Why should other taxpayers have to subsidize gay mating?

[bripat9643]

You're holding straights to one standard and gays to another.

It's called trying to justify anti gay bigotry. The "tyrannical activist judges" see through it to the underlying animus.

It's really gonna suck for them when the Supreme Court rules that same-sex marriage is Constitutional.

It will suck for everyone but the queers

Since it won't affect anyone but homosexuals, other than your teeny tiny 'ego' being offended, it won't suck for anyone.

Just ask the baker who had to pay a $135,000 fine whether it sucks.

 

[bripat9643]

That's cute, you call yourself a husband? How do you decide which you are? Or do you take turns?

????

As I recall you are married also- how did you decide whether to call yourself a husband? did you take a poll of your friends and family? Ask your daddy what you should be called? Or do you take turns, so you take on the female term sometimes?

He simply uses the term that has been accepted for thousands of years.

The English word "married" have been accepted for thousands of years? How can that be when English as we know it hasn't even been around for thousands of years?

Marriage has been around since man developed agriculture.

Gays have been around even longer.

Birth defects have been around since life evolved.

 

[Syriusly]

You're holding straights to one standard and gays to another.

It's called trying to justify anti gay bigotry. The "tyrannical activist judges" see through it to the underlying animus.

It's really gonna suck for them when the Supreme Court rules that same-sex marriage is Constitutional.

It will suck for everyone but the queers

Since it won't affect anyone but homosexuals, other than your teeny tiny 'ego' being offended, it won't suck for anyone.

Just ask the baker who had to pay a $135,000 fine whether it sucks.

That had nothing to do with legal marriage- Bakers need to follow the law like everyone else- yeah it does suck to be those who dont' want to follow the law.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

I bet you guys if you create a few more WHINEY ASS BITCHY GAY THREADS you'll change some hearts & minds.....or not

 

[kaz]

The question: This is a financial question, not a moral one. How financially do the rest of us benefit that government should be charging us higher taxes to make up for lower taxes for people to have gay sex who do not perpetuate the species? Why do we gain for that we should pay for it? That is the question

Because feelings have become more important than anything else. Gays want the power of government to sell the belief that same sex relations is equivalent to opposite sex relations. Any grade schooler not already brainwashed knows better. It's how a species exists. I think it may be even bigger than that. If you can get a population to believe that you can get them to believe anything, the hard part is done, their minds are yours for the shaping.

It certainly is equal legally. The 14th Amendment's equal protection clause does not apply to heterosexuals only.

Nope, they have the same right as everyone else, it certainly doesn't

You're too stupid for words. Everyone else can legally marry the person they love and hope to spend the rest of their life together. Gays can't.

There's a solution to that. The legislature. The courts are for when people are being treated differently. Like being black and being forced by government to government marry your own kind. And when you're forced to sit in the back of the bus and use different drinking fountains and bathrooms. Blacks didn't want something different, they were just treated differently. Gays were treated like everyone else.

You are too stupid for words. You think being treated the same as everyone else when you want something different is a job for the courts. It's not, it's a job for the legislature. And as a job for the legislature, my question is, why ... should .... I ... pay ... for ... it? Why do I want to pay gays to fuck their brains out? Go for it, you like anuses, fine by me. But I don't see what right that gives you to reach in my wallet. It doesn't. There is zero reason for me to pay you to fuck a guy the rest of your life

 

[kaz]

I bet you guys if you create a few more WHINEY ASS BITCHY GAY THREADS you'll change some hearts & minds.....or not

The whiny, bitchy guy is you, old fart. Here's a thought, don't click on links you aren't interested in. The obvious, what a concept...

 

[kaz]

Well, that would be a lie as I never said he made the "statement," I said it's what he thinks

Thanks, kaz!

I claim you're a pathological liar who can't refrain from lying, and here you do me the favor of lying again.

When you deny you claim he said that, but that you said he thought that -- you are once again, lying.....

"you call the British PM and British intelligence liars..." - a pathological liar ​

I don't think he is pathological- that implies he can't control his lying. He chooses to lie.

You could be right. You point out how he chooses to lie and he agreed with you.

This whole thread is a lie, Einstein. It's mocking you by applying your own standard to you

He said you lied and you agreed. Why would I argue that?

Yes, this thread is mocking you, and you are too stupid to grasp it

 

[kaz]

I at least get the concept of straight government marriage. Perpetuation of the species. It is the best situation for kids to have a traditional family with a mother and father because:

1) Men and women have different personalities and it is ideal for kids to have a parental relationship with one of each. Having two of the same sex is like having two left shoes or two right shoes. Neither a left shoe nor right shoes is more important than the other, you need one of each. They are different.

2) Kids are best served with a stay at home parent, generally a mother for many reasons for nurturing, caring and helping them stay out of trouble unattended

So for a mother to stay home, it's expensive. Taxpayers as part of the species benefit from the advancement of the species. And frankly that leads even financially to better taxpayers on average in the future.

If gays want to mate and pool resources, that's fine. But why should taxpayers pay for that? Government revenue is reduced, but why? What do we get out of it? Why should we have to fund it? What benefit is it to society that we should be paying for it?

The question: This is a financial question, not a moral one. How financially do the rest of us benefit that government should be charging us higher taxes to make up for lower taxes for people to have gay sex who do not perpetuate the species? Why do we gain for that we should pay for it? That is the question

Ummm... That's quite a stretch wouldn't you say? Taxpayers don't subsidize ANY marriage - and if you can show they do, I'll get married tomorrow.

You get a tax rate reduction, government sure as hell doesn't take the money out of the budget and not spend it. So yeah, someone else is paying for it. Or did you think government money appears by magic?

Actually in all of the years we have been married, we have paid less than filing separately about 70% of the time- and the rest we paid more for being married.

Then your wife is not staying at home, which is the "concept of marriage," making it more affordable for kids to have stay at home mothers. Government isn't paying in your case for what it isn't getting, nothing wrong with her working or with government not paying for her to not work when she does work

My wife does. Now try justifying not treating my civil marriage exactly like yours again.

My wife and I are both the parents of my children, the way humans evolved

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

I bet you guys if you create a few more WHINEY ASS BITCHY GAY THREADS you'll change some hearts & minds.....or not

The whiny, bitchy guy is you, old fart. Here's a thought, don't click on links you aren't interested in. The obvious, what a concept...

I'm very interested in teaching MORONS not to give our political enemies ammo or cover for their bullshit. Sadly you're too fucking stupid to see your own mistake.

 

[kaz]

Oh I get it...only people that don't like taxes should get the tax breaks.

We are the only ones who should take them. You want other people to pay them...

Silly, I support a progressive tax...like the one we have that incentivizes.

Exactly as I said...

 

[Skylar]

There's a solution to that. The legislature. The courts are for when people are being treated differently. Like being black and being forced by government to government marry your own kind. And when you're forced to sit in the back of the bus and use different drinking fountains and bathrooms. Blacks didn't want something different, they were just treated differently. Gays were treated like everyone else.

Your analogy breaks with interracial marriage bans. After all, everyone was treated the same. The problem was....the bans themselves were invalid. If the bans don't meet constitutional muster, then they're overturned.

There's no valid reason to deny gays the right to marry. There's no requirement of marriage that they can't meet, save an arbitrary one. There's nothing intrinsic to gender that is a requirement of marriage. As no one has to procreate or be able to procreate in order to get married...or stay married.

The moment infertile straights were allowed to marry, any basis of exclusion of gays using procreation collapsed.

You are too stupid for words. You think being treated the same as everyone else when you want something different is a job for the courts. It's not, it's a job for the legislature. And as a job for the legislature, my question is, why ... should .... I ... pay ... for ... it?

Gays have kids. And kids aren't a requirement. So for those gays that have kids, there is your answer. For those gays that don't, you pay for it the same reason you do all the straights that get married and never have children.

And for the record, you've officially taken a 'tax cuts equal me paying for it' stance. I'll hold you to that in any other debate.

 

[kaz]

I don't throw mine under the bus every chance I get

You are full of shit. And you're a hypocrite. Either admit you treat your partner that way or cut the crap. Obviously you don't

Nope...I've got you pegged. Stop asking gays why they want civil marriage and the "validation". You and your wife can answer your own question.

I have answered the question, dumb bimbo. Jeez, you and bodecea are the dumbest shits in the septic tank.

Government marriage means nothing to me. My wife is a conservative Christian, she wants the church and government marriage. Since unlike you I have a soul and care about my partner, I give her what she wants. I have a lot of responsibilities in my home, I get to decide foreign policy, defence policy, our position on social spending. She knows my views clearly, she just wants her way. I give that to her. When you learn why, then maybe one gay (you) will be ready for real marriage. In the mean time, yours is a facade, you don't get it. You are the best argument against gay government marriage. For you, it's all about you. That isn't marriage

 

[Skylar]

You said I called the British PM and British Intelligence liars

Exactly, you worship Miriam, but you call the British Intelligence liars when they did the same thing. You can't deny it, and you don't

The obvious problem with your reasoning being......you lied about me calling the British PM and British Intelligence liars. You made it up.

And I absolutely deny calling the British PM and British Intelligence liars. I've never even debated the topic. You made up the debate, you made up my participation in it, you made up my dialogue. All pulled sideways out of your ass.

You lied, you were caught lying....and you're still desperately scrambling to keep perpetrating the lie.

Which is exactly my point.

 

[kaz]

You get a tax rate reduction, government sure as hell doesn't take the money out of the budget and not spend it. So yeah, someone else is paying for it. Or did you think government money appears by magic?

Actually in all of the years we have been married, we have paid less than filing separately about 70% of the time- and the rest we paid more for being married.

Then your wife is not staying at home, which is the "concept of marriage," making it more affordable for kids to have stay at home mothers. Government isn't paying in your case for what it isn't getting, nothing wrong with her working or with government not paying for her to not work when she does work

Still waiting to hear how you ended being called 'husband' in your marriage- was it a popular election, did you just go by what your Daddy told you, or do you swap out titles with your wife?

I pay the bills

If you're the husband because you pay the bills; does that mean you become the wife if you lose your job and your wife starts paying the bills?

Yes, then I would be a little bitch like you

 

[kaz]

So none of you leftists can answer the question? Why should society fund gay mating

I have answered that- society is not funding gay mating or straight mating.

Government benefits- such as they are- have nothing to do with 'mating'.

So gays don't have sex when they get married? What is that claim based on?

 

[kaz]

You get a tax rate reduction, government sure as hell doesn't take the money out of the budget and not spend it. So yeah, someone else is paying for it. Or did you think government money appears by magic?

Actually in all of the years we have been married, we have paid less than filing separately about 70% of the time- and the rest we paid more for being married.

Then your wife is not staying at home, which is the "concept of marriage," making it more affordable for kids to have stay at home mothers. Government isn't paying in your case for what it isn't getting, nothing wrong with her working or with government not paying for her to not work when she does work

Still waiting to hear how you ended being called 'husband' in your marriage- was it a popular election, did you just go by what your Daddy told you, or do you swap out titles with your wife?

I pay the bills

So if you are in an accident and are unconscious, and your wife pays the bill, she becomes the husband?

Sheesh that is one wierd marriage.

She'd pay the bills based on the money in our account, which I filled, so no

 

[kaz]

Yes, authoritarian leftist that you are, marriage, families, sex, morality, they are all up to government. You're sick, my little friend

LOL......look if you want to call your relationship with your pillow, marriage- I don't really care.

But if you want a real marriage in the United States- you do what my wife and I did- you get legally married.

That's cute, you call yourself a husband? How do you decide which you are? Or do you take turns?

????

As I recall you are married also- how did you decide whether to call yourself a husband? did you take a poll of your friends and family? Ask your daddy what you should be called? Or do you take turns, so you take on the female term sometimes?

He simply uses the term that has been accepted for thousands of years.

The English word "married" have been accepted for thousands of years? How can that be when English as we know it hasn't even been around for thousands of years?

When in history before modern times have butt fuckers and carpet gnawers been called "married?"

 

[Skylar]

My wife is a conservative Christian, she wants the church and government marriage. Since unlike you I have a soul and care about my partner, I give her what she wants. I have a lot of responsibilities in my home, I get to decide foreign policy, defence policy, our position on social spending. She knows my views clearly, she just wants her way. I give that to her. When you learn why, then maybe one gay (you) will be ready for real marriage. In the mean time, yours is a facade, you don't get it. You are the best argument against gay government marriage. For you, it's all about you. That isn't marriage

Wow. That was dickishly hateful even by your normally batshit standards.

And Seawitch is a superb argument for gay marriage. She's in a long term relationship, has kids, has a family. Even by your 'procreation' standard, SeaWitch meets every criteria.

Yet in another superb demonstration that even you don't buy your bullshit, even when a same sex marriage meets your standard, you reject it. Demonstrating your standards as meaningless to you as government marriage.

Which is convenient. As your standards are meaningless to us too. And meaningless to the law.

 

[kaz]

So you support a man marrying his dad? Gross!

If it makes you feel any better, I find that disgusting as well. But I do support choice. It's not my place to determine who can marry who as long as it's between consenting adults.

The question, if you ever decide to read my original post, is why we should be paying for that

 

[kaz]

You get a tax rate reduction, government sure as hell doesn't take the money out of the budget and not spend it. So yeah, someone else is paying for it. Or did you think government money appears by magic?

Actually in all of the years we have been married, we have paid less than filing separately about 70% of the time- and the rest we paid more for being married.

Then your wife is not staying at home, which is the "concept of marriage," making it more affordable for kids to have stay at home mothers. Government isn't paying in your case for what it isn't getting, nothing wrong with her working or with government not paying for her to not work when she does work

Still waiting to hear how you ended being called 'husband' in your marriage- was it a popular election, did you just go by what your Daddy told you, or do you swap out titles with your wife?

I pay the bills

I pay the bill but I'm still a wife. My wife does all the cooking and much of the cleaning and laundry. We both help with homework.

You can call yourself whatever you want