kaz
Diamond Member
- Dec 1, 2010
- 78,025
- 22,327
- Thread starter
- #3,321
Of course it's a fail. How can it not be given all of the false premises you based it on?Wow, a liberal automaton thinks my thread is a "monumental failure." Wow, that hurts. OK, it doesn't, but I tried, I really did.
BTW, you don't know what a strawman is, it made no sense if you read my OP. Who's view did I misrepresent? You are an idiot, you're on Google dumb ass, just type in "definition {word you don't know}" and it'll be defined for you. Then do the same for the words in the definition you don't know until you're clear on it all
It's based on a false premise that marriage is about procreation. It's not .... it's about the pursuit of happiness.
It's based on a false premise that the government provides tax breaks to married couples because they procreate and questions why same-sex marriages should receive that same tax break since they don't procreate. It doesn't ... the tax laws regarding marriage are for being married and has nothing to do with procreation. The government does have additional benefits for having children, and those tax breaks have nothing to do with marriage.
It's based on a false premise that gay couples don't procreate. They do ... While they can't procreate naturally with each other, there are other methods in which they do, such as artificial insemination.
And despite all of your false premises, you still tried desperately to salvage your thread by kazzing your way through, but even then, the premise of your OP was also laid to rest with the simple answer, equality under the law.
This thread is pretty much hundreds of pages of making an ass of you since your OP was bullshit to begin with.![]()
You haven't done the test I told you to try. Ask random people not involved in the discussion if they think marriage and lower tax rates are motivated by the likely hood that they will have children or if they think like you do that people already pooling resources and saving money should get an additional tax cut by government
Everyone gets child related tax breaks, married or not.
Exactly, and straight or gay. So that isn't what the thread is about. Gays get tax breaks for raising children. The thread is about having them
So you want to eliminate all marriage tax breaks from all married couples who don't have children.
Why didn't you say that in the OP.
Strawman, also asked and answered dozens of times. I will answer it again though if you ask without being snotty, Major Burns