Why should other taxpayers have to subsidize gay mating?

[Seawytch]

I see no difference between a gay couple who chooses to- or not to- have children- and to get married- or not get married and

a straight couple who is infertile- and chooses to- or not to- have children- and to get married - or not get married

The gay couple wasn't having children either ex-post or ex-ante. The straight couple was 90% having children ex-ante. Decisions have to be made ex-ante, not ex-post. You keep ignoring my pointing that out. How do you go back and change the upfront choice?

My brother and his wife were not having children ex-post or ex-ante. My 90 year old grandfather was not going to have children with his 80 year old girlfriend ex-post or ex-ante...

You don't care about them and children though...just the gay married couples...bigot.

 

[kaz]

[

Retarded is thinking two women are "married." I have no objection to them thinking that, but most people don't. Which is why you have to keep going to the courts to decree criminal fiats to get your way

See this is what makes you a retard. The judiciary is not criminal.

Your lack of understanding of the Constitution is beyond comical.

The Judiciary is clearly criminal when they legislate from the bench. They have zero Constitutional authority to do that

No court is legislating from the bench.

They didn't in Loving v. Virginia
They didn't in Zablocki
And they are not in the current cases in front of the court.

Yes, gays not getting a tax break and validation is the same as blacks getting lynched and shot with water canons. Gay is the new black. Not.

Being black changed who you could marry for every black, being gay changed who you can marry for zero gays. Yeah, that's the same...

 

[kaz]

I work hard to keep family out of it. I'd appreciate the same in return. I'm not bringing up my wife, you are

Okay- I will do so- sorry.

You just consider both parties to the marriage to be government sponsored prostitutes?

We are good.

And I never said anyone was a prostitute. You did. How do prostitutes hire each other? I don't even get how you think that makes sense

According to you marriage is all about the government paying married couples for sex- prostitutes get paid for sex- the government is paying both of them for sex, hence both are prostitutes.

Or maybe porn actors.

I mean logically following your odd point of view that marriage is all about the government paying couples to have sex.

Isn't that the entire reason this is before the courts? Financial benefit?

Was this heterosexuals that brought the case? No?
!

No.

No.

So gays are not taking the tax breaks? Link?



This case wasn't brought by gays? If that's true, then there is no standing, the case would be tossed immediately

 

[kaz]

Okay- I will do so- sorry.

You just consider both parties to the marriage to be government sponsored prostitutes?

We are good.

And I never said anyone was a prostitute. You did. How do prostitutes hire each other? I don't even get how you think that makes sense

According to you marriage is all about the government paying married couples for sex- prostitutes get paid for sex- the government is paying both of them for sex, hence both are prostitutes.

Or maybe porn actors.

I mean logically following your odd point of view that marriage is all about the government paying couples to have sex.

Isn't that the entire reason this is before the courts? Financial benefit?

Was this heterosexuals that brought the case? No?
!

No.

No.

Opinions noted

Gay marriage was actually brought to the court by Leprechauns you know

 

[kaz]

You're right...there is no point to this ridiculous discussion. There are far, far (by the hundreds of thousands) more "subsidized" straight married couples not having kids than there are gay "subsidized" married couples.

Looks like you're catching on to how silly anti gay bigots arguments are...and how easily they fail.

Actually what you are proving is that you are a gay Nazi

FemiNazi - the 60s feminists and their current avatars are excretions of lesbianism.

LOL.....its like you live to parrot Rush Limbaugh.

Good to know you hate all women as much as you hate homosexuals.

Attacking the source is two things. First, it's a logical fallacy. Second, it says you have nothing

I've read this thread from post one - he hasn't come out with anything of substance yet- I doubt he's capable of it ----in fact the only poster I see here from the queer camp that has any shred of intelligence is seawytch - but she's shivering in her skivvies from some of the previous thumpings she's been subjected to.

Hey Queers - Is this he best you can do ??!! Half wits and simpletons .... lol

Yes, Seawytch runs the gamut from lucid to kool-aid swiller. The rest of them have the needle stuck on kool-aid swiller.

 

[kaz]

Actually what you are proving is that you are a gay Nazi

FemiNazi - the 60s feminists and their current avatars are excretions of lesbianism.

LOL.....its like you live to parrot Rush Limbaugh.

Good to know you hate all women as much as you hate homosexuals.

Half wits and simpletons ....

Well that only explains half of you- the other half is your hate for Americans who happen to be gay.

Half wits and simpletons .... Well that only explains half of you- the other half is your hate for Americans who happen to be gay.

Yes, not wanting to pay gays to screw and not procreate is hating them. You got us

 

[kaz]

No it doesn't, that's just stupid. They had marriage without kids long before gays wanted to get paid to screw.
t

Ah its so sad- Kaz thinks marriage is only about getting paid to have sex.

Strawman, I covered that

I wonder if his wife knows that is how he considers their marriage?

My wife is well aware of my views on marriage. We have an understanding. I get my view, she gets her way. She's good with that

So she is okay with you considering her a government sponsored prostitute?

I work hard to keep family out of it. I'd appreciate the same in return. I'm not bringing up my wife, you are

Your marriage is relevant to this thread because you said you're opposed to government marriage,

and yet, you're married.

Now why is that?

Asked and answered. If you don't agree with my answer, build on it, don't ignore it and ask again

 

[kaz]

You ask me this question over and over and I answer it over and over. Why should I bother if you don't retain the answer? You don't like my argument so you're going to ignore it isn't an argument

Stop challenging Kaz and his words!

Really its simple- Kaz has his marriage bennies- and wants gay couples to have to pay for his marriage bennies while keeping them from gay couples.

All the rest is just his rationale for why he has his and screw the gays.

Here is a learning moment for both of you nit wits. As I said, my issue is not that he's "challenging" my words, it's that he keeps ignoring my responses and repeating his question. Debates involve processing responses and building on them, not ignoring them and repeating the same question endlessly.

Get it now? You don't, do you?

Stop challenging Kaz and his words!

Really its simple- Kaz has his marriage bennies- and wants gay couples to have to pay for his marriage bennies while keeping them from gay couples.

All the rest is just his rationale for why he has his and screw the gays.

Let's check the scorecard so far:

Kids created by having sex

Kaz - 2
All gay sex in the history of humanity - 0

Wow, I'm ahead!

You're ahead in what? What do you "win", Kaz? Are the millions of babies born every year through AI or IVF the children of "losers"?

Today, approximately 1.5% of all infants born in the United States every year are conceived using Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART).
​

Do adoptive parents "lose" in your world? Oh, that's right...it's just the gay ones.

Tell us that story about how you're not an anti gay bigot again...

Irrelevant to my OP post. And this has been asked and answered. If you don't like my answer, build on what I said, don't ignore my answer and ask again

 

[kaz]

We are good.

And I never said anyone was a prostitute. You did. How do prostitutes hire each other? I don't even get how you think that makes sense

According to you marriage is all about the government paying married couples for sex- prostitutes get paid for sex- the government is paying both of them for sex, hence both are prostitutes.

Or maybe porn actors.

I mean logically following your odd point of view that marriage is all about the government paying couples to have sex.

Isn't that the entire reason this is before the courts? Financial benefit?

Was this heterosexuals that brought the case? No?

You seem confused.

As Kaz has rightly stated, he is responsible for more children being born than all same sex coupling in the history of the world.

That's actually kinda awesome when you think of it!

That's actually very awesome when you think of it!!

No, asshole, marriage is not about financial benefit. Well, maybe it was for you and your wife, but you don't speak for anyone else.

Wow, that would have been a great argument ... if he said that ...

He has said it many times.

I haven't seen that, and he certainly didn't say it in that post

 

[kaz]

We are good.

And I never said anyone was a prostitute. You did. How do prostitutes hire each other? I don't even get how you think that makes sense

According to you marriage is all about the government paying married couples for sex- prostitutes get paid for sex- the government is paying both of them for sex, hence both are prostitutes.

Or maybe porn actors.

I mean logically following your odd point of view that marriage is all about the government paying couples to have sex.

Gays are only having sex if they are paid to have sex? What is that based on?

That's even a better argument to not fund gay mating. Let's stop paying them to have sex so they stop having sex and we end the whole ridiculous issue. Now you're talking!

That was based upon your idiotic claim

It's their wanting me to pay for their gay fucking I oppose.- Thats you Kaz- speaking of marriage of course- which means you believe marriage is nothing more than government sponsored prostitution.

And of course it just brings it back to:
Kaz is happy to get his government bennies and have gay couples pay for them- but he doesn't want share with them

Gays are after the money, Holmes. You work out who you are saying is a prostitute

As have you, you lying piece of dog shit.

I followed the concept of marriage, I had two kids the old fashioned way

 

[kaz]

I see no difference between a gay couple who chooses to- or not to- have children- and to get married- or not get married and

a straight couple who is infertile- and chooses to- or not to- have children- and to get married - or not get married

The gay couple wasn't having children either ex-post or ex-ante. The straight couple was 90% having children ex-ante. Decisions have to be made ex-ante, not ex-post. You keep ignoring my pointing that out. How do you go back and change the upfront choice?

My brother and his wife were not having children ex-post or ex-ante. My 90 year old grandfather was not going to have children with his 80 year old girlfriend ex-post or ex-ante...

You don't care about them and children though...just the gay married couples...bigot.

Anecdotal arguments aren't worth anything

 

[Pop23]

I wonder if the fuckwit who started this thread realizes that the definition of 'mating', the term he uses in the thread title, i.e., 'gay mating' means:

1. mating - the act of pairing a male and female for reproductive purposes

lol, of course he doesn't. That is one of a zillion characteristics he exhibits that earn him the title of 'fuckwit'.

Then that would imply that one group mates and the other simulates mating? Or imitates mating?

Gee thanks for clearing that up!

99% of all human sexual acts are for purposes other than mating. That is unique to our species, and one more reason the reproduction argument is so stupid.

But only one of the two groups have the stress that the act of pleasure will result in pregnancy.

Seems the more you try to make the two groups similar, the more you point out the differences

 

[Pop23]

We are good.

And I never said anyone was a prostitute. You did. How do prostitutes hire each other? I don't even get how you think that makes sense

According to you marriage is all about the government paying married couples for sex- prostitutes get paid for sex- the government is paying both of them for sex, hence both are prostitutes.

Or maybe porn actors.

I mean logically following your odd point of view that marriage is all about the government paying couples to have sex.

Isn't that the entire reason this is before the courts? Financial benefit?

Was this heterosexuals that brought the case? No?

You seem confused.

As Kaz has rightly stated, he is responsible for more children being born than all same sex coupling in the history of the world.

That's actually kinda awesome when you think of it!

That's actually very awesome when you think of it!!

No, asshole, marriage is not about financial benefit. Well, maybe it was for you and your wife, but you don't speak for anyone else.

Wow, that would have been a great argument ... if he said that ...

He has said it many times.

This I will agree with. I have said that the GOVERNMENTAL LICENSE simply bestows GOVERNMENTAL economic benefit to the couple.

The gov cannot demand love as there is no love test

The gov cannot demand sex.

The government cannot demand faithfulness or fidelity.

All the above are SEPERATE from the marriage license.

 

[NYcarbineer]

According to you marriage is all about the government paying married couples for sex- prostitutes get paid for sex- the government is paying both of them for sex, hence both are prostitutes.

Or maybe porn actors.

I mean logically following your odd point of view that marriage is all about the government paying couples to have sex.

Gays are only having sex if they are paid to have sex? What is that based on?

That's even a better argument to not fund gay mating. Let's stop paying them to have sex so they stop having sex and we end the whole ridiculous issue. Now you're talking!

That was based upon your idiotic claim

It's their wanting me to pay for their gay fucking I oppose.- Thats you Kaz- speaking of marriage of course- which means you believe marriage is nothing more than government sponsored prostitution.

And of course it just brings it back to:
Kaz is happy to get his government bennies and have gay couples pay for them- but he doesn't want share with them

Gays are after the money, Holmes. You work out who you are saying is a prostitute

As have you, you lying piece of dog shit.

I followed the concept of marriage, I had two kids the old fashioned way

And you've gotten thousands of dollars worth of tax breaks for having two kids that taxpayers without children don't get.

Why should we pay you to have kids?

 

[NYcarbineer]

I wonder if the fuckwit who started this thread realizes that the definition of 'mating', the term he uses in the thread title, i.e., 'gay mating' means:

1. mating - the act of pairing a male and female for reproductive purposes

lol, of course he doesn't. That is one of a zillion characteristics he exhibits that earn him the title of 'fuckwit'.

Then that would imply that one group mates and the other simulates mating? Or imitates mating?

Gee thanks for clearing that up!

99% of all human sexual acts are for purposes other than mating. That is unique to our species, and one more reason the reproduction argument is so stupid.

But only one of the two groups have the stress that the act of pleasure will result in pregnancy.

Seems the more you try to make the two groups similar, the more you point out the differences

The stress? Goddam, you are digging.

Heterosexual couples go to great lengths to make their sexual activity non-reproductive, IOW, they go to great lengths to make their sex like gay sex.

 

[NYcarbineer]

FemiNazi - the 60s feminists and their current avatars are excretions of lesbianism.

LOL.....its like you live to parrot Rush Limbaugh.

Good to know you hate all women as much as you hate homosexuals.

Half wits and simpletons ....

Well that only explains half of you- the other half is your hate for Americans who happen to be gay.

Half wits and simpletons .... Well that only explains half of you- the other half is your hate for Americans who happen to be gay.

Yes, not wanting to pay gays to screw and not procreate is hating them. You got us

You don't pay gays anything. Gays pay far more in taxes by being childless than they can ever gain from getting married.

The takers are people like you who get huge tax breaks just from breeding.

 

[Pop23]

I wonder if the fuckwit who started this thread realizes that the definition of 'mating', the term he uses in the thread title, i.e., 'gay mating' means:

1. mating - the act of pairing a male and female for reproductive purposes

lol, of course he doesn't. That is one of a zillion characteristics he exhibits that earn him the title of 'fuckwit'.

Then that would imply that one group mates and the other simulates mating? Or imitates mating?

Gee thanks for clearing that up!

99% of all human sexual acts are for purposes other than mating. That is unique to our species, and one more reason the reproduction argument is so stupid.

But only one of the two groups have the stress that the act of pleasure will result in pregnancy.

Seems the more you try to make the two groups similar, the more you point out the differences

The stress? Goddam, you are digging.

Heterosexual couples go to great lengths to make their sexual activity non-reproductive, IOW, they go to great lengths to make their sex like gay sex.

Great lengths.

I agree, and great expense. Neither of which are required in same sex couplings. And, same sex partners never worry about birth control failure.

Again, pointing out how very different the two groups are.

 

[Pop23]

LOL.....its like you live to parrot Rush Limbaugh.

Good to know you hate all women as much as you hate homosexuals.

Half wits and simpletons ....

Well that only explains half of you- the other half is your hate for Americans who happen to be gay.

Half wits and simpletons .... Well that only explains half of you- the other half is your hate for Americans who happen to be gay.

Yes, not wanting to pay gays to screw and not procreate is hating them. You got us

You don't pay gays anything. Gays pay far more in taxes by being childless than they can ever gain from getting married.

The takers are people like you who get huge tax breaks just from breeding.

And reap the benefits of those children.

If you need a doctor, that doctor is the result of male/female coupling

If I need a doctor, he is not the result of same sex coupling.

Quite the disparity, don't you think?

 

[kaz]

Gays are only having sex if they are paid to have sex? What is that based on?

That's even a better argument to not fund gay mating. Let's stop paying them to have sex so they stop having sex and we end the whole ridiculous issue. Now you're talking!

That was based upon your idiotic claim

It's their wanting me to pay for their gay fucking I oppose.- Thats you Kaz- speaking of marriage of course- which means you believe marriage is nothing more than government sponsored prostitution.

And of course it just brings it back to:
Kaz is happy to get his government bennies and have gay couples pay for them- but he doesn't want share with them

Gays are after the money, Holmes. You work out who you are saying is a prostitute

As have you, you lying piece of dog shit.

I followed the concept of marriage, I had two kids the old fashioned way

And you've gotten thousands of dollars worth of tax breaks for having two kids that taxpayers without children don't get.

Why should we pay you to have kids?

OK, I'll answer your questions one more time. After that when you ask me again, I'm just going to call you stupid

You are stupid

 

[kaz]

You don't pay gays anything. Gays pay far more in taxes by being childless than they can ever gain from getting married.

The takers are people like you who get huge tax breaks just from breeding.

I thought you said there were no tax breaks, now suddenly you get it?

And yes, we get it for breeding. Raising a family is expensive. My question exactly. Why should gays get it for not breeding, just having sex?