Why should other taxpayers have to subsidize gay mating?

[jillian]

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

wow... pure idiocy... cool

no one is "subsidizing" gay marriage.

As for children, i'd prefer not to subsidize *you* reproducing.

 

[NYcarbineer]

You don't know what begging the question means.

Why shouldn't same sex couples be allowed to marry and file jointly?

Begging the question. Read my OP post

Your OP says this .

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

Childless opposite sex married couples get the benefit of filing jointly. They aren't 'perpetuating' the species. Why should they get the benefit and not same sex married couples?

Allowing Registered Domestic Partners and Individuals in Civil Unions to file Joint Returns or file as head of head of household is all it would take to solve the queer marriage quagmire if that were truly the case - it is not the case .

Then they wouldn't be legally married. How does that resolve the issue of inequality?

You're still out of touch - follow the thread back to the post I replied to and perhaps you'll get a clue.

So far as inequality - a mentally diseased degenerate pervert [aka GAY] is equal in all respects - they can marry any member of the opposite sex that they so choose.

Now don't misinterpret what I said like you've been doing all along with Kaz and others on this thread - I SAID - they are equal in all respects - I did not say they were entitled to Respect - Got it ?

You're an idiot even for this board full of idiot conservatives.

Saying gays are equal because they can marry someone of the opposite is sheer idiocy.

 

[GreenBean]

Irrelevant to the standard already set....where infections define whose disease it is.

Women and children make up a clear majority of HIV cases. Even if every single man on earth who has HIV is gay (which, of course, they're not) the 'HIV is a gay disease' narrative is still hapless, ignorant bullshit.

Which apparently you've gobbled down.

As I already pointed out with CDC statistics, women and children are a small fraction of HIV cases in this country.

• More than 1.2 million people in the United States are living with HIV infection, and almost 1 in 7 (14%) are unaware of their infection.
• Gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (MSMa), particularly young black/African American MSM, are most seriously affected by HIV.
• By race, blacks/African Americans face the most severe burden of HIV.

Although MSM represent about 4% of the male population in the United States4, in 2010, MSM accounted for 78% of new HIV infections among males and 63% of all new infections2. MSM accounted for 54% of all people living with HIV infection in 2011, the most recent year these data are available1.

HIV in the United States Statistics Overview Statistics Center HIV AIDS CDC

Although MSM accounted for 54% of all people living with HIV infection in 2011- it is unknown how many of those not statistically counted as MSM are closet fags nor how many were infected by half fags [bi-sexuals] or infected by someone who was infected by someone who was a half fag and so on down the line.

Thank you for pointing out once more that the claims that AID's is a 'gay disease' is just a lie perpetuated by bigoted homophobes.

Since as the statistics you have provided show- 46% of all HIV in the United States is not related to homosexuality.

I just quoted CDC statistics that show 85% of HIV is attributed to Male-2-Male transmission, and that probably is a gross underestimate.

HIV is a gay disease.

So Brip- once again- you claim:
HIV is a gay disease

And you also have stated you hate gays.

Therefore, according to your perverse 'logic'- you hate anyone with HIV.

Therefore you hate this little girl.

View attachment 41526

Because to you she is gay- because she has HIV- and you hate all gays.

Brip lives his/her life to hate others- including this little girl.

Because she has HIV- which Brip thinks is gay- and Brip hates all things gay.

Question should be

How did this little Girl contract HIV

Somewhere in the line of transmission form the initial source to this kid the odds are 999 out of 1000 that there's a slimy faggot involved and this poor kid is paying the price for perverts to get their rocks off.

 

[bodecea]

You don't know what begging the question means.

Why shouldn't same sex couples be allowed to marry and file jointly?

Begging the question. Read my OP post

Your OP says this .

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

Childless opposite sex married couples get the benefit of filing jointly. They aren't 'perpetuating' the species. Why should they get the benefit and not same sex married couples?

Allowing Registered Domestic Partners and Individuals in Civil Unions to file Joint Returns or file as head of head of household is all it would take to solve the queer marriage quagmire if that were truly the case - it is not the case .

Then they wouldn't be legally married. How does that resolve the issue of inequality?

You're still out of touch - follow the thread back to the post I replied to and perhaps you'll get a clue.

So far as inequality - a mentally diseased degenerate pervert [aka GAY] is equal in all respects - they can marry any member of the opposite sex that they so choose.

Now don't misinterpret what I said like you've been doing all along with Kaz and others on this thread - I SAID - they are equal in all respects - I did not say they were entitled to Respect - Got it ?

How well did that argument work in front of the Supreme Court?

 

[Syriusly]

As I already pointed out with CDC statistics, women and children are a small fraction of HIV cases in this country.

• More than 1.2 million people in the United States are living with HIV infection, and almost 1 in 7 (14%) are unaware of their infection.
• Gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (MSMa), particularly young black/African American MSM, are most seriously affected by HIV.
• By race, blacks/African Americans face the most severe burden of HIV.

Although MSM represent about 4% of the male population in the United States4, in 2010, MSM accounted for 78% of new HIV infections among males and 63% of all new infections2. MSM accounted for 54% of all people living with HIV infection in 2011, the most recent year these data are available1.

HIV in the United States Statistics Overview Statistics Center HIV AIDS CDC

Although MSM accounted for 54% of all people living with HIV infection in 2011- it is unknown how many of those not statistically counted as MSM are closet fags nor how many were infected by half fags [bi-sexuals] or infected by someone who was infected by someone who was a half fag and so on down the line.

Thank you for pointing out once more that the claims that AID's is a 'gay disease' is just a lie perpetuated by bigoted homophobes.

Since as the statistics you have provided show- 46% of all HIV in the United States is not related to homosexuality.

I just quoted CDC statistics that show 85% of HIV is attributed to Male-2-Male transmission, and that probably is a gross underestimate.

HIV is a gay disease.

So Brip- once again- you claim:
HIV is a gay disease

And you also have stated you hate gays.

Therefore, according to your perverse 'logic'- you hate anyone with HIV.

Therefore you hate this little girl.

View attachment 41526

Because to you she is gay- because she has HIV- and you hate all gays.

Brip lives his/her life to hate others- including this little girl.

Because she has HIV- which Brip thinks is gay- and Brip hates all things gay.

Question should be

How did this little Girl contract HIV

Somewhere in the line of transmission form the initial source to this kid the odds are 999 out of 1000 that there's a slimy faggot involved and this poor kid is paying the price for perverts to get their rocks off.

So you hate this little girl also?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Irrelevant to the standard already set....where infections define whose disease it is.

Women and children make up a clear majority of HIV cases. Even if every single man on earth who has HIV is gay (which, of course, they're not) the 'HIV is a gay disease' narrative is still hapless, ignorant bullshit.

Which apparently you've gobbled down.

As I already pointed out with CDC statistics, women and children are a small fraction of HIV cases in this country.

• More than 1.2 million people in the United States are living with HIV infection, and almost 1 in 7 (14%) are unaware of their infection.
• Gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (MSMa), particularly young black/African American MSM, are most seriously affected by HIV.
• By race, blacks/African Americans face the most severe burden of HIV.

Although MSM represent about 4% of the male population in the United States4, in 2010, MSM accounted for 78% of new HIV infections among males and 63% of all new infections2. MSM accounted for 54% of all people living with HIV infection in 2011, the most recent year these data are available1.

HIV in the United States Statistics Overview Statistics Center HIV AIDS CDC

Although MSM accounted for 54% of all people living with HIV infection in 2011- it is unknown how many of those not statistically counted as MSM are closet fags nor how many were infected by half fags [bi-sexuals] or infected by someone who was infected by someone who was a half fag and so on down the line.

Thank you for pointing out once more that the claims that AID's is a 'gay disease' is just a lie perpetuated by bigoted homophobes.

Since as the statistics you have provided show- 46% of all HIV in the United States is not related to homosexuality.

I just quoted CDC statistics that show 85% of HIV is attributed to Male-2-Male transmission, and that probably is a gross underestimate.

HIV is a gay disease.

So Brip- once again- you claim:
HIV is a gay disease

And you also have stated you hate gays.

Therefore, according to your perverse 'logic'- you hate anyone with HIV.

Therefore you hate this little girl.

View attachment 41526

Because to you she is gay- because she has HIV- and you hate all gays.

Brip lives his/her life to hate others- including this little girl.

Because she has HIV- which Brip thinks is gay- and Brip hates all things gay.

How much HIV are a married lesbian couple spreading?

 

[Faun]

You don't know what begging the question means.

Why shouldn't same sex couples be allowed to marry and file jointly?

Begging the question. Read my OP post

Your OP says this .

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

Childless opposite sex married couples get the benefit of filing jointly. They aren't 'perpetuating' the species. Why should they get the benefit and not same sex married couples?

Allowing Registered Domestic Partners and Individuals in Civil Unions to file Joint Returns or file as head of head of household is all it would take to solve the queer marriage quagmire if that were truly the case - it is not the case .

Then they wouldn't be legally married. How does that resolve the issue of inequality?

You're still out of touch - follow the thread back to the post I replied to and perhaps you'll get a clue.

So far as inequality - a mentally diseased degenerate pervert [aka GAY] is equal in all respects - they can marry any member of the opposite sex that they so choose.

Now don't misinterpret what I said like you've been doing all along with Kaz and others on this thread - I SAID - they are equal in all respects - I did not say they were entitled to Respect - Got it ?

Allowing them to marry a person of the opposite gender but not the person they love and want to be married to is denying them their inalienable right to pursue happiness. We don't do that in America. As far as repect, who the fuck cares who you respect?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Why shouldn't they get those?

Begging the question. Read my OP post

You don't know what begging the question means.

Why shouldn't same sex couples be allowed to marry and file jointly?

Begging the question. Read my OP post

Your OP says this .

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

Childless opposite sex married couples get the benefit of filing jointly. They aren't 'perpetuating' the species. Why should they get the benefit and not same sex married couples?

Allowing Registered Domestic Partners and Individuals in Civil Unions to file Joint Returns or file as head of head of household is all it would take to solve the queer marriage quagmire if that were truly the case - it is not the case .

Idiot. kaz's whole point is that gays shouldn't get joint filing status but opposite sex couples should.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Begging the question. Read my OP post

Your OP says this .

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

Childless opposite sex married couples get the benefit of filing jointly. They aren't 'perpetuating' the species. Why should they get the benefit and not same sex married couples?

Allowing Registered Domestic Partners and Individuals in Civil Unions to file Joint Returns or file as head of head of household is all it would take to solve the queer marriage quagmire if that were truly the case - it is not the case .

Then they wouldn't be legally married. How does that resolve the issue of inequality?

You're still out of touch - follow the thread back to the post I replied to and perhaps you'll get a clue.

So far as inequality - a mentally diseased degenerate pervert [aka GAY] is equal in all respects - they can marry any member of the opposite sex that they so choose.

Now don't misinterpret what I said like you've been doing all along with Kaz and others on this thread - I SAID - they are equal in all respects - I did not say they were entitled to Respect - Got it ?

Allowing them to marry a person of the opposite gender but not the person they love and want to be married to is denying them their inalienable right to pursue happiness. We don't do that in America. As far as repect, who the fuck cares who you respect?

Allowing a man to marry a woman but denying a woman the right to marry that woman is gender discrimination and gender discrimination is in fact unconstitutional.

 

[GreenBean]

Begging the question. Read my OP post

Your OP says this .

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

Childless opposite sex married couples get the benefit of filing jointly. They aren't 'perpetuating' the species. Why should they get the benefit and not same sex married couples?

Allowing Registered Domestic Partners and Individuals in Civil Unions to file Joint Returns or file as head of head of household is all it would take to solve the queer marriage quagmire if that were truly the case - it is not the case .

Then they wouldn't be legally married. How does that resolve the issue of inequality?

You're still out of touch - follow the thread back to the post I replied to and perhaps you'll get a clue.

So far as inequality - a mentally diseased degenerate pervert [aka GAY] is equal in all respects - they can marry any member of the opposite sex that they so choose.

Now don't misinterpret what I said like you've been doing all along with Kaz and others on this thread - I SAID - they are equal in all respects - I did not say they were entitled to Respect - Got it ?

You're an idiot even for this board full of idiot conservatives.

Saying gays are equal because they can marry someone of the opposite is sheer idiocy.

Begging the question. Read my OP post

You don't know what begging the question means.

Why shouldn't same sex couples be allowed to marry and file jointly?

Begging the question. Read my OP post

Your OP says this .

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

Childless opposite sex married couples get the benefit of filing jointly. They aren't 'perpetuating' the species. Why should they get the benefit and not same sex married couples?

Allowing Registered Domestic Partners and Individuals in Civil Unions to file Joint Returns or file as head of head of household is all it would take to solve the queer marriage quagmire if that were truly the case - it is not the case .

Idiot. kaz's whole point is that gays shouldn't not get joint filing status but opposite sex couples should.

Dumb ass YOU SAID - "Childless opposite sex married couples get the benefit of filing jointly. They aren't 'perpetuating' the species. Why should they get the benefit and not same sex married couples?"

You capice dumbass or are your own words too baffling for you ?

 

[GreenBean]

Begging the question. Read my OP post

Your OP says this .

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

Childless opposite sex married couples get the benefit of filing jointly. They aren't 'perpetuating' the species. Why should they get the benefit and not same sex married couples?

Allowing Registered Domestic Partners and Individuals in Civil Unions to file Joint Returns or file as head of head of household is all it would take to solve the queer marriage quagmire if that were truly the case - it is not the case .

Then they wouldn't be legally married. How does that resolve the issue of inequality?

You're still out of touch - follow the thread back to the post I replied to and perhaps you'll get a clue.

So far as inequality - a mentally diseased degenerate pervert [aka GAY] is equal in all respects - they can marry any member of the opposite sex that they so choose.

Now don't misinterpret what I said like you've been doing all along with Kaz and others on this thread - I SAID - they are equal in all respects - I did not say they were entitled to Respect - Got it ?

Allowing them to marry a person of the opposite gender but not the person they love and want to be married to is denying them their inalienable right to pursue happiness. We don't do that in America. As far as repect, who the fuck cares who you respect?

Nice back pedal

 

[NYcarbineer]

Your OP says this .

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

Childless opposite sex married couples get the benefit of filing jointly. They aren't 'perpetuating' the species. Why should they get the benefit and not same sex married couples?

Allowing Registered Domestic Partners and Individuals in Civil Unions to file Joint Returns or file as head of head of household is all it would take to solve the queer marriage quagmire if that were truly the case - it is not the case .

Then they wouldn't be legally married. How does that resolve the issue of inequality?

You're still out of touch - follow the thread back to the post I replied to and perhaps you'll get a clue.

So far as inequality - a mentally diseased degenerate pervert [aka GAY] is equal in all respects - they can marry any member of the opposite sex that they so choose.

Now don't misinterpret what I said like you've been doing all along with Kaz and others on this thread - I SAID - they are equal in all respects - I did not say they were entitled to Respect - Got it ?

You're an idiot even for this board full of idiot conservatives.

Saying gays are equal because they can marry someone of the opposite is sheer idiocy.

You don't know what begging the question means.

Why shouldn't same sex couples be allowed to marry and file jointly?

Begging the question. Read my OP post

Your OP says this .

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

Childless opposite sex married couples get the benefit of filing jointly. They aren't 'perpetuating' the species. Why should they get the benefit and not same sex married couples?

Allowing Registered Domestic Partners and Individuals in Civil Unions to file Joint Returns or file as head of head of household is all it would take to solve the queer marriage quagmire if that were truly the case - it is not the case .

Idiot. kaz's whole point is that gays shouldn't not get joint filing status but opposite sex couples should.

Dumb ass YOU SAID - "Childless opposite sex married couples get the benefit of filing jointly. They aren't 'perpetuating' the species. Why should they get the benefit and not same sex married couples?"

You capice dumbass or are your own words too baffling for you ?

Go read the OP.

 

[GreenBean]

As I already pointed out with CDC statistics, women and children are a small fraction of HIV cases in this country.

• More than 1.2 million people in the United States are living with HIV infection, and almost 1 in 7 (14%) are unaware of their infection.
• Gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (MSMa), particularly young black/African American MSM, are most seriously affected by HIV.
• By race, blacks/African Americans face the most severe burden of HIV.

Although MSM represent about 4% of the male population in the United States4, in 2010, MSM accounted for 78% of new HIV infections among males and 63% of all new infections2. MSM accounted for 54% of all people living with HIV infection in 2011, the most recent year these data are available1.

HIV in the United States Statistics Overview Statistics Center HIV AIDS CDC

Although MSM accounted for 54% of all people living with HIV infection in 2011- it is unknown how many of those not statistically counted as MSM are closet fags nor how many were infected by half fags [bi-sexuals] or infected by someone who was infected by someone who was a half fag and so on down the line.

Thank you for pointing out once more that the claims that AID's is a 'gay disease' is just a lie perpetuated by bigoted homophobes.

Since as the statistics you have provided show- 46% of all HIV in the United States is not related to homosexuality.

I just quoted CDC statistics that show 85% of HIV is attributed to Male-2-Male transmission, and that probably is a gross underestimate.

HIV is a gay disease.

So Brip- once again- you claim:
HIV is a gay disease

And you also have stated you hate gays.

Therefore, according to your perverse 'logic'- you hate anyone with HIV.

Therefore you hate this little girl.

View attachment 41526

Because to you she is gay- because she has HIV- and you hate all gays.

Brip lives his/her life to hate others- including this little girl.

Because she has HIV- which Brip thinks is gay- and Brip hates all things gay.

How much HIV are a married lesbian couple spreading?

Not a whole hell of a lot - transmission of the virus requires an exchange of body fluids. Lesbian Sushi sauce is not conducive to transmission of HIV ... but that's okay because the queers more than make up for it.

 

[GreenBean]

Allowing Registered Domestic Partners and Individuals in Civil Unions to file Joint Returns or file as head of head of household is all it would take to solve the queer marriage quagmire if that were truly the case - it is not the case .

Then they wouldn't be legally married. How does that resolve the issue of inequality?

You're still out of touch - follow the thread back to the post I replied to and perhaps you'll get a clue.

So far as inequality - a mentally diseased degenerate pervert [aka GAY] is equal in all respects - they can marry any member of the opposite sex that they so choose.

Now don't misinterpret what I said like you've been doing all along with Kaz and others on this thread - I SAID - they are equal in all respects - I did not say they were entitled to Respect - Got it ?

You're an idiot even for this board full of idiot conservatives.

Saying gays are equal because they can marry someone of the opposite is sheer idiocy.

Begging the question. Read my OP post

Your OP says this .

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

Childless opposite sex married couples get the benefit of filing jointly. They aren't 'perpetuating' the species. Why should they get the benefit and not same sex married couples?

Allowing Registered Domestic Partners and Individuals in Civil Unions to file Joint Returns or file as head of head of household is all it would take to solve the queer marriage quagmire if that were truly the case - it is not the case .

Idiot. kaz's whole point is that gays shouldn't not get joint filing status but opposite sex couples should.

Dumb ass YOU SAID - "Childless opposite sex married couples get the benefit of filing jointly. They aren't 'perpetuating' the species. Why should they get the benefit and not same sex married couples?"

You capice dumbass or are your own words too baffling for you ?

Go read the OP.

I didn't reply to the OP dumbass _ I replied to your post capice ?!

 

[Faun]

Your OP says this .

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

Childless opposite sex married couples get the benefit of filing jointly. They aren't 'perpetuating' the species. Why should they get the benefit and not same sex married couples?

Allowing Registered Domestic Partners and Individuals in Civil Unions to file Joint Returns or file as head of head of household is all it would take to solve the queer marriage quagmire if that were truly the case - it is not the case .

Then they wouldn't be legally married. How does that resolve the issue of inequality?

You're still out of touch - follow the thread back to the post I replied to and perhaps you'll get a clue.

So far as inequality - a mentally diseased degenerate pervert [aka GAY] is equal in all respects - they can marry any member of the opposite sex that they so choose.

Now don't misinterpret what I said like you've been doing all along with Kaz and others on this thread - I SAID - they are equal in all respects - I did not say they were entitled to Respect - Got it ?

Allowing them to marry a person of the opposite gender but not the person they love and want to be married to is denying them their inalienable right to pursue happiness. We don't do that in America. As far as repect, who the fuck cares who you respect?

Nice back pedal

If that's all you've got to say, then you have no argument against same-sex marriage.

 

[Seawytch]

Begging the question. Read my OP post

You don't know what begging the question means.

Why shouldn't same sex couples be allowed to marry and file jointly?

Begging the question. Read my OP post

Your OP says this .

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

Childless opposite sex married couples get the benefit of filing jointly. They aren't 'perpetuating' the species. Why should they get the benefit and not same sex married couples?

Allowing Registered Domestic Partners and Individuals in Civil Unions to file Joint Returns or file as head of head of household is all it would take to solve the queer marriage quagmire if that were truly the case - it is not the case .

Idiot. kaz's whole point is that gays shouldn't get joint filing status but opposite sex couples should.

Regardless of the "production" of children. It's okay to "subsidize" the straights that don't and won't have children but not okay to "subsidize" gays even if the DO have children.

Soooo not the libertarian position.

 

[kaz]

Would you care to explain how two fags or two dikes created life all by themselves ... it doesn't happen little fella and the perpetuate the species' angle is not moot

'All by themselves' isn't the standard we hold straights to

Of course it is. The concept of government marriage is fucking and having babies. That some have them through adoption and test tubes isn't why it's there and we wouldn't have it if straights had most of their babies that way

And yet, the government doesn't withhold marriage licenses from folks who can't. or don't want to, have kids. It's not a prerequisite to get a marriage license if you're straight so it's not an excuse to withhold one if you're gay.

That you don't get a hit with every at bat doesn't mean you can't bat. Not ever getting a hit at any at bat does prove you can't bat

A beauty of the government is that it doesn't get to decide who gets to bat. It has to treat everyone equally under the law.

Right, that's why we have polygamy and narcissists can marry themselves, we all get to decide for ourselves.

Liar, you don't believe that

 

[kaz]

Yes, then I would be a little bitch like you

Nah, I'm the man in my house. Always and under any circumstances. You? You just admitted you can be the wife.

I'm a man by action, you claim manhood because you have a penis. And you think that's you looking good in this?

Is that why you cry like a little girl? (No insult intended to little girls)

So the voices in your head are little whiners like you, are they?

Look at you do it again.... Putting words and thoughts of your own onto other posters.

Wow, you are seriously not a bright girl. I can't help you if you can't read

 

[kaz]

No, that's YOUR concept...a concept most people don't share

You'll say anything, wont' you? Got it, people don't think lower tax rates are about children, they are about holding hands. What a shill

There's that Irony again.

Back to the playground for you! You do love it there

 

[kaz]

Even by your 'procreation' standard, SeaWitch meets every criteria

Nope, she had a test tube baby, she's the parent and the only parent in the government marriage. Read my original post

Now you are telling us about what kind of babies we had.

I assumed when you said the father was a gay man he didn't bang you, are you saying that's not the case? I admit that was an assumption on my part, you saying it was wrong?

Can't keep your lesbians straight (pardon the pun)

That was me that had a gay man father her children. He's the donor, my wife and I are the parents. So says our children and so says the law. The law part matters because of anti gay bigots like you that would want to take our children away from us.

But it is that they know we are their parents that matters. They know their donor is their donor and that my wife and I are their parents.

Isn't it sad to see someone who needs, literally NEEDS those labels of parent to be just so? It's as if they can't show by their actions who the real parents are, it's got to be like wearing a nametag that says "Hello, due to biology I am your parent."

Valid point in a different discussion, irrelevant to this one. You don't get government door prizes for that, Trixie