Law professor: Slippery slope to legal incest and polygamy

[g5000]

You demand the things like steep progressive and death taxes, and then you whine about not being exempt from them while you want to screw single people with them. If our government wasn't so discriminatory, in things you support, then it would be irrelevant.

My sympathy for you not getting any of those things is zero. It's your own trap.

Nope, just treat my legal marriage exactly like your legal marriage is treated. Not a difficult concept. You should be able to grasp it.

Not the same.

You want progressive taxes, I don't. If taxes were flat, there would be no tax break for marriage. You want the death tax, I don't. If there were no death tax for anyone, there would be no death tax break for marriage.

I want a break from YOUR taxes. YOU want a break from YOUR taxes. In no way is that the same. What you are doing and I'm not there is a word for. H-Y-P-O-C-R-I-S-Y.

Pay your taxes, or remove them for everyone. Don't just exempt yourself. Hypocrite.

Straight married people have demanded and been receiving cash and prizes for nearly a century, not gays.

If there were no tax breaks for marriages, then would not same sex marriages be treated identically to opposite sex marriages?

Indeed they would!

Thus Seawytch's desire is not invalidated by your desires whatsoever.

You pretend your desire is to eliminate tax breaks for married people, but you are really angry at gay people.

Since straight married people currently get tax breaks, she wants the same tax breaks for gay married people. If the cash and prizes went away for straight married people, she would want the same thing for gay married people.

Neither situation exists. Gay marriages are treated differently.

Like she said, it is not hard to grasp, if you really want to grasp it.

 

[NYcarbineer]

and thats just fine. but thats not the real agenda of the gay left. they want the govt to force the rest of us to agree that gay marriage is a normal and totally acceptable alternative lifestyle that can be chosen by kids as they reach puberty.

homosexuality is NOT a normal human condition. whether it is genetic of environmental is subject to debate, but its not normal and equal to heterosexuality. Therefore, a gay union should never be called a marriage. To do so, opens the legal door to all forms of couplings and groupings.

What makes homosexuality abnormal? Percentages? Like people with blue eyes, or people who are lefthanded? Or people who choose to be celibate? Or people who get surgeries to prevent them from fathering children or conceiving?

What is the abnormality of choosing a non-reproductive sexual orientation, if in fact it's a choice?

How many children does a human have to have before he or she becomes 'normal'?

biology 101 wytchey. every species has males and females. they get together to reproduce so their species will continue. Thats the way God or nature designed it.

having 9 fingers or being homosexual are aberations of the human condition, flaws, deformities, abnormalities.

I accept that you had no choice, but neither did the guy born with 9 fingers. Neither of you are normal. But we accept you as fellow human beings.

Every species has males and females, and no species needs every one of its individual members to reproduce in order to survive.

Therefore, non-reproductive members of any species are not abnormal.

So you think blue eyes are an aberration that makes someone abnormal. lol, you're an idiot.

 

[Redfish]

and thats just fine. but thats not the real agenda of the gay left. they want the govt to force the rest of us to agree that gay marriage is a normal and totally acceptable alternative lifestyle that can be chosen by kids as they reach puberty.

homosexuality is NOT a normal human condition. whether it is genetic of environmental is subject to debate, but its not normal and equal to heterosexuality. Therefore, a gay union should never be called a marriage. To do so, opens the legal door to all forms of couplings and groupings.

The gay agenda is not to teach that being gay is normal. They want to teach that being gay is not wrong.

Huge difference.

And you clearly don't like it. You want homosexuality to be considered wrong. When you boil away all the nonsense and logical fallacies behind the objections to same sex marriages, that's all you have left. "God hates fags".

You do not understand the gay agenda----it IS about teaching that being gay is as normal as being straight.

I fully support gays in committed civil unions having equal rights and tax breaks equal to married couples. But thats not what they are really after.

Listen to them carefully------they want the government to mandate how we THINK about gays, they want the government to countermand the teachings of religions regarding homosexuality. Its not about equality and acceptance, its about mind control.

 

[g5000]

What makes homosexuality abnormal? Percentages? Like people with blue eyes, or people who are lefthanded? Or people who choose to be celibate? Or people who get surgeries to prevent them from fathering children or conceiving?

What is the abnormality of choosing a non-reproductive sexual orientation, if in fact it's a choice?

How many children does a human have to have before he or she becomes 'normal'?

biology 101 wytchey. every species has males and females. they get together to reproduce so their species will continue. Thats the way God or nature designed it.

having 9 fingers or being homosexual are aberations of the human condition, flaws, deformities, abnormalities.

I accept that you had no choice, but neither did the guy born with 9 fingers. Neither of you are normal. But we accept you as fellow human beings.

Every species has males and females, and no species needs every one of its individual members to reproduce in order to survive.

Therefore, non-reproductive members of any species are not abnormal.

So you think blue eyes are an aberration that makes someone abnormal. lol, you're an idiot.

The only idiots here are the ones who are conflating abnormal with immoral action.

They just can't off the whole God-hates-fags thing. That is what is driving every anti-gay rhetorical argument. A hatred of gays, nothing more. Saying gays are "abnormal" is a very weak cover.

 

[NYcarbineer]

and thats just fine. but thats not the real agenda of the gay left. they want the govt to force the rest of us to agree that gay marriage is a normal and totally acceptable alternative lifestyle that can be chosen by kids as they reach puberty.

homosexuality is NOT a normal human condition. whether it is genetic of environmental is subject to debate, but its not normal and equal to heterosexuality. Therefore, a gay union should never be called a marriage. To do so, opens the legal door to all forms of couplings and groupings.

What makes homosexuality abnormal? Percentages? Like people with blue eyes, or people who are lefthanded? Or people who choose to be celibate? Or people who get surgeries to prevent them from fathering children or conceiving?

What is the abnormality of choosing a non-reproductive sexual orientation, if in fact it's a choice?

How many children does a human have to have before he or she becomes 'normal'?

biology 101 wytchey. every species has males and females. they get together to reproduce so their species will continue. Thats the way God or nature designed it.

having 9 fingers or being homosexual are aberations of the human condition, flaws, deformities, abnormalities.

I accept that you had no choice, but neither did the guy born with 9 fingers. Neither of you are normal. But we accept you as fellow human beings.

You didn't tell us, how many children does a human have to have in order to qualify as normal?

 

[Redfish]

What makes homosexuality abnormal? Percentages? Like people with blue eyes, or people who are lefthanded? Or people who choose to be celibate? Or people who get surgeries to prevent them from fathering children or conceiving?

What is the abnormality of choosing a non-reproductive sexual orientation, if in fact it's a choice?

How many children does a human have to have before he or she becomes 'normal'?

biology 101 wytchey. every species has males and females. they get together to reproduce so their species will continue. Thats the way God or nature designed it.

having 9 fingers or being homosexual are aberations of the human condition, flaws, deformities, abnormalities.

I accept that you had no choice, but neither did the guy born with 9 fingers. Neither of you are normal. But we accept you as fellow human beings.

Every species has males and females, and no species needs every one of its individual members to reproduce in order to survive.

Therefore, non-reproductive members of any species are not abnormal.

So you think blue eyes are an aberration that makes someone abnormal. lol, you're an idiot.

trying to equate eye color with homosexuality makes you an idiot, carbonpaper. Misquoting me makes you more of an idiot. I never said that all members of a species had to reproduce, I never said that the ones who do not reproduce are abnormal, but since you mention it, if you have a bull that is not interested in the cows you might consider him abnormal.

 

[Redfish]

What makes homosexuality abnormal? Percentages? Like people with blue eyes, or people who are lefthanded? Or people who choose to be celibate? Or people who get surgeries to prevent them from fathering children or conceiving?

What is the abnormality of choosing a non-reproductive sexual orientation, if in fact it's a choice?

How many children does a human have to have before he or she becomes 'normal'?

biology 101 wytchey. every species has males and females. they get together to reproduce so their species will continue. Thats the way God or nature designed it.

having 9 fingers or being homosexual are aberations of the human condition, flaws, deformities, abnormalities.

I accept that you had no choice, but neither did the guy born with 9 fingers. Neither of you are normal. But we accept you as fellow human beings.

You didn't tell us, how many children does a human have to have in order to qualify as normal?

None, when did anyone say that a number of children was required for normalcy?

you and wytchey can really make up some shit to try to justify your illogical stand on this.

 

[kaz]

Nope, just treat my legal marriage exactly like your legal marriage is treated. Not a difficult concept. You should be able to grasp it.

Not the same.

You want progressive taxes, I don't. If taxes were flat, there would be no tax break for marriage. You want the death tax, I don't. If there were no death tax for anyone, there would be no death tax break for marriage.

I want a break from YOUR taxes. YOU want a break from YOUR taxes. In no way is that the same. What you are doing and I'm not there is a word for. H-Y-P-O-C-R-I-S-Y.

Pay your taxes, or remove them for everyone. Don't just exempt yourself. Hypocrite.

Straight married people have demanded and been receiving cash and prizes for nearly a century, not gays.

If there were no tax breaks for marriages, then would not same sex marriages be treated identically to opposite sex marriages?

Indeed they would!

Thus Seawytch's desire is not invalidated by your desires whatsoever.

You pretend your desire is to eliminate tax breaks for married people, but you are really angry at gay people.

Since straight married people currently get tax breaks, she wants the same tax breaks for gay married people. If the cash and prizes went away for straight married people, she would want the same thing for gay married people.

Neither situation exists. Gay marriages are treated differently.

Like she said, it is not hard to grasp, if you really want to grasp it.

If it's not hard to grasp, why didn't you address my points?

As for my being "angry," don't go into psychology, you suck at it.

 

[g5000]

Not the same.

You want progressive taxes, I don't. If taxes were flat, there would be no tax break for marriage. You want the death tax, I don't. If there were no death tax for anyone, there would be no death tax break for marriage.

I want a break from YOUR taxes. YOU want a break from YOUR taxes. In no way is that the same. What you are doing and I'm not there is a word for. H-Y-P-O-C-R-I-S-Y.

Pay your taxes, or remove them for everyone. Don't just exempt yourself. Hypocrite.

Straight married people have demanded and been receiving cash and prizes for nearly a century, not gays.

If there were no tax breaks for marriages, then would not same sex marriages be treated identically to opposite sex marriages?

Indeed they would!

Thus Seawytch's desire is not invalidated by your desires whatsoever.

You pretend your desire is to eliminate tax breaks for married people, but you are really angry at gay people.

Since straight married people currently get tax breaks, she wants the same tax breaks for gay married people. If the cash and prizes went away for straight married people, she would want the same thing for gay married people.

Neither situation exists. Gay marriages are treated differently.

Like she said, it is not hard to grasp, if you really want to grasp it.

If it's not hard to grasp, why didn't you address my points?

As for my bing "angry," don't go into psychology, you suck at it.

I did address your points. You just completely missed hers.

I also happen to be very much in favor of eliminating tax breaks. Not just for marriage, but for everyone. I've even started a topic or two about it. Here's one: http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/263551-the-way-forward-end-tax-expenditures.html

But as long as we are handing out cash and prizes to married people, we should not be excluding gay marriages just because some people have an irrational hatred of fags.

 

[Redfish]

biology 101 wytchey. every species has males and females. they get together to reproduce so their species will continue. Thats the way God or nature designed it.

having 9 fingers or being homosexual are aberations of the human condition, flaws, deformities, abnormalities.

I accept that you had no choice, but neither did the guy born with 9 fingers. Neither of you are normal. But we accept you as fellow human beings.

Every species has males and females, and no species needs every one of its individual members to reproduce in order to survive.

Therefore, non-reproductive members of any species are not abnormal.

So you think blue eyes are an aberration that makes someone abnormal. lol, you're an idiot.

The only idiots here are the ones who are conflating abnormal with immoral action.

They just can't off the whole God-hates-fags thing. That is what is driving every anti-gay rhetorical argument. A hatred of gays, nothing more. Saying gays are "abnormal" is a very weak cover.

they are abnormal, but I don't hate them. please quote when any conservative in this debate said they hated gays.

but thats typical of you liberals, when you are losing the argument on the facts, hurl in some lies and insults.

 

[kaz]

Straight married people have demanded and been receiving cash and prizes for nearly a century, not gays.

If there were no tax breaks for marriages, then would not same sex marriages be treated identically to opposite sex marriages?

Indeed they would!

Thus Seawytch's desire is not invalidated by your desires whatsoever.

You pretend your desire is to eliminate tax breaks for married people, but you are really angry at gay people.

Since straight married people currently get tax breaks, she wants the same tax breaks for gay married people. If the cash and prizes went away for straight married people, she would want the same thing for gay married people.

Neither situation exists. Gay marriages are treated differently.

Like she said, it is not hard to grasp, if you really want to grasp it.

If it's not hard to grasp, why didn't you address my points?

As for my bing "angry," don't go into psychology, you suck at it.

I did address your points. You just completely missed hers.

I also happen to be very much in favor of eliminating tax breaks. Not just for marriage, but for everyone. I've even started a topic or two about it. Here's one: http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/263551-the-way-forward-end-tax-expenditures.html

But as long as we are handing out cash and prizes to married people, we should not be excluding gay marriages just because someone hate fags.

I highlighted in red my point, which you did not address so you could find it easily. She wants those taxes, not me. Why should she then be exempt from paying them?

 

[g5000]

Every species has males and females, and no species needs every one of its individual members to reproduce in order to survive.

Therefore, non-reproductive members of any species are not abnormal.

So you think blue eyes are an aberration that makes someone abnormal. lol, you're an idiot.

The only idiots here are the ones who are conflating abnormal with immoral action.

They just can't off the whole God-hates-fags thing. That is what is driving every anti-gay rhetorical argument. A hatred of gays, nothing more. Saying gays are "abnormal" is a very weak cover.

they are abnormal, but I don't hate them. please quote when any conservative in this debate said they hated gays.

but thats typical of you liberals, when you are losing the argument on the facts, hurl in some lies and insults.

First, I am not a liberal.

Second, by calling someone "abnormal" as an argument to treat gays differently than everyone else, one avoids having to be honest and say they hate fags. That's my point. It's a weak cover that does not fool anyone.

What does abnormality have to do with whether one should receive the same tax break as everyone else? It doesn't. So you see, it is a weak cover. People who use the "abnormal" argument really mean to say fags are immoral. They just don't have the guts to say it.

You must prove the abnormality is harmful in order to exclude someone from the cash and prizes you hand out to others.

And did you really ask for evidence that someone here hates gays? Seriously?

 

[g5000]

Here's a hater right here!

Well the homos have a problem. Until the 1970s homosexuality was classed as a disease. It changed only because the fags took over a meeting of the AMA and threatened everyone. So it's not a disease, it's a choice.

False dichotomy: One is either diseased or makes a choice to be gay.

Horrible, horrible illogic.

But if it's a choice, then they can choose not to do it. So why don't they?

And there's the tell! Why should they choose "not to do it"?

Hmmm...

Could it be because being gay is...wrong?

God hates fags, amiright?

 

[Redfish]

The only idiots here are the ones who are conflating abnormal with immoral action.

They just can't off the whole God-hates-fags thing. That is what is driving every anti-gay rhetorical argument. A hatred of gays, nothing more. Saying gays are "abnormal" is a very weak cover.

they are abnormal, but I don't hate them. please quote when any conservative in this debate said they hated gays.

but thats typical of you liberals, when you are losing the argument on the facts, hurl in some lies and insults.

First, I am not a liberal.

Second, by calling someone "abnormal" as an argument to treat gays differently than everyone else, one avoids having to be honest and say they hate fags. That's my point. It's a weak cover that does not fool anyone.

What does abnormality have to do with whether one should receive the same tax break as everyone else? It doesn't. So you see, it is a weak cover. People who use the "abnormal" argument really mean to say fags are immoral. They just don't have the guts to say it.

You must prove the abnormality is harmful in order to exclude someone from the cash and prizes you hand out to others.

And did you really ask for evidence that someone here hates gays? Seriously?

abnormal is not an insult or a hateful word. I have stated my position on this clearly and consistently. I do not want to exclude anyone from equal treatment under the law, no one!

what I believe would be harmful to our society would be if children were taught that being straight or gay was simply a choice and that the two were equally acceptable lifestyles. Make no mistake, thats exactly what the gay rights people are after.

Yes, there are some haters, but they are a tiny minority.

 

[g5000]

abnormal is not an insult or a hateful word.

In the context it has been used on the subject of homosexuality, it most certainly is.

I have stated my position on this clearly and consistently. I do not want to exclude anyone from equal treatment under the law, no one!

I believe you, but I don't think you understand just how much gays are currently being treated unequally.

what I believe would be harmful to our society would be if children were taught that being straight or gay was simply a choice and that the two were equally acceptable lifestyles. Make no mistake, thats exactly what the gay rights people are after.

This is a plain argument that being gay is wrong. It cannot be interpreted any other way. You are clearly saying being gay is NOT an acceptable lifestyle since you are opposed to the proposition that it is.

And, sorry, but gays do not believe being straight or gay is simply a choice. That is not what gays are after. Only ignorant bigots, like Rabbi, make that argument. That's like saying one chooses to like or dislike asparagus.

 

[NYcarbineer]

biology 101 wytchey. every species has males and females. they get together to reproduce so their species will continue. Thats the way God or nature designed it.

having 9 fingers or being homosexual are aberations of the human condition, flaws, deformities, abnormalities.

I accept that you had no choice, but neither did the guy born with 9 fingers. Neither of you are normal. But we accept you as fellow human beings.

You didn't tell us, how many children does a human have to have in order to qualify as normal?

None, when did anyone say that a number of children was required for normalcy?

you and wytchey can really make up some shit to try to justify your illogical stand on this.

You said it right here:

every species has males and females. they get together to reproduce so their species will continue. Thats the way God or nature designed it.

You defined 'normal' as male and female getting together and reproducing.

THEREFORE...by your own definition, the males and females who don't reproduce are 'abnormal'.

So the question to you, AGAIN, is, how many children must a human have (or how much reproduction must a human do, since that's how you measure normalcy)

in order to qualify as normal?

 

[Seawytch]

You demand the things like steep progressive and death taxes, and then you whine about not being exempt from them while you want to screw single people with them. If our government wasn't so discriminatory, in things you support, then it would be irrelevant.

My sympathy for you not getting any of those things is zero. It's your own trap.

Nope, just treat my legal marriage exactly like your legal marriage is treated. Not a difficult concept. You should be able to grasp it.

Not the same.

You want progressive taxes, I don't. If taxes were flat, there would be no tax break for marriage. You want the death tax, I don't. If there were no death tax for anyone, there would be no death tax break for marriage.

I want a break from YOUR taxes. YOU want a break from YOUR taxes. In no way is that the same. What you are doing and I'm not there is a word for. H-Y-P-O-C-R-I-S-Y.

Pay your taxes, or remove them for everyone. Don't just exempt yourself. Hypocrite.

I love the legally married guy calling me a hypocrite. Too funny.

What you're missing is that regardless of our tax system, my legal marriage should be treated exactly like your legal marriage.

 

[Redfish]

You didn't tell us, how many children does a human have to have in order to qualify as normal?

None, when did anyone say that a number of children was required for normalcy?

you and wytchey can really make up some shit to try to justify your illogical stand on this.

You said it right here:

every species has males and females. they get together to reproduce so their species will continue. Thats the way God or nature designed it.

You defined 'normal' as male and female getting together and reproducing.

THEREFORE...by your own definition, the males and females who don't reproduce are 'abnormal'.

So the question to you, AGAIN, is, how many children must a human have (or how much reproduction must a human do, since that's how you measure normalcy)

in order to qualify as normal?

faulty logic on your part results in a faulty conclusion. I never said or implied that one had to reproduce to be sexually normal.

 

[Redfish]

Nope, just treat my legal marriage exactly like your legal marriage is treated. Not a difficult concept. You should be able to grasp it.

Not the same.

You want progressive taxes, I don't. If taxes were flat, there would be no tax break for marriage. You want the death tax, I don't. If there were no death tax for anyone, there would be no death tax break for marriage.

I want a break from YOUR taxes. YOU want a break from YOUR taxes. In no way is that the same. What you are doing and I'm not there is a word for. H-Y-P-O-C-R-I-S-Y.

Pay your taxes, or remove them for everyone. Don't just exempt yourself. Hypocrite.

I love the legally married guy calling me a hypocrite. Too funny.

What you're missing is that regardless of our tax system, my legal marriage should be treated exactly like your legal marriage.

then what will you tell abdul and his 5 wives? what will you tell jim/tom/marie/jane? what will you tell the father/son who want to marry to avoid inheritance taxes?

this thead is about what your "marriage" will lead to.

face reality, if gay marriage is legally sanctioned by SCOTUS then all forms of marriage must logically also be declared legal.

 

[Seawytch]

If it's not hard to grasp, why didn't you address my points?

As for my bing "angry," don't go into psychology, you suck at it.

I did address your points. You just completely missed hers.

I also happen to be very much in favor of eliminating tax breaks. Not just for marriage, but for everyone. I've even started a topic or two about it. Here's one: http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/263551-the-way-forward-end-tax-expenditures.html

But as long as we are handing out cash and prizes to married people, we should not be excluding gay marriages just because someone hate fags.

I highlighted in red my point, which you did not address so you could find it easily. She wants those taxes, not me. Why should she then be exempt from paying them?

Because, like you, I'm legally married. As long as you're exempt I am. Good luck getting it changed, but in the mean time, I'll get the same breaks you do.