Why should other taxpayers have to subsidize gay mating?

[mdk]

If you want the government out marriage then I suggest you decline all those cushy tax breaks you get. Lead by example; then again, whining about it all the while chomping at the trough is far easier for you.

Sorry I made you cry man, it's just a discussion. Here's a hanky.

So do you suggest people opposed to the mob send them money by choice to exress their dissatisfaction with the mob's tactics as well? What a retarded statement

Make me cry? lol. Don't flatter yourself mate. You made a silly assumption about me but you're far too proud to admit it.

You clearly want to whine about the government being in marriage all the while enjoying the tax breaks you decry. Put your money where your mouth is crybaby.

 

[kaz]

If you want the government out marriage then I suggest you decline all those cushy tax breaks you get. Lead by example; then again, whining about it all the while chomping at the trough is far easier for you.

Sorry I made you cry man, it's just a discussion. Here's a hanky.

So do you suggest people opposed to the mob send them money by choice to exress their dissatisfaction with the mob's tactics as well? What a retarded statement

Make me cry? lol. Don't flatter yourself mate. You made a silly assumption about me but you're far too proud to admit it.

What an idiot. You told me how I feel, I was mocking you. How did you not get that? Let's talk facts and leave the psychoanalysis of each other's feelings behind. You obviously have zero idea how I feel. OK, Darlene?

You clearly want to whine about the government being in marriage all the while enjoying the tax breaks you decry. Put your money where your mouth is crybaby.

Oh, the tears again. It's hard to hear over your gasping sobs. Go play with your dolls for a while, come back when you calm down

 

[mdk]

If you want the government out marriage then I suggest you decline all those cushy tax breaks you get. Lead by example; then again, whining about it all the while chomping at the trough is far easier for you.

Sorry I made you cry man, it's just a discussion. Here's a hanky.

So do you suggest people opposed to the mob send them money by choice to exress their dissatisfaction with the mob's tactics as well? What a retarded statement

Make me cry? lol. Don't flatter yourself mate. You made a silly assumption about me but you're far too proud to admit it.

What an idiot. You told me how I feel, I was mocking you. How did you not get that? Let's talk facts and leave the psychoanalysis of each other's feelings behind. You obviously have zero idea how I feel. OK, Darlene?

You clearly want to whine about the government being in marriage all the while enjoying the tax breaks you decry. Put your money where your mouth is crybaby.

Oh, the tears again. It's hard to hear over your gasping sobs. Go play with your dolls for a while, come back when you calm down

Exposing your whiny hypocrisy wasn't all that hard. You're all for getting the gov't out of marriage but don't want to give up any of the perks you get. The only thing it seems you're willing to do concerning this issue is bitch and complain.

 

[kaz]

If you want the government out marriage then I suggest you decline all those cushy tax breaks you get. Lead by example; then again, whining about it all the while chomping at the trough is far easier for you.

Sorry I made you cry man, it's just a discussion. Here's a hanky.

So do you suggest people opposed to the mob send them money by choice to exress their dissatisfaction with the mob's tactics as well? What a retarded statement

Make me cry? lol. Don't flatter yourself mate. You made a silly assumption about me but you're far too proud to admit it.

What an idiot. You told me how I feel, I was mocking you. How did you not get that? Let's talk facts and leave the psychoanalysis of each other's feelings behind. You obviously have zero idea how I feel. OK, Darlene?

You clearly want to whine about the government being in marriage all the while enjoying the tax breaks you decry. Put your money where your mouth is crybaby.

Oh, the tears again. It's hard to hear over your gasping sobs. Go play with your dolls for a while, come back when you calm down

Exposing your whiny hypocrisy wasn't all that hard. You're all for getting the gov't out of marriage but don't want to give up any of the perks you get. The only thing it seems you're willing to do concerning this issue is bitch and complain.

That you can't stay away from discussing emotions besides indicating you're a chick shows that even you know your argument sucks. If you were confident, you'd want to nail me for my actual positions. Either that or you're just too girl to not focus on emotions. If you ever want to actually discuss the topic though, let me know, Darlene

 

[NYcarbineer]

If you want the government out marriage then I suggest you decline all those cushy tax breaks you get. Lead by example; then again, whining about it all the while chomping at the trough is far easier for you.

Sorry I made you cry man, it's just a discussion. Here's a hanky.

So do you suggest people opposed to the mob send them money by choice to exress their dissatisfaction with the mob's tactics as well? What a retarded statement

Make me cry? lol. Don't flatter yourself mate. You made a silly assumption about me but you're far too proud to admit it.

What an idiot. You told me how I feel, I was mocking you. How did you not get that? Let's talk facts and leave the psychoanalysis of each other's feelings behind. You obviously have zero idea how I feel. OK, Darlene?

You clearly want to whine about the government being in marriage all the while enjoying the tax breaks you decry. Put your money where your mouth is crybaby.

Oh, the tears again. It's hard to hear over your gasping sobs. Go play with your dolls for a while, come back when you calm down

Exposing your whiny hypocrisy wasn't all that hard. You're all for getting the gov't out of marriage but don't want to give up any of the perks you get. The only thing it seems you're willing to do concerning this issue is bitch and complain.

That you can't stay away from discussing emotions besides indicating you're a chick shows that even you know your argument sucks. If you were confident, you'd want to nail me for my actual positions. Either that or you're just too girl to not focus on emotions. If you ever want to actually discuss the topic though, let me know, Darlene

There is nothing but rubble left where your actual positions once were.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Support from anti gay bigots and more click worthy...

Actually, slut, you want married gays to pay less tax than unmarried gays, but more if the unmarried gays have children, but less than married straights who have children, who should pay more if they don't have children.

I want everyone to pay the same rate. Which according to you between promiscuous romps in the sack with random strangers you get online and call bigotry. That I want everyone treated the same and you want everyone treated differently. I'm the bigot.

What an argument. For an idiot.

Except that's not how you framed your OP. You took a decided anti gay position, bigot.

The point is to frame it in the context of your leftist agenda, slut

If it was, you wouldn't have singled out gays and would have made it a rant against all liberals and their support for a progressive tax system.

You made it only about gays...like a good little bigot who needs other bigots to validate him.

Gays are the leftist agenda I am referring to, you ignorant slut

You know you're talking to a RWnut when you're told that equal rights are a 'gay agenda', with 'agenda' used as pejorative.

 

[kaz]

Sorry I made you cry man, it's just a discussion. Here's a hanky.

So do you suggest people opposed to the mob send them money by choice to exress their dissatisfaction with the mob's tactics as well? What a retarded statement

Make me cry? lol. Don't flatter yourself mate. You made a silly assumption about me but you're far too proud to admit it.

What an idiot. You told me how I feel, I was mocking you. How did you not get that? Let's talk facts and leave the psychoanalysis of each other's feelings behind. You obviously have zero idea how I feel. OK, Darlene?

You clearly want to whine about the government being in marriage all the while enjoying the tax breaks you decry. Put your money where your mouth is crybaby.

Oh, the tears again. It's hard to hear over your gasping sobs. Go play with your dolls for a while, come back when you calm down

Exposing your whiny hypocrisy wasn't all that hard. You're all for getting the gov't out of marriage but don't want to give up any of the perks you get. The only thing it seems you're willing to do concerning this issue is bitch and complain.

That you can't stay away from discussing emotions besides indicating you're a chick shows that even you know your argument sucks. If you were confident, you'd want to nail me for my actual positions. Either that or you're just too girl to not focus on emotions. If you ever want to actually discuss the topic though, let me know, Darlene

There is nothing but rubble left where your actual positions once were.

You don't even know what my position is? What is the point of this thread? I've said it dozens of times. You've been a constant in the thread. You don't have to agree with my point, just accurately state it. You aren't capable of it, are you?

 

[NYcarbineer]

It's always fun to hear RWnuts argue in defense of an issue they secretly know they've lost on.

 

[kaz]

Actually, slut, you want married gays to pay less tax than unmarried gays, but more if the unmarried gays have children, but less than married straights who have children, who should pay more if they don't have children.

I want everyone to pay the same rate. Which according to you between promiscuous romps in the sack with random strangers you get online and call bigotry. That I want everyone treated the same and you want everyone treated differently. I'm the bigot.

What an argument. For an idiot.

Except that's not how you framed your OP. You took a decided anti gay position, bigot.

The point is to frame it in the context of your leftist agenda, slut

If it was, you wouldn't have singled out gays and would have made it a rant against all liberals and their support for a progressive tax system.

You made it only about gays...like a good little bigot who needs other bigots to validate him.

Gays are the leftist agenda I am referring to, you ignorant slut

You know you're talking to a RWnut when you're told that equal rights are a 'gay agenda', with 'agenda' used as pejorative.

Exactly the point I constantly make. You are so vacuously stupid that you can only conceive of Republicans and Democrats, so not one is the other. You make that crystal clear here. Well, that wasn't left, ergo you are a right winger.

Democrats fighting for "equal rights" is never equal. You want more than equal. Affirmative action, you automatically blame white cops versus blacks without waiting for any facts. You want to punish businesses and employers and the rich, not just give employees and the poor a fair chance. Wanting to skip democracy and go to tyrannical courts to decree what no one else has, same sex marriage, is just the tip of the iceberg

 

[NYcarbineer]

Make me cry? lol. Don't flatter yourself mate. You made a silly assumption about me but you're far too proud to admit it.

What an idiot. You told me how I feel, I was mocking you. How did you not get that? Let's talk facts and leave the psychoanalysis of each other's feelings behind. You obviously have zero idea how I feel. OK, Darlene?

You clearly want to whine about the government being in marriage all the while enjoying the tax breaks you decry. Put your money where your mouth is crybaby.

Oh, the tears again. It's hard to hear over your gasping sobs. Go play with your dolls for a while, come back when you calm down

Exposing your whiny hypocrisy wasn't all that hard. You're all for getting the gov't out of marriage but don't want to give up any of the perks you get. The only thing it seems you're willing to do concerning this issue is bitch and complain.

That you can't stay away from discussing emotions besides indicating you're a chick shows that even you know your argument sucks. If you were confident, you'd want to nail me for my actual positions. Either that or you're just too girl to not focus on emotions. If you ever want to actually discuss the topic though, let me know, Darlene

There is nothing but rubble left where your actual positions once were.

You don't even know what my position is? What is the point of this thread? I've said it dozens of times. You've been a constant in the thread. You don't have to agree with my point, just accurately state it. You aren't capable of it, are you?

I've already proved you dead wrong on every aspect of your position.

What's hilarious is that you honestly think I have to make you say 'uncle'.

Denial that you've lost the argument is nothing more than the weeping noise of a sore loser.

And a sore loser is nothing more than a pathetic version of a loser.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Except that's not how you framed your OP. You took a decided anti gay position, bigot.

The point is to frame it in the context of your leftist agenda, slut

If it was, you wouldn't have singled out gays and would have made it a rant against all liberals and their support for a progressive tax system.

You made it only about gays...like a good little bigot who needs other bigots to validate him.

Gays are the leftist agenda I am referring to, you ignorant slut

You know you're talking to a RWnut when you're told that equal rights are a 'gay agenda', with 'agenda' used as pejorative.

Exactly the point I constantly make. You are so vacuously stupid that you can only conceive of Republicans and Democrats, so not one is the other. You make that crystal clear here. Well, that wasn't left, ergo you are a right winger.

Democrats fighting for "equal rights" is never equal. You want more than equal. Affirmative action, you automatically blame white cops versus blacks without waiting for any facts. You want to punish businesses and employers and the rich, not just give employees and the poor a fair chance. Wanting to skip democracy and go to tyrannical courts to decree what no one else has, same sex marriage, is just the tip of the iceberg

Mostly 'we' want to make the country better by reaching the day we see the last of people like you.

 

[kaz]

It's always fun to hear RWnuts argue in defense of an issue they secretly know they've lost on.

Wow, Spanky has a word of the day. RW. What's ironic is that in your stupidity needing to use talking points already created by the Democratic party for you since you think of your own, you call me an RW when in reality I am far worse than that. They only want to slow down your authoritarian leftism, I would crush you. You'd be earning your own living and paying your own bills. Right wingers just want to trim your government checks a bit

 

[kaz]

What an idiot. You told me how I feel, I was mocking you. How did you not get that? Let's talk facts and leave the psychoanalysis of each other's feelings behind. You obviously have zero idea how I feel. OK, Darlene?

Oh, the tears again. It's hard to hear over your gasping sobs. Go play with your dolls for a while, come back when you calm down

Exposing your whiny hypocrisy wasn't all that hard. You're all for getting the gov't out of marriage but don't want to give up any of the perks you get. The only thing it seems you're willing to do concerning this issue is bitch and complain.

That you can't stay away from discussing emotions besides indicating you're a chick shows that even you know your argument sucks. If you were confident, you'd want to nail me for my actual positions. Either that or you're just too girl to not focus on emotions. If you ever want to actually discuss the topic though, let me know, Darlene

There is nothing but rubble left where your actual positions once were.

You don't even know what my position is? What is the point of this thread? I've said it dozens of times. You've been a constant in the thread. You don't have to agree with my point, just accurately state it. You aren't capable of it, are you?

I've already proved you dead wrong on every aspect of your position.

What's hilarious is that you honestly think I have to make you say 'uncle'.

Denial that you've lost the argument is nothing more than the weeping noise of a sore loser.

And a sore loser is nothing more than a pathetic version of a loser.

Another crying liberal, here's a hanky, try to focus.

Obviously you realize you need to claim victory as even you know that didn't happen on the field of combat

 

[kaz]

The point is to frame it in the context of your leftist agenda, slut

If it was, you wouldn't have singled out gays and would have made it a rant against all liberals and their support for a progressive tax system.

You made it only about gays...like a good little bigot who needs other bigots to validate him.

Gays are the leftist agenda I am referring to, you ignorant slut

You know you're talking to a RWnut when you're told that equal rights are a 'gay agenda', with 'agenda' used as pejorative.

Exactly the point I constantly make. You are so vacuously stupid that you can only conceive of Republicans and Democrats, so not one is the other. You make that crystal clear here. Well, that wasn't left, ergo you are a right winger.

Democrats fighting for "equal rights" is never equal. You want more than equal. Affirmative action, you automatically blame white cops versus blacks without waiting for any facts. You want to punish businesses and employers and the rich, not just give employees and the poor a fair chance. Wanting to skip democracy and go to tyrannical courts to decree what no one else has, same sex marriage, is just the tip of the iceberg

Mostly 'we' want to make the country better by reaching the day we see the last of people like you.

Typical authoritarian leftism. One of the few things you have ever said you actually mean. Sad, but honest

 

[NYcarbineer]

Exposing your whiny hypocrisy wasn't all that hard. You're all for getting the gov't out of marriage but don't want to give up any of the perks you get. The only thing it seems you're willing to do concerning this issue is bitch and complain.

That you can't stay away from discussing emotions besides indicating you're a chick shows that even you know your argument sucks. If you were confident, you'd want to nail me for my actual positions. Either that or you're just too girl to not focus on emotions. If you ever want to actually discuss the topic though, let me know, Darlene

There is nothing but rubble left where your actual positions once were.

You don't even know what my position is? What is the point of this thread? I've said it dozens of times. You've been a constant in the thread. You don't have to agree with my point, just accurately state it. You aren't capable of it, are you?

I've already proved you dead wrong on every aspect of your position.

What's hilarious is that you honestly think I have to make you say 'uncle'.

Denial that you've lost the argument is nothing more than the weeping noise of a sore loser.

And a sore loser is nothing more than a pathetic version of a loser.

Another crying liberal, here's a hanky, try to focus.

Obviously you realize you need to claim victory as even you know that didn't happen on the field of combat

See, there, you doing it now. lol

You lost the argument when you couldn't cite a single state that had a child producing requirement in its marriage laws.

 

[kaz]

That you can't stay away from discussing emotions besides indicating you're a chick shows that even you know your argument sucks. If you were confident, you'd want to nail me for my actual positions. Either that or you're just too girl to not focus on emotions. If you ever want to actually discuss the topic though, let me know, Darlene

There is nothing but rubble left where your actual positions once were.

You don't even know what my position is? What is the point of this thread? I've said it dozens of times. You've been a constant in the thread. You don't have to agree with my point, just accurately state it. You aren't capable of it, are you?

I've already proved you dead wrong on every aspect of your position.

What's hilarious is that you honestly think I have to make you say 'uncle'.

Denial that you've lost the argument is nothing more than the weeping noise of a sore loser.

And a sore loser is nothing more than a pathetic version of a loser.

Another crying liberal, here's a hanky, try to focus.

Obviously you realize you need to claim victory as even you know that didn't happen on the field of combat

See, there, you doing it now. lol

You lost the argument when you couldn't cite a single state that had a child producing requirement in its marriage laws.

That question had nothing to do with my argument.

It was a ... wait for it ... non-sequitur ...

 

[NYcarbineer]

There is nothing but rubble left where your actual positions once were.

You don't even know what my position is? What is the point of this thread? I've said it dozens of times. You've been a constant in the thread. You don't have to agree with my point, just accurately state it. You aren't capable of it, are you?

I've already proved you dead wrong on every aspect of your position.

What's hilarious is that you honestly think I have to make you say 'uncle'.

Denial that you've lost the argument is nothing more than the weeping noise of a sore loser.

And a sore loser is nothing more than a pathetic version of a loser.

Another crying liberal, here's a hanky, try to focus.

Obviously you realize you need to claim victory as even you know that didn't happen on the field of combat

See, there, you doing it now. lol

You lost the argument when you couldn't cite a single state that had a child producing requirement in its marriage laws.

That question had nothing to do with my argument.

It was a ... wait for it ... non-sequitur ...

That was the theme of your thread. Look at the title:

Why should taxpayers subsidize gay mating?

Answer: because the taxpayers subsidize non-gay mating, and gays are entitled to equal treatment under the law.

Case closed.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Poor Kaz, the world just doesn't believe as he does. Taxes are progressive, and faggots have rights. Things are tough all over.

 

[kaz]

You don't even know what my position is? What is the point of this thread? I've said it dozens of times. You've been a constant in the thread. You don't have to agree with my point, just accurately state it. You aren't capable of it, are you?

I've already proved you dead wrong on every aspect of your position.

What's hilarious is that you honestly think I have to make you say 'uncle'.

Denial that you've lost the argument is nothing more than the weeping noise of a sore loser.

And a sore loser is nothing more than a pathetic version of a loser.

Another crying liberal, here's a hanky, try to focus.

Obviously you realize you need to claim victory as even you know that didn't happen on the field of combat

See, there, you doing it now. lol

You lost the argument when you couldn't cite a single state that had a child producing requirement in its marriage laws.

That question had nothing to do with my argument.

It was a ... wait for it ... non-sequitur ...

That was the theme of your thread. Look at the title:

Why should taxpayers subsidize gay mating?

Answer: because the taxpayers subsidize non-gay mating, and gays are entitled to equal treatment under the law.

Case closed.

Yes, everything is as it seems on the surface, isn't it, Scoobie?

 

[NYcarbineer]

I've already proved you dead wrong on every aspect of your position.

What's hilarious is that you honestly think I have to make you say 'uncle'.

Denial that you've lost the argument is nothing more than the weeping noise of a sore loser.

And a sore loser is nothing more than a pathetic version of a loser.

Another crying liberal, here's a hanky, try to focus.

Obviously you realize you need to claim victory as even you know that didn't happen on the field of combat

See, there, you doing it now. lol

You lost the argument when you couldn't cite a single state that had a child producing requirement in its marriage laws.

That question had nothing to do with my argument.

It was a ... wait for it ... non-sequitur ...

That was the theme of your thread. Look at the title:

Why should taxpayers subsidize gay mating?

Answer: because the taxpayers subsidize non-gay mating, and gays are entitled to equal treatment under the law.

Case closed.

Yes, everything is as it seems on the surface, isn't it, Scoobie?

Make the case that gays do not deserve equal treatment under the law.