Why should other taxpayers have to subsidize gay mating?

[PaintMyHouse]

Didn't say that, now did I? In this case it reflects the will of society, promoting love and marriage, both of which benefit society.

Whatever you are hooked on that causes you to say this kind of nonsense, drop it and start dealing with reality instead.

That's exactly what you said, government = society

No, that is not at all what I said. I'll repeat it for you: In this case it reflects the will of society, promoting love and marriage, both of which benefit society.

Life can be unfair and society picks winners and losers. Now you know.

You never said what you said, you're an intellectual infant who makes snarky yet meaningless comments then say no you didn't. Get it now? Time to grow up and deal with reality

Your projection is noted, and I have little use for children, meaning you.

Should you wish to discuss tax-breaks for breeders, do so.

Time to grow up now, get it?

And government should treat all it's citizens the same, no one should get a tax break for anything. The same taxes should apply to all

A very nice, but childish idea, and utterly idiotic and unrealistic, not to mention economically unsound. Thanks for stopping by. Your "life should be fair" whine has been recorded for all to see. It's not worthy but have a cookie anyway.

 

[sealybobo]

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

Why do we subsidize any couples? Or if we want to encourage people to have kids only give tax breaks to people with kids. Then you wouldn't be discriminating.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

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

Why do we subsidize any couples? Or if we want to encourage people to have kids only give tax breaks to people with kids. Then you wouldn't be discriminating.

I very much doubt that Kaz approves of Breaks for Breeders either. After all, what good does that do him and as we all know, it's all about him...

 

[sealybobo]

Didn't say that, now did I? In this case it reflects the will of society, promoting love and marriage, both of which benefit society.

Whatever you are hooked on that causes you to say this kind of nonsense, drop it and start dealing with reality instead.

That's exactly what you said, government = society

No, that is not at all what I said. I'll repeat it for you: In this case it reflects the will of society, promoting love and marriage, both of which benefit society.

Life can be unfair and society picks winners and losers. Now you know.

You never said what you said, you're an intellectual infant who makes snarky yet meaningless comments then say no you didn't. Get it now? Time to grow up and deal with reality

Your projection is noted, and I have little use for children, meaning you.

Should you wish to discuss tax-breaks for breeders, do so.

Time to grow up now, get it?

And government should treat all it's citizens the same, no one should get a tax break for anything. The same taxes should apply to all

We give tax breaks to encourage spending or other behaviors.

I can't remember the country but they wanted to increase the birth rate so they gave huge tax breaks for people who have kids 9 months from today. So get to screwing.

 

[kaz]

That's exactly what you said, government = society

No, that is not at all what I said. I'll repeat it for you: In this case it reflects the will of society, promoting love and marriage, both of which benefit society.

Life can be unfair and society picks winners and losers. Now you know.

You never said what you said, you're an intellectual infant who makes snarky yet meaningless comments then say no you didn't. Get it now? Time to grow up and deal with reality

Your projection is noted, and I have little use for children, meaning you.

Should you wish to discuss tax-breaks for breeders, do so.

Time to grow up now, get it?

And government should treat all it's citizens the same, no one should get a tax break for anything. The same taxes should apply to all

A very nice, but childish idea, and utterly idiotic and unrealistic, not to mention economically unsound. Thanks for stopping by. Your "life should be fair" whine has been recorded for all to see. It's not worthy but have a cookie anyway.

Wow, sorry for making you scream like that, calm down, it's just an internet discussion. Here's a tissue, Darlene.

Thanks for your concern over my feelings, gay boy, but I don't give a shit and I'm not interested in you anyway. Try to focus on the discussion if you don't mind instead of my feelings. M'kay?

 

[sealybobo]

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

Why do we subsidize any couples? Or if we want to encourage people to have kids only give tax breaks to people with kids. Then you wouldn't be discriminating.

I very much doubt that Kaz approves of Breaks for Breeders either. After all, what good does that do him and as we all know, it's all about him...

Unfortunately Republicans are electing more and more people who think like kas

 

[PaintMyHouse]

That's exactly what you said, government = society

No, that is not at all what I said. I'll repeat it for you: In this case it reflects the will of society, promoting love and marriage, both of which benefit society.

Life can be unfair and society picks winners and losers. Now you know.

You never said what you said, you're an intellectual infant who makes snarky yet meaningless comments then say no you didn't. Get it now? Time to grow up and deal with reality

Your projection is noted, and I have little use for children, meaning you.

Should you wish to discuss tax-breaks for breeders, do so.

Time to grow up now, get it?

And government should treat all it's citizens the same, no one should get a tax break for anything. The same taxes should apply to all

We give tax breaks to encourage spending or other behaviors.

I can't remember the country but they wanted to increase the birth rate so they gave huge tax breaks for people who have kids 9 months from today. So get to screwing.

Many nations have incentives to encourage people to have children. Here even Kaz would be okay with that if those breaks were only for those making white babies...

 

[sealybobo]

Didn't say that, now did I? In this case it reflects the will of society, promoting love and marriage, both of which benefit society.

Whatever you are hooked on that causes you to say this kind of nonsense, drop it and start dealing with reality instead.

That's exactly what you said, government = society

No, that is not at all what I said. I'll repeat it for you: In this case it reflects the will of society, promoting love and marriage, both of which benefit society.

Life can be unfair and society picks winners and losers. Now you know.

You never said what you said, you're an intellectual infant who makes snarky yet meaningless comments then say no you didn't. Get it now? Time to grow up and deal with reality

Your projection is noted, and I have little use for children, meaning you.

Should you wish to discuss tax-breaks for breeders, do so.

Time to grow up now, get it?

And government should treat all it's citizens the same, no one should get a tax break for anything. The same taxes should apply to all

You didn't say that about the bush tax breaks.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

No, that is not at all what I said. I'll repeat it for you: In this case it reflects the will of society, promoting love and marriage, both of which benefit society.

Life can be unfair and society picks winners and losers. Now you know.

You never said what you said, you're an intellectual infant who makes snarky yet meaningless comments then say no you didn't. Get it now? Time to grow up and deal with reality

Your projection is noted, and I have little use for children, meaning you.

Should you wish to discuss tax-breaks for breeders, do so.

Time to grow up now, get it?

And government should treat all it's citizens the same, no one should get a tax break for anything. The same taxes should apply to all

A very nice, but childish idea, and utterly idiotic and unrealistic, not to mention economically unsound. Thanks for stopping by. Your "life should be fair" whine has been recorded for all to see. It's not worthy but have a cookie anyway.

Wow, sorry for making you scream like that, calm down, it's just an internet discussion. Here's a tissue, Darlene.

Thanks for your concern over my feelings, gay boy, but I don't give a shit and I'm not interested in you anyway. Try to focus on the discussion if you don't mind instead of my feelings. M'kay?

You affect me not at all little man. Stop kidding yourself that you do, and feeling is all that you have apparently? So far we've seen nothing else.

 

[sealybobo]

No, that is not at all what I said. I'll repeat it for you: In this case it reflects the will of society, promoting love and marriage, both of which benefit society.

Life can be unfair and society picks winners and losers. Now you know.

You never said what you said, you're an intellectual infant who makes snarky yet meaningless comments then say no you didn't. Get it now? Time to grow up and deal with reality

Your projection is noted, and I have little use for children, meaning you.

Should you wish to discuss tax-breaks for breeders, do so.

Time to grow up now, get it?

And government should treat all it's citizens the same, no one should get a tax break for anything. The same taxes should apply to all

We give tax breaks to encourage spending or other behaviors.

I can't remember the country but they wanted to increase the birth rate so they gave huge tax breaks for people who have kids 9 months from today. So get to screwing.

Many nations have incentives to encourage people to have children. Here even Kaz would be okay with that if those breaks were only for those making white babies...

And those white kids won't do manual labor so no wonder we need blacks and Mexicans to breed more babies.

And these same whites make fun of Greeks? Easy to criticize when you are a part of the privileged class.

 

[kaz]

No, that is not at all what I said. I'll repeat it for you: In this case it reflects the will of society, promoting love and marriage, both of which benefit society.

Life can be unfair and society picks winners and losers. Now you know.

You never said what you said, you're an intellectual infant who makes snarky yet meaningless comments then say no you didn't. Get it now? Time to grow up and deal with reality

Your projection is noted, and I have little use for children, meaning you.

Should you wish to discuss tax-breaks for breeders, do so.

Time to grow up now, get it?

And government should treat all it's citizens the same, no one should get a tax break for anything. The same taxes should apply to all

We give tax breaks to encourage spending or other behaviors.

I can't remember the country but they wanted to increase the birth rate so they gave huge tax breaks for people who have kids 9 months from today. So get to screwing.

Many nations have incentives to encourage people to have children. Here even Kaz would be okay with that if those breaks were only for those making white babies...

I've decided to erase race whores from my viewing experience, it has made the site so much more pleasant. Bye bye

 

[kaz]

You never said what you said, you're an intellectual infant who makes snarky yet meaningless comments then say no you didn't. Get it now? Time to grow up and deal with reality

Your projection is noted, and I have little use for children, meaning you.

Should you wish to discuss tax-breaks for breeders, do so.

Time to grow up now, get it?

And government should treat all it's citizens the same, no one should get a tax break for anything. The same taxes should apply to all

A very nice, but childish idea, and utterly idiotic and unrealistic, not to mention economically unsound. Thanks for stopping by. Your "life should be fair" whine has been recorded for all to see. It's not worthy but have a cookie anyway.

Wow, sorry for making you scream like that, calm down, it's just an internet discussion. Here's a tissue, Darlene.

Thanks for your concern over my feelings, gay boy, but I don't give a shit and I'm not interested in you anyway. Try to focus on the discussion if you don't mind instead of my feelings. M'kay?

You affect me not at all little man. Stop kidding yourself that you do, and feeling is all that you have apparently? So far we've seen nothing else.

Damn you're stupid. I'm not going to miss you

 

[PaintMyHouse]

It would appear that we can now discuss Breaks for Breeders instead of chatting with the results of such things. Let the joyous celebration begin...

 

[sealybobo]

No, that is not at all what I said. I'll repeat it for you: In this case it reflects the will of society, promoting love and marriage, both of which benefit society.

Life can be unfair and society picks winners and losers. Now you know.

You never said what you said, you're an intellectual infant who makes snarky yet meaningless comments then say no you didn't. Get it now? Time to grow up and deal with reality

Your projection is noted, and I have little use for children, meaning you.

Should you wish to discuss tax-breaks for breeders, do so.

Time to grow up now, get it?

And government should treat all it's citizens the same, no one should get a tax break for anything. The same taxes should apply to all

A very nice, but childish idea, and utterly idiotic and unrealistic, not to mention economically unsound. Thanks for stopping by. Your "life should be fair" whine has been recorded for all to see. It's not worthy but have a cookie anyway.

Wow, sorry for making you scream like that, calm down, it's just an internet discussion. Here's a tissue, Darlene.

Thanks for your concern over my feelings, gay boy, but I don't give a shit and I'm not interested in you anyway. Try to focus on the discussion if you don't mind instead of my feelings. M'kay?

That didn't look like screaming to me. Do poor and middle class Republicans and libertarians realize if we tried your way changes are it wouldn't go well for you and most of your friends family and neighbors? Of course you don't.

Or are you and your neighbors and family all good on your savings?

The funny thing is, I'm saving for retirement and I'm not in debt. Most of you Republicans I argue with can't say the same.

And if they can, why are they complaining about the 90% who can't because they don't have enough money?

Instead trump will go from 8 billion to 16?

Republicans have lotto mentality. If you don't know what that is ask.

 

[sealybobo]

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

Why do we subsidize any couples? Or if we want to encourage people to have kids only give tax breaks to people with kids. Then you wouldn't be discriminating.

I very much doubt that Kaz approves of Breaks for Breeders either. After all, what good does that do him and as we all know, it's all about him...

Here's another thing kaz won't get. Imagine how much less 2 gay guys in one house consumes compared to them each living in separate houses. They can turn the light on in one house or two. They can use the gas to cut one lawn not two. Cohabitation.

They can also adopt an orphan that straight people don't want. Legally.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Didn't say that, now did I? In this case it reflects the will of society, promoting love and marriage, both of which benefit society.

Whatever you are hooked on that causes you to say this kind of nonsense, drop it and start dealing with reality instead.

That's exactly what you said, government = society

No, that is not at all what I said. I'll repeat it for you: In this case it reflects the will of society, promoting love and marriage, both of which benefit society.

Life can be unfair and society picks winners and losers. Now you know.

You never said what you said, you're an intellectual infant who makes snarky yet meaningless comments then say no you didn't. Get it now? Time to grow up and deal with reality

Your projection is noted, and I have little use for children, meaning you.

Should you wish to discuss tax-breaks for breeders, do so.

Time to grow up now, get it?

And government should treat all it's citizens the same, no one should get a tax break for anything. The same taxes should apply to all

OK, you are acting confused again, which is a logical position for a libertarian.

Taxes are part of our government by We the People.

 

[RKMBrown]

You never said what you said, you're an intellectual infant who makes snarky yet meaningless comments then say no you didn't. Get it now? Time to grow up and deal with reality

Your projection is noted, and I have little use for children, meaning you.

Should you wish to discuss tax-breaks for breeders, do so.

Time to grow up now, get it?

And government should treat all it's citizens the same, no one should get a tax break for anything. The same taxes should apply to all

We give tax breaks to encourage spending or other behaviors.

I can't remember the country but they wanted to increase the birth rate so they gave huge tax breaks for people who have kids 9 months from today. So get to screwing.

Many nations have incentives to encourage people to have children. Here even Kaz would be okay with that if those breaks were only for those making white babies...

I've decided to erase race whores from my viewing experience, it has made the site so much more pleasant. Bye bye

For once you have a good idea!

 

[kaz]

Your projection is noted, and I have little use for children, meaning you.

Should you wish to discuss tax-breaks for breeders, do so.

Time to grow up now, get it?

And government should treat all it's citizens the same, no one should get a tax break for anything. The same taxes should apply to all

We give tax breaks to encourage spending or other behaviors.

I can't remember the country but they wanted to increase the birth rate so they gave huge tax breaks for people who have kids 9 months from today. So get to screwing.

Many nations have incentives to encourage people to have children. Here even Kaz would be okay with that if those breaks were only for those making white babies...

I've decided to erase race whores from my viewing experience, it has made the site so much more pleasant. Bye bye

For once you have a good idea!

Yes, SealyBoo, HarryDresden, JoeB131, PhoenixOps, JakeStarky now PaintMyHouse and a few other race whores who just out of the blue to start calling people racists being gone have made the site so much more enjoyable. I love the new ignore capability over the old one so much better, they really are gone now. And they are not missed, not at all. They can scream, whine and wail all they want

 

[JakeStarkey]

He still read those who confuse and contradict him.

Kaz is such a goof ball.

 

[Seawytch]

Get rid of all the tax breaks...gays will still be married and will still want to.