Why should other taxpayers have to subsidize gay mating?

[WorldWatcher]

If you wham bam thank you maam with someone you don't know and produce a kid you don't get compensated for it. If you couple and provide a stable home for a child you produce, you do, that is the "concept" of marriage, which is why I kept referring you to the op.

that there are exceptions to that both ways doesn't change the "concept."

So where did that get us?

A single woman who has a "wham bam thank you maam" evening and ends up pregnant and 9 months later delivers a baby can't deduct medical expenses from the pregnancy (if not covered by insurance and she files a long form and itemizes medical expenses and it exceeds 10% of AGI)?

A single woman who has a "wham bam thank you maam" evening and ends up pregnant and 9 months later delivers a baby can't take deductions for her dependent and claim child care expenses?



Well ya they can so ya they are "compensated" for it, funny how now keeping more of your own money (since the mom is paying the medical bills and expenses for the child) is now "compensation.



>>>>

 

[Syriusly]

[

I don't have a problem with what you are asking, I just don't get it. People bring up "children" as a justification for gay marriage, but children are already deductible. Can you clarify the point in the OP you're addressing and the point you're trying to make?

You said - in the context of the tread pertaining to "subsidizing" gay marriage - that there were tax deductions for producing a child and that is what marriage accomplished.

I'm simply asking you to identify what tax deductions exist for producing children that are limited context of being Civilly Married.


Now we all now there are tax deductions for the medical expenses for having a child (if you itemize deuctions and expenses exceed 10% of AGI) and costs associated with raising a child (indivdiual deductions, child care deductions, etc). Such deductions lower the AGI and therefore the effective tax rate. But known that I now of are limited to those in a Civil Marriage, they all apply to parents (different-sex couples, same-sex couples, and single moms and dads) equally.



>>>>

If you wham bam thank you maam with someone you don't know and produce a kid you don't get compensated for it. If you couple and provide a stable home for a child you produce, you do, that is the "concept" of marriage, which is why I kept referring you to the op.

that there are exceptions to that both ways doesn't change the "concept."

So where did that get us?

Any person raising a child gets the deduction for raising a child- as I recall they are termed dependents.

This has no relationship to marriage. Marriage is not required to claim that dependent- nor do married couples who claim dependents get any additional benefits.

My wife and I get the same 'subsidies' for being married- as a similar couple with no children.

 

[kaz]

If you wham bam thank you maam with someone you don't know and produce a kid you don't get compensated for it. If you couple and provide a stable home for a child you produce, you do, that is the "concept" of marriage, which is why I kept referring you to the op.

that there are exceptions to that both ways doesn't change the "concept."

So where did that get us?

A single woman who has a "wham bam thank you maam" evening and ends up pregnant and 9 months later delivers a baby can't deduct medical expenses from the pregnancy (if not covered by insurance and she files a long form and itemizes medical expenses and it exceeds 10% of AGI)?

A single woman who has a "wham bam thank you maam" evening and ends up pregnant and 9 months later delivers a baby can't take deductions for her dependent and claim child care expenses?



Well ya they can so ya they are "compensated" for it, funny how now keeping more of your own money (since the mom is paying the medical bills and expenses for the child) is now "compensation.



>>>>

OK. I don't know that that has to do with anything, but OK

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

Kids need mother and father, not one of either. It doesn't mean homos can't be good parents. Kids just need both genders. Procreation was the given in the advent of marriage. One of those things its creators most likely didn't expect needed explanation.
Your argument is old, petty and defeated.

Thanks for sharing your uneducated opinion. Saying it over and over and over and over doesn't actually make it so.

It's noted that you provide no studies or evidence...just you repeating the same opinion over and over.

We don't raise our children in bubbles so no, kids don't need a mother and a father. All the studies show they need two parents, that's it.

Seriously, how do you explain that there is no difference in outcomes between children raised by gays and children raised by straights?

How many times do I have to refer to every single predominantly black jurisdiction in this country? In each of those you find the prevalence of unstructured families and an uptick in social demise. It transcends socioeconomics. It's about depleted family structure. Mostly a lack of dads. It is as empirical as the sunrise.

So your response is to point to single parent households. Not a valid comparison.

Again, how do you explain that there is no difference in outcomes between children raised by gays and children raised by straights?

I know you don't know anything at all about science, but to make a statment like that is ridiculous. Child rearing has untold variables, you need to have a measurement system in place and make a specific conclusion. Do you mean there is "no difference" educationally? Career wise? Income? What measurement are you claiming as "outcome?"

Also, failure to detect a difference is in no way proof there is not one. Logic really isn't your thing

I know that all the studies of children raised by couples show that there is no difference in outcomes between our children and yours. The measurements are all in the studies. For example;

A new study from the University of Colorado Denver finds that scientists agree that children of same-sex parents experience "no difference" on a range of social and behavioral outcomes compared to children of heterosexual or single parents.
​

So can you answer the question? If children, as you claim, need a father and mother to have "ideal" lives, why is there no difference in outcomes among our children, the children raised by gays and children raised by straights?

You argue like a five-year-old. It's about having both genders in the home, not whether homos can be good parents.
The data is empirical and consistently repeated to the detriment of the society.

 

[Seawytch]

Thanks for sharing your uneducated opinion. Saying it over and over and over and over doesn't actually make it so.

It's noted that you provide no studies or evidence...just you repeating the same opinion over and over.

We don't raise our children in bubbles so no, kids don't need a mother and a father. All the studies show they need two parents, that's it.

Seriously, how do you explain that there is no difference in outcomes between children raised by gays and children raised by straights?

How many times do I have to refer to every single predominantly black jurisdiction in this country? In each of those you find the prevalence of unstructured families and an uptick in social demise. It transcends socioeconomics. It's about depleted family structure. Mostly a lack of dads. It is as empirical as the sunrise.

So your response is to point to single parent households. Not a valid comparison.

Again, how do you explain that there is no difference in outcomes between children raised by gays and children raised by straights?

I know you don't know anything at all about science, but to make a statment like that is ridiculous. Child rearing has untold variables, you need to have a measurement system in place and make a specific conclusion. Do you mean there is "no difference" educationally? Career wise? Income? What measurement are you claiming as "outcome?"

Also, failure to detect a difference is in no way proof there is not one. Logic really isn't your thing

I know that all the studies of children raised by couples show that there is no difference in outcomes between our children and yours. The measurements are all in the studies. For example;

A new study from the University of Colorado Denver finds that scientists agree that children of same-sex parents experience "no difference" on a range of social and behavioral outcomes compared to children of heterosexual or single parents.
​

So can you answer the question? If children, as you claim, need a father and mother to have "ideal" lives, why is there no difference in outcomes among our children, the children raised by gays and children raised by straights?

You argue like a five-year-old. It's about having both genders in the home, not whether homos can be good parents.
The data is empirical and consistently repeated to the detriment of the society.

I see...so having actual facts and data supporting those fact, to you, is "arguing like a five year old" while you believe you merely stating an unsupported opinion is logical.

You have not been able to, in any way, support your opinion. Using single parent homes does not support your claims.

You can't even answer the simple question: If children, as you claim, need a father and mother, why is there no difference in outcomes among our children, the children raised by gays and children raised by straights?

 

[Syriusly]

Thanks for sharing your uneducated opinion. Saying it over and over and over and over doesn't actually make it so.

It's noted that you provide no studies or evidence...just you repeating the same opinion over and over.

We don't raise our children in bubbles so no, kids don't need a mother and a father. All the studies show they need two parents, that's it.

Seriously, how do you explain that there is no difference in outcomes between children raised by gays and children raised by straights?

How many times do I have to refer to every single predominantly black jurisdiction in this country? In each of those you find the prevalence of unstructured families and an uptick in social demise. It transcends socioeconomics. It's about depleted family structure. Mostly a lack of dads. It is as empirical as the sunrise.

So your response is to point to single parent households. Not a valid comparison.

Again, how do you explain that there is no difference in outcomes between children raised by gays and children raised by straights?

I know you don't know anything at all about science, but to make a statment like that is ridiculous. Child rearing has untold variables, you need to have a measurement system in place and make a specific conclusion. Do you mean there is "no difference" educationally? Career wise? Income? What measurement are you claiming as "outcome?"

Also, failure to detect a difference is in no way proof there is not one. Logic really isn't your thing

I know that all the studies of children raised by couples show that there is no difference in outcomes between our children and yours. The measurements are all in the studies. For example;

A new study from the University of Colorado Denver finds that scientists agree that children of same-sex parents experience "no difference" on a range of social and behavioral outcomes compared to children of heterosexual or single parents.
​

So can you answer the question? If children, as you claim, need a father and mother to have "ideal" lives, why is there no difference in outcomes among our children, the children raised by gays and children raised by straights?

You argue like a five-year-old. It's about having both genders in the home, not whether homos can be good parents.
The data is empirical and consistently repeated to the detriment of the society.

LOL- she actually provides an argument- with a citation of facts.

You quote yourself- quoting your own opinion as if it were fact- as if anyone cares about your own opinion.

Why don't you want children who have been abandoned by their parents to get adopted?
Facts and Statistics

In the U.S. 397,122 children are living without permanent families in the foster care system. 101,666 of these children are eligible for adoption, but nearly 32% of these children will wait over three years in foster care before being adopted.

Roughly 33,000 children- waiting 3 or more years to be adopted- and your only concern is preventing them from having gay parents?

In 2012, 23,396 youth aged out of the U.S. foster care system without the emotional and financial support necessary to succeed.

23,000 kids- abandoned by the system- left to swim or sink at 18 years old- with no family to help them- and your only concern is preventing them from having gay parents?

Perhaps you might want to focus your efforts on preventing the heterosexual biological parents of children from abandoning them- before declaring that homosexuals are the problem.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

How many times do I have to refer to every single predominantly black jurisdiction in this country? In each of those you find the prevalence of unstructured families and an uptick in social demise. It transcends socioeconomics. It's about depleted family structure. Mostly a lack of dads. It is as empirical as the sunrise.

So your response is to point to single parent households. Not a valid comparison.

Again, how do you explain that there is no difference in outcomes between children raised by gays and children raised by straights?

I know you don't know anything at all about science, but to make a statment like that is ridiculous. Child rearing has untold variables, you need to have a measurement system in place and make a specific conclusion. Do you mean there is "no difference" educationally? Career wise? Income? What measurement are you claiming as "outcome?"

Also, failure to detect a difference is in no way proof there is not one. Logic really isn't your thing

I know that all the studies of children raised by couples show that there is no difference in outcomes between our children and yours. The measurements are all in the studies. For example;

A new study from the University of Colorado Denver finds that scientists agree that children of same-sex parents experience "no difference" on a range of social and behavioral outcomes compared to children of heterosexual or single parents.
​

So can you answer the question? If children, as you claim, need a father and mother to have "ideal" lives, why is there no difference in outcomes among our children, the children raised by gays and children raised by straights?

You argue like a five-year-old. It's about having both genders in the home, not whether homos can be good parents.
The data is empirical and consistently repeated to the detriment of the society.

I see...so having actual facts and data supporting those fact, to you, is "arguing like a five year old" while you believe you merely stating an unsupported opinion is logical.

You have not been able to, in any way, support your opinion. Using single parent homes does not support your claims.

You can't even answer the simple question: If children, as you claim, need a father and mother, why is there no difference in outcomes among our children, the children raised by gays and children raised by straights?

There is a difference and I've referenced it several times. Every community with a predominance or plurality of unstructured families suffers social demise. Homo couples lack that necessary structure and contribute to the problem. You insist on wagging the dog with the anecdotal.
I'm through with your childish, defeated, contrarian antagonism.

 

[Seawytch]

So your response is to point to single parent households. Not a valid comparison.

Again, how do you explain that there is no difference in outcomes between children raised by gays and children raised by straights?

I know you don't know anything at all about science, but to make a statment like that is ridiculous. Child rearing has untold variables, you need to have a measurement system in place and make a specific conclusion. Do you mean there is "no difference" educationally? Career wise? Income? What measurement are you claiming as "outcome?"

Also, failure to detect a difference is in no way proof there is not one. Logic really isn't your thing

I know that all the studies of children raised by couples show that there is no difference in outcomes between our children and yours. The measurements are all in the studies. For example;

A new study from the University of Colorado Denver finds that scientists agree that children of same-sex parents experience "no difference" on a range of social and behavioral outcomes compared to children of heterosexual or single parents.
​

So can you answer the question? If children, as you claim, need a father and mother to have "ideal" lives, why is there no difference in outcomes among our children, the children raised by gays and children raised by straights?

You argue like a five-year-old. It's about having both genders in the home, not whether homos can be good parents.
The data is empirical and consistently repeated to the detriment of the society.

I see...so having actual facts and data supporting those fact, to you, is "arguing like a five year old" while you believe you merely stating an unsupported opinion is logical.

You have not been able to, in any way, support your opinion. Using single parent homes does not support your claims.

You can't even answer the simple question: If children, as you claim, need a father and mother, why is there no difference in outcomes among our children, the children raised by gays and children raised by straights?

There is a difference and I've referenced it several times. Every community with a predominance or plurality of unstructured families suffers social demise. Homo couples lack that necessary structure and contribute to the problem. You insist on wagging the dog with the anecdotal.
I'm through with your childish, defeated, contrarian antagonism.

No, you've pointed to problems in single parent homes as indicative of there needing to be a mother and father. It isn't. As pointed out in the numerous studies provided, two PARENTS makes the difference not a mother and father.

There is, in fact, only ONE gender based parenting ability. Care to guess what it is?

 

[Seawytch]

Does the gender of parents really matter?

 

[kaz]

How many times do I have to refer to every single predominantly black jurisdiction in this country? In each of those you find the prevalence of unstructured families and an uptick in social demise. It transcends socioeconomics. It's about depleted family structure. Mostly a lack of dads. It is as empirical as the sunrise.

So your response is to point to single parent households. Not a valid comparison.

Again, how do you explain that there is no difference in outcomes between children raised by gays and children raised by straights?

I know you don't know anything at all about science, but to make a statment like that is ridiculous. Child rearing has untold variables, you need to have a measurement system in place and make a specific conclusion. Do you mean there is "no difference" educationally? Career wise? Income? What measurement are you claiming as "outcome?"

Also, failure to detect a difference is in no way proof there is not one. Logic really isn't your thing

I know that all the studies of children raised by couples show that there is no difference in outcomes between our children and yours. The measurements are all in the studies. For example;

A new study from the University of Colorado Denver finds that scientists agree that children of same-sex parents experience "no difference" on a range of social and behavioral outcomes compared to children of heterosexual or single parents.
​

So can you answer the question? If children, as you claim, need a father and mother to have "ideal" lives, why is there no difference in outcomes among our children, the children raised by gays and children raised by straights?

You argue like a five-year-old. It's about having both genders in the home, not whether homos can be good parents.
The data is empirical and consistently repeated to the detriment of the society.

I see...so having actual facts and data supporting those fact, to you, is "arguing like a five year old" while you believe you merely stating an unsupported opinion is logical.

You have not been able to, in any way, support your opinion. Using single parent homes does not support your claims.

You can't even answer the simple question: If children, as you claim, need a father and mother, why is there no difference in outcomes among our children, the children raised by gays and children raised by straights?

Describing your fictitious statement that studies prove something in a statement that no scientific study would ever actually say as a "fact" is fictitious. Why aren't you wearing clown makeup like your honey and the rest of the clowns on your side?

 

[kaz]

Does the gender of parents really matter?

Of course not, men and women are the same. You just like the women's sexual organs like I do. Other than that you'd be indifferent between being with a man and a woman. And children are of course sexless automation at heart as well who just need their nose blown and their ass wiped. Parents are just babysitters.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

Your incomplete study doesn't consider that the children being raised by homos are living in communities dominated by structured families and the impact that norm has on their circumstance. Move those homo faux families into black neighborhoods and give it a little while.

 

[Seawytch]

Does the gender of parents really matter?

Of course not, men and women are the same. You just like the women's sexual organs like I do. Other than that you'd be indifferent between being with a man and a woman. And children are of course sexless automation at heart as well who just need their nose blown and their ass wiped. Parents are just babysitters.

Lactation. That's the only gender based parenting ability.

 

[Seawytch]

Your incomplete study doesn't consider that the children being raised by homos are living in communities dominated by structured families and the impact that norm has on their circumstance. Move those homo faux families into black neighborhoods and give it a little while.

Dude, you're getting racism in your homophobia.

 

[bodecea]

Your incomplete study doesn't consider that the children being raised by homos are living in communities dominated by structured families and the impact that norm has on their circumstance. Move those homo faux families into black neighborhoods and give it a little while.

Dude, you're getting racism in your homophobia.

They certainly get mixed together a lot, don't they?

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

Your incomplete study doesn't consider that the children being raised by homos are living in communities dominated by structured families and the impact that norm has on their circumstance. Move those homo faux families into black neighborhoods and give it a little while.

Dude, you're getting racism in your homophobia.

You need math lessons.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

Your incomplete study doesn't consider that the children being raised by homos are living in communities dominated by structured families and the impact that norm has on their circumstance. Move those homo faux families into black neighborhoods and give it a little while.

Dude, you're getting racism in your homophobia.

They certainly get mixed together a lot, don't they?

You could use some math lessons, too.

 

[Seawytch]

Your incomplete study doesn't consider that the children being raised by homos are living in communities dominated by structured families and the impact that norm has on their circumstance. Move those homo faux families into black neighborhoods and give it a little while.

Dude, you're getting racism in your homophobia.

You need math lessons.

That's funny coming from the guy who says children need a mother and a father because...single parent homes. I happen to know that two is better than one and that children need two parents, not a mother and a father.

And you still have not been able to explain that if children indeed need a mother and a father as you claim, then how is it that there is no difference in outcomes between children raised by gays and children raised by straights?

 

[kaz]

Does the gender of parents really matter?

Of course not, men and women are the same. You just like the women's sexual organs like I do. Other than that you'd be indifferent between being with a man and a woman. And children are of course sexless automation at heart as well who just need their nose blown and their ass wiped. Parents are just babysitters.

Lactation. That's the only gender based parenting ability.

Parenting "ability" has nothing to do with my point, nothing at all. And yes, you've mentioned many times that the only difference between men and women is our sex organs. We just need two parents to divide the work in half. Just like you'd be indifferent dating a guy other than the sex organs, they aren't the right ones

So if one kid needs two parents who are sexless automatons to him, then don't eight kids need at least 5 or 6 parents? I mean it's a lot more work to divide up.

We evolved with mother/father. It cracks me up when people like you criticize conservatives for denying science, it's a total hoot

 

[kaz]

Your incomplete study doesn't consider that the children being raised by homos are living in communities dominated by structured families and the impact that norm has on their circumstance. Move those homo faux families into black neighborhoods and give it a little while.

Dude, you're getting racism in your homophobia.

You need math lessons.

That's funny coming from the guy who says children need a mother and a father because...single parent homes. I happen to know that two is better than one and that children need two parents, not a mother and a father.

And you still have not been able to explain that if children indeed need a mother and a father as you claim, then how is it that there is no difference in outcomes between children raised by gays and children raised by straights?

Begging the question. No scientific study ever said what you just said. And anyone who knows what scientific studies are would ever say that. Maybe you should have stayed in school past the sixth grade. Oh well, hindsight is 20/20...