Why should other taxpayers have to subsidize gay mating?

[kaz]

You can keep sucking his cock like you are if that's what makes you happy, but at least wipe your chin.

OMG, after the endless 100 page cluster fuck with you, syriusly, skylar, seawytch, bodedica you would say this? I mean that's even clown for a clown, bro

Really? "OMG??"

You really are the wife in your marriage. Hell, you sound like a 4 year old girl watching the power puff girls.

And your, I know you are but what am I," retort also expresses your 4 year old mentality.

You dipshits have had an endless cluster fuck, Syriously disappeared for it, he kept trying to circle jerk seawytch and kept splattering cum on my shoes. Then suddenly you're shocked that an anarchist and a minarchist are in agreement? After the love notes between you liberals?

It's just comic, but comedy is your subject as you're a clown

I need not repeat my reply again since it still applies.

How does it apply? How does the Declaration of Independence apply to the law? The Constitution does that.

And again, by your argument, we are a theocracy since the Declaration of Independence specifically says our rights were endowed by our creator. Is any argument simple enough for you to follow?

 

[Seawytch]

You can keep sucking his cock like you are if that's what makes you happy, but at least wipe your chin.

OMG, after the endless 100 page cluster fuck with you, syriusly, skylar, seawytch, bodedica you would say this? I mean that's even clown for a clown, bro

Really? "OMG??"

You really are the wife in your marriage. Hell, you sound like a 4 year old girl watching the power puff girls.

And your, I know you are but what am I," retort also expresses your 4 year old mentality.

You dipshits have had an endless cluster fuck, Syriously disappeared for it, he kept trying to circle jerk seawytch and kept splattering cum on my shoes. Then suddenly you're shocked that an anarchist and a minarchist are in agreement? After the love notes between you liberals?

It's just comic, but comedy is your subject as you're a clown

Yes, your thread is comedic that's for sure.

You do love playground arguments! I'd say they're your forte, but how can children's arguments be a skill exactly?

Watching you justify subsidizing non productive straight marriages ...

Strawman, I never did that. Sorry Charlie, but only good tasting tuna get to be Sunkist

while wanting to deny gay couples, productive or not, is highly amusing...especially when you tried to tie it to Republican hostage taking and the shutting down of the government. Funny stuff indeed. Coo coo banana bird, but funny.

Wrong, gay couples can get child tax breaks, your liberal amigos even pointed that out. It's only the gay mating I don't want to pay for. And I don't want to pay for straight mating either.

But I do like your argument. I oppose progressive taxes, and I oppose government marriage. So I have to support letting liberal special interest groups out of progressive taxes which I oppose by giving them government marriage which I oppose or I'm a hypocrite.

Yes, you'll be here until Thursday, come see your show...

If you "didn't want to pay for straight mating either", you should have framed your OP that way. Nope, you just wanted anti gay validation from the bigot club.

You got it!

 

[kaz]

OMG, after the endless 100 page cluster fuck with you, syriusly, skylar, seawytch, bodedica you would say this? I mean that's even clown for a clown, bro

Really? "OMG??"

You really are the wife in your marriage. Hell, you sound like a 4 year old girl watching the power puff girls.

And your, I know you are but what am I," retort also expresses your 4 year old mentality.

You dipshits have had an endless cluster fuck, Syriously disappeared for it, he kept trying to circle jerk seawytch and kept splattering cum on my shoes. Then suddenly you're shocked that an anarchist and a minarchist are in agreement? After the love notes between you liberals?

It's just comic, but comedy is your subject as you're a clown

Yes, your thread is comedic that's for sure.

You do love playground arguments! I'd say they're your forte, but how can children's arguments be a skill exactly?

Watching you justify subsidizing non productive straight marriages ...

Strawman, I never did that. Sorry Charlie, but only good tasting tuna get to be Sunkist

while wanting to deny gay couples, productive or not, is highly amusing...especially when you tried to tie it to Republican hostage taking and the shutting down of the government. Funny stuff indeed. Coo coo banana bird, but funny.

Wrong, gay couples can get child tax breaks, your liberal amigos even pointed that out. It's only the gay mating I don't want to pay for. And I don't want to pay for straight mating either.

But I do like your argument. I oppose progressive taxes, and I oppose government marriage. So I have to support letting liberal special interest groups out of progressive taxes which I oppose by giving them government marriage which I oppose or I'm a hypocrite.

Yes, you'll be here until Thursday, come see your show...

If you "didn't want to pay for straight mating either", you should have framed your OP that way. Nope, you just wanted anti gay validation from the bigot club.

You got it!

Fair enough, Jane you ignorant slut.

Going forward, I'll check with the liberal intelligentsia how you all want me to frame my threads first

 

[Faun]

Wrong again, that's nor my argument. Remember? You're too stupid to understand my argument. And now we see that stems from your absolutely mind-fucking belief that marriage is not a fundamental right.

Hey, recall your argument that marriage is an unalienable right and then your other argument that marriage is not an unalienable right?

That's how most of your arguments go.

What the hell is an "unalienable right?"

And I said gays are being denied their inalienable rights by being denied the right to marry. That is to say, their inalienable right to pursue happiness is being denied by their right to get married.

Savvy?

I'm not saying marriage is an inalienable right.

You stupid as shit dipshit mother fucker, I keep pointing out to you that the right to "pursue happiness" is in the Declaration of Independence. And even then they were referring to government not stopping you, they did not mean government should do it for you. What legal right do we get in our laws from the Declaration of Independence?

It also said our rights come from our creator, so are we a theocracy?

No, we are not a theocracy. You should know that.
Yes or no ... the pursuit of happiness is an inalienable right?

Answer the question, how is the Declaration of Independence a source of rights in our country?

And if it is, how are we not a theocracy since it says our rights are endowed by our creator?

You have to answer my question before you ask yours. I will answer yours as soon as you do

I already answered your question. We are not a theocracy. Our rights come from G-d, not the DoI. That we recognize that does not establish us as a theocracy. Really ... you should know all this. You shouldn't need me to educate you.

Now then ... your answer to my question is ... ?

 

[Faun]

That would be relevant if it had to do with how he used the analogy, but he didn't. You said people procreate without a license, he said people drive without a license too. You have to look at how the analogy is used, Opie the Clown

Which was the analogy he offered in response to me pointing out that a marriage license is not required to procreate. His analogy was a failure from before he even hit [post reply].

Yes, it was an analogy, and he told you how he was using that analogy. You picked something that wasn't how he was using the analogy, so what you said was a truism. Sadly multiple words are in this conversation you don't know and aren't going to look up

This is the point where you are free to engage in wholesale verbal abuse. It's a total waste of time to continue arguing the point with him. He's like a corpse that insists it isn't dead even though it doesn't have a pulse and its body is at room temperature.

I agree, but it does help with trying to learn to explain things to stupid people. In reality that's why I do insult liberals all the time though, it's impossible to get content back, they just don't process. You do seriously come up with some good arguments, though everyone goes over their heads

When you're an anarchist you learn to come up with good arguments because people are so flabbergasted by the idea.

It's cute how you refer to your delusions as, "good arguments."

 

[Faun]

As for marrying no one... there is no law against naming yourself no one, but it's been done before... my name is no man...

The point is that if someone wants to marry no one, they are marrying who they want and they should be able to get marriage perks. Since you are saying government has no say over who you marry. Skylar loves the sound of his own voice, why should he not get marriage perks for that? Why do you get shit from government Skylar and his own voice can't get when you have a "contract" for marriage?

Calling government marriage a "contract" is pretty preposterous, BTW. Government marriage is a government program. It's not defined by the participants and they can't change it, but government can change it without their consent. It's a bastardization of the word "contract." And again why does a "contract" entitle them to anything from government? It's a government program, nothing more

Holyfuckingshit!

Not getting married is getting married in your alternate universe?? Is not going to the movies going to the movies? Is not driving a car driving a car?

That made no sense. I like the clown antics though, you do ride in the car with the clown car party

Of course it made no sense -- I repeated back your own words, in your twisted world, marrying no one is getting married. It's refreshing to see that makes no sense to you too.

You repeated my words, but you mangled them and completely changed the meaning to gibberish

Nope, those are your words. They didn't make sense to me either.

 

[kaz]

Hey, recall your argument that marriage is an unalienable right and then your other argument that marriage is not an unalienable right?

That's how most of your arguments go.

What the hell is an "unalienable right?"

And I said gays are being denied their inalienable rights by being denied the right to marry. That is to say, their inalienable right to pursue happiness is being denied by their right to get married.

Savvy?

I'm not saying marriage is an inalienable right.

You stupid as shit dipshit mother fucker, I keep pointing out to you that the right to "pursue happiness" is in the Declaration of Independence. And even then they were referring to government not stopping you, they did not mean government should do it for you. What legal right do we get in our laws from the Declaration of Independence?

It also said our rights come from our creator, so are we a theocracy?

No, we are not a theocracy. You should know that.
Yes or no ... the pursuit of happiness is an inalienable right?

Answer the question, how is the Declaration of Independence a source of rights in our country?

And if it is, how are we not a theocracy since it says our rights are endowed by our creator?

You have to answer my question before you ask yours. I will answer yours as soon as you do

I already answered your question. We are not a theocracy. Our rights come from G-d, not the DoI. That we recognize that does not establish us as a theocracy. Really ... you should know all this. You shouldn't need me to educate you.

Now then ... your answer to my question is ... ?

You didn't answer my question, what bearing does the Declaration of Independence have on laws in our country?

 

[kaz]

The point is that if someone wants to marry no one, they are marrying who they want and they should be able to get marriage perks. Since you are saying government has no say over who you marry. Skylar loves the sound of his own voice, why should he not get marriage perks for that? Why do you get shit from government Skylar and his own voice can't get when you have a "contract" for marriage?

Calling government marriage a "contract" is pretty preposterous, BTW. Government marriage is a government program. It's not defined by the participants and they can't change it, but government can change it without their consent. It's a bastardization of the word "contract." And again why does a "contract" entitle them to anything from government? It's a government program, nothing more

Holyfuckingshit!

Not getting married is getting married in your alternate universe?? Is not going to the movies going to the movies? Is not driving a car driving a car?

That made no sense. I like the clown antics though, you do ride in the car with the clown car party

Of course it made no sense -- I repeated back your own words, in your twisted world, marrying no one is getting married. It's refreshing to see that makes no sense to you too.

You repeated my words, but you mangled them and completely changed the meaning to gibberish

Nope, those are your words. They didn't make sense to me either.

Actually, when you change the order of the words, you generally change their meaning

 

[kaz]

Which was the analogy he offered in response to me pointing out that a marriage license is not required to procreate. His analogy was a failure from before he even hit [post reply].

Yes, it was an analogy, and he told you how he was using that analogy. You picked something that wasn't how he was using the analogy, so what you said was a truism. Sadly multiple words are in this conversation you don't know and aren't going to look up

This is the point where you are free to engage in wholesale verbal abuse. It's a total waste of time to continue arguing the point with him. He's like a corpse that insists it isn't dead even though it doesn't have a pulse and its body is at room temperature.

I agree, but it does help with trying to learn to explain things to stupid people. In reality that's why I do insult liberals all the time though, it's impossible to get content back, they just don't process. You do seriously come up with some good arguments, though everyone goes over their heads

When you're an anarchist you learn to come up with good arguments because people are so flabbergasted by the idea.

It's cute how you refer to your delusions as, "good arguments."

People really need to stop questioning the inherent truth of liberalism, don't they, Bozo? The right answers have already been thought for us, we just need to think them, like you do

 

[Faun]

Hey, recall your argument that marriage is an unalienable right and then your other argument that marriage is not an unalienable right?

That's how most of your arguments go.

What the hell is an "unalienable right?"

And I said gays are being denied their inalienable rights by being denied the right to marry. That is to say, their inalienable right to pursue happiness is being denied by their right to get married.

Savvy?

I'm not saying marriage is an inalienable right.

You stupid as shit dipshit mother fucker, I keep pointing out to you that the right to "pursue happiness" is in the Declaration of Independence. And even then they were referring to government not stopping you, they did not mean government should do it for you. What legal right do we get in our laws from the Declaration of Independence?

It also said our rights come from our creator, so are we a theocracy?

No, we are not a theocracy. You should know that.
Yes or no ... the pursuit of happiness is an inalienable right?

Yes, the pursuit of happiness is an inalienable right. Happiness itself, however, is not. Neither a marriage license nor a driver's license is mandated by that right.

I agree, I was asking a more narrow question since he's making a legal argument we have that right. I'm asking where in the law that is a right since he keeps stating it's a legal right. Though he doesn't grasp that government is restricted from infringing on that right and he thinks government has to provide it.

I think the Constitution in legal terms puts it better, the right to life, liberty and property. Pursuit of happiness is more abstract, perfect for a Declaration, not so much for a Constitution, and requiring government to follow the due process of law to infringe on our life, liberty or property protects that right

You remain clueless. I am not saying the government has to provide a right ... I'm saying they can't deny anyone their rights unless there's just cause.

 

[Faun]

As for marrying no one... there is no law against naming yourself no one, but it's been done before... my name is no man...

The point is that if someone wants to marry no one, they are marrying who they want and they should be able to get marriage perks. Since you are saying government has no say over who you marry. Skylar loves the sound of his own voice, why should he not get marriage perks for that? Why do you get shit from government Skylar and his own voice can't get when you have a "contract" for marriage?

Calling government marriage a "contract" is pretty preposterous, BTW. Government marriage is a government program. It's not defined by the participants and they can't change it, but government can change it without their consent. It's a bastardization of the word "contract." And again why does a "contract" entitle them to anything from government? It's a government program, nothing more

Holyfuckingshit!

Not getting married is getting married in your alternate universe?? Is not going to the movies going to the movies? Is not driving a car driving a car?

That made no sense. I like the clown antics though, you do ride in the car with the clown car party

Of course it made no sense -- I repeated back your own words, in your twisted world, marrying no one is getting married. It's refreshing to see that makes no sense to you too.

You repeated my words, but you mangled them and completely changed the meaning to gibberish

Here, have a tissue...

 

[kaz]

What the hell is an "unalienable right?"

And I said gays are being denied their inalienable rights by being denied the right to marry. That is to say, their inalienable right to pursue happiness is being denied by their right to get married.

Savvy?

I'm not saying marriage is an inalienable right.

You stupid as shit dipshit mother fucker, I keep pointing out to you that the right to "pursue happiness" is in the Declaration of Independence. And even then they were referring to government not stopping you, they did not mean government should do it for you. What legal right do we get in our laws from the Declaration of Independence?

It also said our rights come from our creator, so are we a theocracy?

No, we are not a theocracy. You should know that.
Yes or no ... the pursuit of happiness is an inalienable right?

Yes, the pursuit of happiness is an inalienable right. Happiness itself, however, is not. Neither a marriage license nor a driver's license is mandated by that right.

I agree, I was asking a more narrow question since he's making a legal argument we have that right. I'm asking where in the law that is a right since he keeps stating it's a legal right. Though he doesn't grasp that government is restricted from infringing on that right and he thinks government has to provide it.

I think the Constitution in legal terms puts it better, the right to life, liberty and property. Pursuit of happiness is more abstract, perfect for a Declaration, not so much for a Constitution, and requiring government to follow the due process of law to infringe on our life, liberty or property protects that right

You remain clueless. I am not saying the government has to provide a right ... I'm saying they can't deny anyone their rights unless there's just cause.

Of course you are, when you say government has to provide validation and tax breaks under the pursuit of happiness, you are clearly saying it's government's responsibility to provide you with your rights. You have the right to be left alone, you do not have the right to demand anything, including from the government

 

[kaz]

The point is that if someone wants to marry no one, they are marrying who they want and they should be able to get marriage perks. Since you are saying government has no say over who you marry. Skylar loves the sound of his own voice, why should he not get marriage perks for that? Why do you get shit from government Skylar and his own voice can't get when you have a "contract" for marriage?

Calling government marriage a "contract" is pretty preposterous, BTW. Government marriage is a government program. It's not defined by the participants and they can't change it, but government can change it without their consent. It's a bastardization of the word "contract." And again why does a "contract" entitle them to anything from government? It's a government program, nothing more

Holyfuckingshit!

Not getting married is getting married in your alternate universe?? Is not going to the movies going to the movies? Is not driving a car driving a car?

That made no sense. I like the clown antics though, you do ride in the car with the clown car party

Of course it made no sense -- I repeated back your own words, in your twisted world, marrying no one is getting married. It's refreshing to see that makes no sense to you too.

You repeated my words, but you mangled them and completely changed the meaning to gibberish

Here, have a tissue...

Sorry I made you cry, guy. Go play with your dolls and come back when you can calm down

 

[Faun]

What the hell is an "unalienable right?"

And I said gays are being denied their inalienable rights by being denied the right to marry. That is to say, their inalienable right to pursue happiness is being denied by their right to get married.

Savvy?

I'm not saying marriage is an inalienable right.

You stupid as shit dipshit mother fucker, I keep pointing out to you that the right to "pursue happiness" is in the Declaration of Independence. And even then they were referring to government not stopping you, they did not mean government should do it for you. What legal right do we get in our laws from the Declaration of Independence?

It also said our rights come from our creator, so are we a theocracy?

No, we are not a theocracy. You should know that.
Yes or no ... the pursuit of happiness is an inalienable right?

Answer the question, how is the Declaration of Independence a source of rights in our country?

And if it is, how are we not a theocracy since it says our rights are endowed by our creator?

You have to answer my question before you ask yours. I will answer yours as soon as you do

I already answered your question. We are not a theocracy. Our rights come from G-d, not the DoI. That we recognize that does not establish us as a theocracy. Really ... you should know all this. You shouldn't need me to educate you.

Now then ... your answer to my question is ... ?

You didn't answer my question, what bearing does the Declaration of Independence have on laws in our country?

Other than being a potential point of reference in legal cases, not a whole lot.

Now then .... my question....?

 

[Faun]

You stupid as shit dipshit mother fucker, I keep pointing out to you that the right to "pursue happiness" is in the Declaration of Independence. And even then they were referring to government not stopping you, they did not mean government should do it for you. What legal right do we get in our laws from the Declaration of Independence?

It also said our rights come from our creator, so are we a theocracy?

No, we are not a theocracy. You should know that.
Yes or no ... the pursuit of happiness is an inalienable right?

Yes, the pursuit of happiness is an inalienable right. Happiness itself, however, is not. Neither a marriage license nor a driver's license is mandated by that right.

I agree, I was asking a more narrow question since he's making a legal argument we have that right. I'm asking where in the law that is a right since he keeps stating it's a legal right. Though he doesn't grasp that government is restricted from infringing on that right and he thinks government has to provide it.

I think the Constitution in legal terms puts it better, the right to life, liberty and property. Pursuit of happiness is more abstract, perfect for a Declaration, not so much for a Constitution, and requiring government to follow the due process of law to infringe on our life, liberty or property protects that right

You remain clueless. I am not saying the government has to provide a right ... I'm saying they can't deny anyone their rights unless there's just cause.

Of course you are, when you say government has to provide validation and tax breaks under the pursuit of happiness, you are clearly saying it's government's responsibility to provide you with your rights. You have the right to be left alone, you do not have the right to demand anything, including from the government

I see your idiocy persists. Regardless ... seeking to prevent the government from blocking rights is not asking them to provide rights. It's not seeking validation nor is it seeking monetary gains. It's seeking equal protection guaranteed by the Constitution.

Seriously, do you need a few thousand more posts to understand that??

 

[Faun]

Holyfuckingshit!

Not getting married is getting married in your alternate universe?? Is not going to the movies going to the movies? Is not driving a car driving a car?

That made no sense. I like the clown antics though, you do ride in the car with the clown car party

Of course it made no sense -- I repeated back your own words, in your twisted world, marrying no one is getting married. It's refreshing to see that makes no sense to you too.

You repeated my words, but you mangled them and completely changed the meaning to gibberish

Here, have a tissue...

Sorry I made you cry, guy. Go play with your dolls and come back when you can calm down

Those tissues are for you. But again, your pre-K intellect of, I'm rubber, you're glue.... speaks for itself.

 

[kaz]

You stupid as shit dipshit mother fucker, I keep pointing out to you that the right to "pursue happiness" is in the Declaration of Independence. And even then they were referring to government not stopping you, they did not mean government should do it for you. What legal right do we get in our laws from the Declaration of Independence?

It also said our rights come from our creator, so are we a theocracy?

No, we are not a theocracy. You should know that.
Yes or no ... the pursuit of happiness is an inalienable right?

Answer the question, how is the Declaration of Independence a source of rights in our country?

And if it is, how are we not a theocracy since it says our rights are endowed by our creator?

You have to answer my question before you ask yours. I will answer yours as soon as you do

I already answered your question. We are not a theocracy. Our rights come from G-d, not the DoI. That we recognize that does not establish us as a theocracy. Really ... you should know all this. You shouldn't need me to educate you.

Now then ... your answer to my question is ... ?

You didn't answer my question, what bearing does the Declaration of Independence have on laws in our country?

Other than being a potential point of reference in legal cases, not a whole lot.

Now then .... my question....?

That doesn't answer the question. So then why do you keep saying people have the right to gay marriage based on the Declaration of Independence if the DOI doesn't ave "a whole lot" of bearing on our laws? That makes no sense.

And I did answer your question to bripat and you responded to it

 

[kaz]

No, we are not a theocracy. You should know that.
Yes or no ... the pursuit of happiness is an inalienable right?

Yes, the pursuit of happiness is an inalienable right. Happiness itself, however, is not. Neither a marriage license nor a driver's license is mandated by that right.

I agree, I was asking a more narrow question since he's making a legal argument we have that right. I'm asking where in the law that is a right since he keeps stating it's a legal right. Though he doesn't grasp that government is restricted from infringing on that right and he thinks government has to provide it.

I think the Constitution in legal terms puts it better, the right to life, liberty and property. Pursuit of happiness is more abstract, perfect for a Declaration, not so much for a Constitution, and requiring government to follow the due process of law to infringe on our life, liberty or property protects that right

You remain clueless. I am not saying the government has to provide a right ... I'm saying they can't deny anyone their rights unless there's just cause.

Of course you are, when you say government has to provide validation and tax breaks under the pursuit of happiness, you are clearly saying it's government's responsibility to provide you with your rights. You have the right to be left alone, you do not have the right to demand anything, including from the government

I see your idiocy persists. Regardless ... seeking to prevent the government from blocking rights is not asking them to provide rights. It's not seeking validation nor is it seeking monetary gains. It's seeking equal protection guaranteed by the Constitution.

Seriously, do you need a few thousand more posts to understand that??

What a bunch of meaningless spin. You are saying government has to provide paper and tax breaks, that is clearly demanding something from government, it is not stopping government from "blocking rights"

 

[kaz]

That made no sense. I like the clown antics though, you do ride in the car with the clown car party

Of course it made no sense -- I repeated back your own words, in your twisted world, marrying no one is getting married. It's refreshing to see that makes no sense to you too.

You repeated my words, but you mangled them and completely changed the meaning to gibberish

Here, have a tissue...

Sorry I made you cry, guy. Go play with your dolls and come back when you can calm down

Those tissues are for you. But again, your pre-K intellect of, I'm rubber, you're glue.... speaks for itself.

Actually I'm making the point of how stupid it is to tell other posters how they feel. A point you grasp other than when you are the one doing it, showing how effective my point is.

And I told you to play with your dolls until you calm down, go back and don't come back until you're done crying, Nancy

 

[Faun]

No, we are not a theocracy. You should know that.
Yes or no ... the pursuit of happiness is an inalienable right?

Answer the question, how is the Declaration of Independence a source of rights in our country?

And if it is, how are we not a theocracy since it says our rights are endowed by our creator?

You have to answer my question before you ask yours. I will answer yours as soon as you do

I already answered your question. We are not a theocracy. Our rights come from G-d, not the DoI. That we recognize that does not establish us as a theocracy. Really ... you should know all this. You shouldn't need me to educate you.

Now then ... your answer to my question is ... ?

You didn't answer my question, what bearing does the Declaration of Independence have on laws in our country?

Other than being a potential point of reference in legal cases, not a whole lot.

Now then .... my question....?

That doesn't answer the question. So then why do you keep saying people have the right to gay marriage based on the Declaration of Independence if the DOI doesn't ave "a whole lot" of bearing on our laws? That makes no sense.

And I did answer your question to bripat and you responded to it

Asked and answered. ..... many times over. Again, you simply don't possess the intellect to understand. That's ok.