Gay Dallas Judge Won't Perform Straight Marriages

[bodecea]

We have way too many people who look for someone to whine to when they don't get their own way. Like this idiot judge. "We'll MAKE YOU do what we want". They have forced photographers to work for them, innkeepers to rent rooms in the B&B to them. Counselors to provide couples counseling. Everyonce in a while they need to fat NO shoved in their faces.

Loser bigot is loser

Yep....and I smell some serious issues on her part too.7

 

[bodecea]

We have way too many people who look for someone to whine to when they don't get their own way. Like this idiot judge. "We'll MAKE YOU do what we want". They have forced photographers to work for them, innkeepers to rent rooms in the B&B to them. Counselors to provide couples counseling. Everyonce in a while they need to fat NO shoved in their faces.

Loser bigot is loser

Then stop being a bigot. Simple solution.

You should take that advice. Seriously.

 

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,


1. So in conclusion, we have learned that Judges want to steer laws, they want to abandon there duty, and support the uncommon immorality they involve themselves with.
2. Homos are few, and judges want to have them equal to normal people.
3. A homo is not equal, they are perverted, anyone who has a brain knows that.
4. We have also learned that outlandish statements about said judges get more traction than trying to reason with unreasonable people.
5. The whole *Gang Rap* comments etc, were meant to show everyone should disdain what this judge is trying to forge, we won't have homos marrying here in Texas, not no, but hell no!!!!


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

 

[Peach]

I disagree. For one thing, wouldn't you rather know up front that some asshole isn't worthy of receiving your money, especially when he really doesn't want it?

Second, I believe these types of people would be quickly ran out of business when people stopped doing business with bigots. Others would choose NOT to be bigoted for their own bottom line.

But the businesses use PUBLIC resources; fire, police, water, waste disposal etc. PRIVATE clubs can allow whom they wish but public businesses must serve the PUBLIC.

Bad premise. Air is public therefore according to your logic nothing is private.

No, residences, private land, and private clubs are not required to "include" those they wish to prevent the entry thereof. I made the point that most businesses open to serve even a portion of the public use PUBLIC money in the form of fire, rescue, police, and utilities. One could argue that is covered by taxes paid, but then you might have a Muslim firefighter refuse to put out a fire in a business owned by those of the Jewish faith.

 

[Peach]

Sorry bout that,


1. So in conclusion, we have learned that Judges want to steer laws, they want to abandon there duty, and support the uncommon immorality they involve themselves with.
2. Homos are few, and judges want to have them equal to normal people.
3. A homo is not equal, they are perverted, anyone who has a brain knows that.
4. We have also learned that outlandish statements about said judges get more traction than trying to reason with unreasonable people.
5. The whole *Gang Rap* comments etc, were meant to show everyone should disdain what this judge is trying to forge, we won't have homos marrying here in Texas, not no, but hell no!!!!


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

As I support the right of same gender marriage, I disagree strongly with your assertions. Still, the Judge should have announced a PERSONAL reason for not marrying those allowed to marry under Texas law. She can just NOT perform the ceremonies.

 

[WorldWatcher]

But the businesses use PUBLIC resources; fire, police, water, waste disposal etc. PRIVATE clubs can allow whom they wish but public businesses must serve the PUBLIC.

Bad premise. Air is public therefore according to your logic nothing is private.

No, residences, private land, and private clubs are not required to "include" those they wish to prevent the entry thereof. I made the point that most businesses open to serve even a portion of the public use PUBLIC money in the form of fire, rescue, police, and utilities. One could argue that is covered by taxes paid, but then you might have a Muslim firefighter refuse to put out a fire in a business owned by those of the Jewish faith.

Comparing the function of private business to government entities isn't equivalent.

For the "Muslim Firefighter" to be equivalent to Public Accommodation laws applying to private businesses then the Muslim would have to be the owner of a Private Firefighting business who refused a Jewish customer from contracting for services. A professional firefighter hired a the government entity is acting in an official government capacity and not as a private business owner.


>>>>

 

[Peach]

Bad premise. Air is public therefore according to your logic nothing is private.

No, residences, private land, and private clubs are not required to "include" those they wish to prevent the entry thereof. I made the point that most businesses open to serve even a portion of the public use PUBLIC money in the form of fire, rescue, police, and utilities. One could argue that is covered by taxes paid, but then you might have a Muslim firefighter refuse to put out a fire in a business owned by those of the Jewish faith.

Comparing the function of private business to government entities isn't equivalent.

For the "Muslim Firefighter" to be equivalent to Public Accommodation laws applying to private businesses then the Muslim would have to be the owner of a Private Firefighting business who refused a Jewish customer from contracting for services. A professional firefighter hired a the government entity is acting in an official government capacity and not as a private business owner.


>>>>

Good point. Then as long as PRIVATE businesses pay extra for PUBLIC services, they can operate as they choose.

 

[Katzndogz]

Why should they pay extra? As punshment? Private businesses pay taxes just like everyone else and should be entitled to the very same protections as everyone else. We don't have two or three tier taxes where your taxes are determined by social behavior.

 

[Immanuel]

Why should they pay extra? As punshment? Private businesses pay taxes just like everyone else and should be entitled to the very same protections as everyone else. We don't have two or three tier taxes where your taxes are determined by social behavior.

Yes we do. It is called a "progressive" tax system.

Immie

 

[Peach]

Why should they pay extra? As punshment? Private businesses pay taxes just like everyone else and should be entitled to the very same protections as everyone else. We don't have two or three tier taxes where your taxes are determined by social behavior.

The businesses cited may use public resources for businesses that do not serve the PUBLIC. The "extra" fees may come in the form of operating licenses however. Still, for a club, which is what is being described, how can taxpayers of all stripes preclude THEIR money being spent on "businesses" which operate privately?

 

[WorldWatcher]

No, residences, private land, and private clubs are not required to "include" those they wish to prevent the entry thereof. I made the point that most businesses open to serve even a portion of the public use PUBLIC money in the form of fire, rescue, police, and utilities. One could argue that is covered by taxes paid, but then you might have a Muslim firefighter refuse to put out a fire in a business owned by those of the Jewish faith.

Comparing the function of private business to government entities isn't equivalent.

For the "Muslim Firefighter" to be equivalent to Public Accommodation laws applying to private businesses then the Muslim would have to be the owner of a Private Firefighting business who refused a Jewish customer from contracting for services. A professional firefighter hired a the government entity is acting in an official government capacity and not as a private business owner.


>>>>

Good point. Then as long as PRIVATE businesses pay extra for PUBLIC services, they can operate as they choose.

Private businesses already pay extra for public services through corporate tax rates, business licensing structures, and higher property taxes associated with commercial use of land then those for private residences.


>>>>

 

[WorldWatcher]

Why should they pay extra? As punshment? Private businesses pay taxes just like everyone else and should be entitled to the very same protections as everyone else. We don't have two or three tier taxes where your taxes are determined by social behavior.

Actually we do have multiple tax tiers based on social behavior. For example many tax laws are different depending on if you are Civilly Married or not and the decision to Civilly Marry or not is a personal choice (i.e. social behavior).


>>>>

 

[Katzndogz]

Why should they pay extra? As punshment? Private businesses pay taxes just like everyone else and should be entitled to the very same protections as everyone else. We don't have two or three tier taxes where your taxes are determined by social behavior.

Yes we do. It is called a "progressive" tax system.

Immie

A progressive tax system is based on revenues not on behavior. Following that logic, gay bathouses should pay triple tax because of the role they play in the spread of disease.

 

[bodecea]

Why should they pay extra? As punshment? Private businesses pay taxes just like everyone else and should be entitled to the very same protections as everyone else. We don't have two or three tier taxes where your taxes are determined by social behavior.

Yes we do. It is called a "progressive" tax system.

Immie

A progressive tax system is based on revenues not on behavior. Following that logic, gay bathouses should pay triple tax because of the role they play in the spread of disease.

SOOOOO 80s!

 

[Katzndogz]

Why should they pay extra? As punshment? Private businesses pay taxes just like everyone else and should be entitled to the very same protections as everyone else. We don't have two or three tier taxes where your taxes are determined by social behavior.

Actually we do have multiple tax tiers based on social behavior. For example many tax laws are different depending on if you are Civilly Married or not and the decision to Civilly Marry or not is a personal choice (i.e. social behavior).


>>>>

Oh you mean like the marriage PENALTY. Yes we should do away with that.

 

[Immanuel]

Why should they pay extra? As punshment? Private businesses pay taxes just like everyone else and should be entitled to the very same protections as everyone else. We don't have two or three tier taxes where your taxes are determined by social behavior.

Yes we do. It is called a "progressive" tax system.

Immie

A progressive tax system is based on revenues not on behavior. Following that logic, gay bathouses should pay triple tax because of the role they play in the spread of disease.

Our "progressive" tax system has "loopholes" built into it, that either reward or punish certain social behaviors i.e. as you mentioned in a later post the marriage penalty, also the child tax credit among others.

Immie

 

[WorldWatcher]

Why should they pay extra? As punshment? Private businesses pay taxes just like everyone else and should be entitled to the very same protections as everyone else. We don't have two or three tier taxes where your taxes are determined by social behavior.

Actually we do have multiple tax tiers based on social behavior. For example many tax laws are different depending on if you are Civilly Married or not and the decision to Civilly Marry or not is a personal choice (i.e. social behavior).


>>>>

Oh you mean like the marriage PENALTY. Yes we should do away with that.

The marriage tax penalty is not universal and typically impacts Civil Marriages where the spouses earn approximately the same amount. When there is a disparity between spousal incomes, there can actually be a tax benefit resulting in a lower tax rate for being married then for two singles.

However I was actually thinking more along the lines of IRS Tax code that allows for:

* transfer or property to a spouse tax free which for other individuals would be counted and taxed as income,

* No inheritance taxes upon the death of a spouse.

* And specific exemptions applicable only to someone considered "married". For example there is a $250,000 exemption on profit on the sale of a home. Married couples can claim $500,000 (which makes sense since there are two people). However a widow/widower (someone who is legally single) can still claim the $500,000 exemption for up to 2-years for the sale of a home after the death of a spouse.

* Then there is the situation applicable to certain legally married couples, where for some, the employer portion of health insurance is not charged as income. However for other legally married couples, if the spouse is on their insurance policy then the employee is charged a tax on the employer portion of the benefit because it is treated as employee income.​

Again, different tax liabilities based on social behavior (deciding to get Civilly Married). But I do agree, tax code should be structured to eliminate the Income Tax penalty for being married when it results in higher taxes.


>>>>

 

[Katzndogz]

The answer is to get rid of these taxes, not accommodate perversion.

 

[WorldWatcher]

The answer is to get rid of these taxes, not accommodate perversion.

What does a heterosexual male transferring property to his wife have to do with perversion?

What does a heterosexual male inheriting the property in total that he built up over a life with his wife after she dies have to do with perversion?

What does a widow selling a home after the death of her husband after his death have to do with perversion?


Those were examples of differences in tax code based on behavior of heterosexuals. Ya, run for office on the idea that those items should be eliminated from the tax code because heterosexual are perverts. I'm sure that will be a winning ticket.


>>>>

 

[Katzndogz]

The answer is to get rid of these taxes, not accommodate perversion.

What does a heterosexual male transferring property to his wife have to do with perversion?

What does a heterosexual male inheriting the property in total that he built up over a life with his wife after she dies have to do with perversion?

What does a widow selling a home after the death of her husband after his death have to do with perversion?


Those were examples of differences in tax code based on behavior of heterosexuals. Ya, run for office on the idea that those items should be eliminated from the tax code because heterosexual are perverts. I'm sure that will be a winning ticket.


>>>>

Then you are not using these examples as support for same sex marriage. My mistake.