate is determined by Adjust Gross Income. The rate of tax is determined by how much you make not really by whether someone is married or not. The deduction for a single person is $6,200. The deduction for a married couple is $12,400 for the two people.
The people that produce the "future" (assuming you mean children) get a deduction for each child - that deduction is not conditional on being married or single, straight or gay.
>>>>
Now let's change the tax code so that only households that raise(d) the future generations get tax breaks.
Then we can talk equity.
er... no.
er... Yes
so if someone is infertile they should have a different tax rate than someone who can have a child?
rightwingnuthackworld is funny
Where did that come from?
Do you actually read before insulting
Invitro or adoption are acceptable (see previous posts)
Good lord
TOLERANCENo. It's a ruling against rights and freedom.wonderful news for individual rights
The gov mandating by fascist decree that all people must acknowledge and acquiesce to irrelevant kinky sex between non-procreative adults is an infringement upon rights and freedom. Not even a religious thing. Just basic logic. Something that eludes most democrats and lefties.
Now let's change the tax code so that only households that raise(d) the future generations get tax breaks.
Then we can talk equity.
er... no.
er... Yes
so if someone is infertile they should have a different tax rate than someone who can have a child?
rightwingnuthackworld is funny
Where did that come from?
Do you actually read before insulting
Invitro or adoption are acceptable (see previous posts)
Good lord
So a gay or lesbian couple that uses adoption or invitro (egg and/or sperm donation) get's a lower tax rate for life right?
>>>>
That has nothing to do with my post.Keep that in mind if you serve on a jury in a crime where the victim is gay. Keep that in mind when the perversion that this nation has become wants your patriotism.No. It's a ruling against rights and freedom.wonderful news for individual rights
The gov mandating by fascist decree that all people must acknowledge and acquiesce to irrelevant kinky sex between non-procreative adults is an infringement upon rights and freedom. Not even a religious thing. Just basic logic. Something that eludes most democrats and lefties.
TOLERANCENo. It's a ruling against rights and freedom.wonderful news for individual rights
The gov mandating by fascist decree that all people must acknowledge and acquiesce to irrelevant kinky sex between non-procreative adults is an infringement upon rights and freedom. Not even a religious thing. Just basic logic. Something that eludes most democrats and lefties.
Not acceptance.
Is it so hard to tolerate someone else? Must we all conform to a narrow template of morality? Who arbitrates this morality? Used to be Queen Victoria, but that was under the aegis of the throne in Great Britain. But in America?
The government is mandating that two consenting adults without a blood relationship may avail themselves of the benefits and protections of the marriage contract.
Why do you have a problem with that? Will same sex marriage ruin your marriage?
You are just a bigot whose world is shrinking. Tough.
The Justices are waiting until after the elections to hear these cases. There is nothing stopping them from hearing them or similar cases later.
TFederal judges unilaterally overturning duly voted on referendums like Prop 8 is a bad precedent for the legal system, and nobody is going to be happy with the consequences of that.
TOLERANCENo. It's a ruling against rights and freedom.wonderful news for individual rights
The gov mandating by fascist decree that all people must acknowledge and acquiesce to irrelevant kinky sex between non-procreative adults is an infringement upon rights and freedom. Not even a religious thing. Just basic logic. Something that eludes most democrats and lefties.
Not acceptance.
Is it so hard to tolerate someone else? Must we all conform to a narrow template of morality? Who arbitrates this morality? Used to be Queen Victoria, but that was under the aegis of the throne in Great Britain. But in America?
The government is mandating that two consenting adults without a blood relationship may avail themselves of the benefits and protections of the marriage contract.
Why do you have a problem with that? Will same sex marriage ruin your marriage?
You are just a bigot whose world is shrinking. Tough.
Looks like my post went over your head, too. Tolerance means not interfering. Forced acquiescence is interference. Homos want to force their irrelevant behavior onto others. That is the opposite of tolerance.
Calling for the protection of children is not 'freaking out'.The reactionaries who can't believe their world is changing continue to freak out.
Went over your head, too, eh? Explain why it is 'false' as you say.TOLERANCENo. It's a ruling against rights and freedom.wonderful news for individual rights
The gov mandating by fascist decree that all people must acknowledge and acquiesce to irrelevant kinky sex between non-procreative adults is an infringement upon rights and freedom. Not even a religious thing. Just basic logic. Something that eludes most democrats and lefties.
Not acceptance.
Is it so hard to tolerate someone else? Must we all conform to a narrow template of morality? Who arbitrates this morality? Used to be Queen Victoria, but that was under the aegis of the throne in Great Britain. But in America?
The government is mandating that two consenting adults without a blood relationship may avail themselves of the benefits and protections of the marriage contract.
Why do you have a problem with that? Will same sex marriage ruin your marriage?
You are just a bigot whose world is shrinking. Tough.
Looks like my post went over your head, too. Tolerance means not interfering. Forced acquiescence is interference. Homos want to force their irrelevant behavior onto others. That is the opposite of tolerance.
False.
er... no.
er... Yes
so if someone is infertile they should have a different tax rate than someone who can have a child?
rightwingnuthackworld is funny
Where did that come from?
Do you actually read before insulting
Invitro or adoption are acceptable (see previous posts)
Good lord
So a gay or lesbian couple that uses adoption or invitro (egg and/or sperm donation) get's a lower tax rate for life right?
>>>>
Arghhhh, been addressed
Yes, if they raised a child they are supplying what is needed for the world to go on.
I cannot see any correlation between marriage equality and anyone force(ing) their irrelevant behavior onto others. Do heterosexual married couples 'force' their lives upon yours?TOLERANCENo. It's a ruling against rights and freedom.wonderful news for individual rights
The gov mandating by fascist decree that all people must acknowledge and acquiesce to irrelevant kinky sex between non-procreative adults is an infringement upon rights and freedom. Not even a religious thing. Just basic logic. Something that eludes most democrats and lefties.
Not acceptance.
Is it so hard to tolerate someone else? Must we all conform to a narrow template of morality? Who arbitrates this morality? Used to be Queen Victoria, but that was under the aegis of the throne in Great Britain. But in America?
The government is mandating that two consenting adults without a blood relationship may avail themselves of the benefits and protections of the marriage contract.
Why do you have a problem with that? Will same sex marriage ruin your marriage?
You are just a bigot whose world is shrinking. Tough.
Looks like my post went over your head, too. Tolerance means not interfering. Forced acquiescence is interference. Homos want to force their irrelevant behavior onto others. That is the opposite of tolerance.
er... Yes
so if someone is infertile they should have a different tax rate than someone who can have a child?
rightwingnuthackworld is funny
Where did that come from?
Do you actually read before insulting
Invitro or adoption are acceptable (see previous posts)
Good lord
So a gay or lesbian couple that uses adoption or invitro (egg and/or sperm donation) get's a lower tax rate for life right?
>>>>
Arghhhh, been addressed
Yes, if they raised a child they are supplying what is needed for the world to go on.
OK so the lifetime tax deduction is available to heterosexuals and homosexuals.
Is it based in the individual testing positive for fertility. In other words the government makes you go to the doctor have a test and submit the medical results?
Or is it based on performance?
Now for women it's pretty easy to determine performance, but for men - will they need to get a get a DNA test to prove that they qualify because they produced off spring or do we just go with the name on the birth certificate? So a woman can go out and screw around and the infertile Dad gets credit?
Share with us specifically how this brilliant idea is going to work?
>>>>
You haven't explained a single thing! Acting like you have and wishing it will all go away is a cop out.This has been explained continually, Rosh.
No more. You don't get "just once more."
It's over.
The Justices are waiting until after the elections to hear these cases. There is nothing stopping them from hearing them or similar cases later.
Picaro,
They didn't defer the cases - which means they would reexamine them at a later conference.
That precedent wasn't set in Hollingsworth v. Perry (Prop 8, 2013), the precedent was set in Loving v. Virginia (1967) - that decision overturned Virginia law, but if also overturned the Constitutional Amendment which put and interracial marriage ban in the Alabama Constitution. A duly voted on referendum.
When they create children they have. On those children by their mere existence and others in the sense that new people exist to affect society. Homos cannot create children therefore no need to involve the government or others.I cannot see any correlation between marriage equality and anyone force(ing) their irrelevant behavior onto others. Do heterosexual married couples 'force' their lives upon yours?TOLERANCENo. It's a ruling against rights and freedom.wonderful news for individual rights
The gov mandating by fascist decree that all people must acknowledge and acquiesce to irrelevant kinky sex between non-procreative adults is an infringement upon rights and freedom. Not even a religious thing. Just basic logic. Something that eludes most democrats and lefties.
Not acceptance.
Is it so hard to tolerate someone else? Must we all conform to a narrow template of morality? Who arbitrates this morality? Used to be Queen Victoria, but that was under the aegis of the throne in Great Britain. But in America?
The government is mandating that two consenting adults without a blood relationship may avail themselves of the benefits and protections of the marriage contract.
Why do you have a problem with that? Will same sex marriage ruin your marriage?
You are just a bigot whose world is shrinking. Tough.
Looks like my post went over your head, too. Tolerance means not interfering. Forced acquiescence is interference. Homos want to force their irrelevant behavior onto others. That is the opposite of tolerance.
