Law professor: Slippery slope to legal incest and polygamy

[Seawytch]

Not the same.

You want progressive taxes, I don't. If taxes were flat, there would be no tax break for marriage. You want the death tax, I don't. If there were no death tax for anyone, there would be no death tax break for marriage.

I want a break from YOUR taxes. YOU want a break from YOUR taxes. In no way is that the same. What you are doing and I'm not there is a word for. H-Y-P-O-C-R-I-S-Y.

Pay your taxes, or remove them for everyone. Don't just exempt yourself. Hypocrite.

I love the legally married guy calling me a hypocrite. Too funny.

What you're missing is that regardless of our tax system, my legal marriage should be treated exactly like your legal marriage.

then what will you tell abdul and his 5 wives? what will you tell jim/tom/marie/jane? what will you tell the father/son who want to marry to avoid inheritance taxes?

this thead is about what your "marriage" will lead to.

face reality, if gay marriage is legally sanctioned by SCOTUS then all forms of marriage must logically also be declared legal.

 

[Redfish]

I love the legally married guy calling me a hypocrite. Too funny.

What you're missing is that regardless of our tax system, my legal marriage should be treated exactly like your legal marriage.

then what will you tell abdul and his 5 wives? what will you tell jim/tom/marie/jane? what will you tell the father/son who want to marry to avoid inheritance taxes?

this thead is about what your "marriage" will lead to.

face reality, if gay marriage is legally sanctioned by SCOTUS then all forms of marriage must logically also be declared legal.

what you and your partner do with your hamsters is your business, I am not interested so please do not post any pictures.

You gay libs are the ones that always bring up animal sex------why is that?

 

[Seawytch]

then what will you tell abdul and his 5 wives? what will you tell jim/tom/marie/jane? what will you tell the father/son who want to marry to avoid inheritance taxes?

this thead is about what your "marriage" will lead to.

face reality, if gay marriage is legally sanctioned by SCOTUS then all forms of marriage must logically also be declared legal.

what you and your partner do with your hamsters is your business, I am not interested so please do not post any pictures.

You gay libs are the ones that always bring up animal sex------why is that?

Just pointing out your slippery slope fallacy, Fishy.

Sorry, you'll have to satisfy that fantasy elsewhere too. We're not a rodent household. We're lesbians, we have cats.

 

[Redfish]

what you and your partner do with your hamsters is your business, I am not interested so please do not post any pictures.

You gay libs are the ones that always bring up animal sex------why is that?

Just pointing out your slippery slope fallacy, Fishy.

Sorry, you'll have to satisfy that fantasy elsewhere too. We're not a rodent household. We're lesbians, we have cats.

damn, lesbian sex with cats--------Ugh. I may call the humane society.

I never said that gay marriage would lead to beastiality. I said it could legally lead to polygamy an bigamy, and I am correct. society can choose. I am but one vote.

 

[Gadawg73]

Not the same.

You want progressive taxes, I don't. If taxes were flat, there would be no tax break for marriage. You want the death tax, I don't. If there were no death tax for anyone, there would be no death tax break for marriage.

I want a break from YOUR taxes. YOU want a break from YOUR taxes. In no way is that the same. What you are doing and I'm not there is a word for. H-Y-P-O-C-R-I-S-Y.

Pay your taxes, or remove them for everyone. Don't just exempt yourself. Hypocrite.

I love the legally married guy calling me a hypocrite. Too funny.

What you're missing is that regardless of our tax system, my legal marriage should be treated exactly like your legal marriage.

then what will you tell abdul and his 5 wives? what will you tell jim/tom/marie/jane? what will you tell the father/son who want to marry to avoid inheritance taxes?

this thead is about what your "marriage" will lead to.

face reality, if gay marriage is legally sanctioned by SCOTUS then all forms of marriage must logically also be declared legal.

Rank speculation opinion only.
No offense.

 

[Seawytch]

what you and your partner do with your hamsters is your business, I am not interested so please do not post any pictures.

You gay libs are the ones that always bring up animal sex------why is that?

Just pointing out your slippery slope fallacy, Fishy.

Sorry, you'll have to satisfy that fantasy elsewhere too. We're not a rodent household. We're lesbians, we have cats.

damn, lesbian sex with cats--------Ugh. I may call the humane society.

I never said that gay marriage would lead to beastiality. I said it could legally lead to polygamy an bigamy, and I am correct. society can choose. I am but one vote.

Seriously, you need mental help if you think that by having cats, one of which belongs to our daughter, means we have sex with them. What thought process goes there? Seek professional help, I beg you.

A slippery slope fallacy is still a fallacy be it polygamy, incest or whatever.

 

[NYcarbineer]

None, when did anyone say that a number of children was required for normalcy?

you and wytchey can really make up some shit to try to justify your illogical stand on this.

You said it right here:

every species has males and females. they get together to reproduce so their species will continue. Thats the way God or nature designed it.

You defined 'normal' as male and female getting together and reproducing.

THEREFORE...by your own definition, the males and females who don't reproduce are 'abnormal'.

So the question to you, AGAIN, is, how many children must a human have (or how much reproduction must a human do, since that's how you measure normalcy)

in order to qualify as normal?

faulty logic on your part results in a faulty conclusion. I never said or implied that one had to reproduce to be sexually normal.

Ok, you're backtracking, fair enough.

So a person CAN be normal without entering into a reproductive relationship.

That makes homosexuals just as normal as heterosexuals.

Case closed.

 

[kaz]

Nope, just treat my legal marriage exactly like your legal marriage is treated. Not a difficult concept. You should be able to grasp it.

Not the same.

You want progressive taxes, I don't. If taxes were flat, there would be no tax break for marriage. You want the death tax, I don't. If there were no death tax for anyone, there would be no death tax break for marriage.

I want a break from YOUR taxes. YOU want a break from YOUR taxes. In no way is that the same. What you are doing and I'm not there is a word for. H-Y-P-O-C-R-I-S-Y.

Pay your taxes, or remove them for everyone. Don't just exempt yourself. Hypocrite.

I love the legally married guy calling me a hypocrite. Too funny.

What you're missing is that regardless of our tax system, my legal marriage should be treated exactly like your legal marriage.

As I pointed out, marriage doesn't get me out of anything I support. I oppose progressive taxes, I oppose the death tax, I don't think government should give any benefit to married people, so "my" hypocrisy is a delusion in your mind you just use to rationalize your position.

You on the other hand support those things. But not for you, that is clear hypocrisy.

And you're also a hypocrite because you say you have a loving give and take relationship with your partner, then you say I should ignore my partner and inform her I'm doing it my way.

Hypocrisy is your life, it doesn't even register to you.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Not the same.

You want progressive taxes, I don't. If taxes were flat, there would be no tax break for marriage. You want the death tax, I don't. If there were no death tax for anyone, there would be no death tax break for marriage.

I want a break from YOUR taxes. YOU want a break from YOUR taxes. In no way is that the same. What you are doing and I'm not there is a word for. H-Y-P-O-C-R-I-S-Y.

Pay your taxes, or remove them for everyone. Don't just exempt yourself. Hypocrite.

I love the legally married guy calling me a hypocrite. Too funny.

What you're missing is that regardless of our tax system, my legal marriage should be treated exactly like your legal marriage.

then what will you tell abdul and his 5 wives? what will you tell jim/tom/marie/jane? what will you tell the father/son who want to marry to avoid inheritance taxes?

this thead is about what your "marriage" will lead to.

face reality, if gay marriage is legally sanctioned by SCOTUS then all forms of marriage must logically also be declared legal.

Those examples have just as good an argument with only man/woman marriage being legally recognized.

There is nothing magic about recognizing one form of monogamy as opposed to 2.

 

[Gadawg73]

We always have the Bible sanctioning polygamy as a form of marriage along with incest and consensual adultery. 27 states now allow you to marry your first cousin now.
Where is the outrage over all of this? Genesis is the word of God.
We allow women of any age to have babies and folks are worried about 2 gay folks legally getting married.
And if they were really worried about polygamy where was their draft and the referendums for The Defense From Polygamy Act?
Because there have never been any concerns about that in the first place, easier to beat up on the gay boogeyman, keep him in his place as a 2nd class citizen.
DOMA, Prop 8 and all of these anti gay bills are just a way for folks to attempt to feel morally superior to everyone else.

 

[Redfish]

Just pointing out your slippery slope fallacy, Fishy.

Sorry, you'll have to satisfy that fantasy elsewhere too. We're not a rodent household. We're lesbians, we have cats.

damn, lesbian sex with cats--------Ugh. I may call the humane society.

I never said that gay marriage would lead to beastiality. I said it could legally lead to polygamy an bigamy, and I am correct. society can choose. I am but one vote.

Seriously, you need mental help if you think that by having cats, one of which belongs to our daughter, means we have sex with them. What thought process goes there? Seek professional help, I beg you.

A slippery slope fallacy is still a fallacy be it polygamy, incest or whatever.

you brought up animal sex, I just made a joke about it.

mark my words, some muslim or radical mormon will bring a polygamy case to the SCOTUS using the california ruling as precedent, and they will win.

Watch, it will happen.

 

[Redfish]

I love the legally married guy calling me a hypocrite. Too funny.

What you're missing is that regardless of our tax system, my legal marriage should be treated exactly like your legal marriage.

then what will you tell abdul and his 5 wives? what will you tell jim/tom/marie/jane? what will you tell the father/son who want to marry to avoid inheritance taxes?

this thead is about what your "marriage" will lead to.

face reality, if gay marriage is legally sanctioned by SCOTUS then all forms of marriage must logically also be declared legal.

Rank speculation opinion only.
No offense.

of course its my opinion, based on experience and history. 99% of the stuff on this message board is someone's opinion.

no offense.

 

[bodecea]

damn, lesbian sex with cats--------Ugh. I may call the humane society.

I never said that gay marriage would lead to beastiality. I said it could legally lead to polygamy an bigamy, and I am correct. society can choose. I am but one vote.

Seriously, you need mental help if you think that by having cats, one of which belongs to our daughter, means we have sex with them. What thought process goes there? Seek professional help, I beg you.

A slippery slope fallacy is still a fallacy be it polygamy, incest or whatever.

you brought up animal sex, I just made a joke about it.

mark my words, some muslim or radical mormon will bring a polygamy case to the SCOTUS using the california ruling as precedent, and they will win.

Watch, it will happen.

Based on what legal precedent?

 

[kaz]

I did address your points. You just completely missed hers.

I also happen to be very much in favor of eliminating tax breaks. Not just for marriage, but for everyone. I've even started a topic or two about it. Here's one: http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/263551-the-way-forward-end-tax-expenditures.html

But as long as we are handing out cash and prizes to married people, we should not be excluding gay marriages just because someone hate fags.

I highlighted in red my point, which you did not address so you could find it easily. She wants those taxes, not me. Why should she then be exempt from paying them?

Because, like you, I'm legally married. As long as you're exempt I am. Good luck getting it changed, but in the mean time, I'll get the same breaks you do.

American Christians give billions a year to their church that they aren't required to give. American liberals take billions in deductions from their taxes that they don't have to take.

You're uncommitted, insincere and flagrantly hypocritical. At least Christians are committed enough to their own cause to spend their own money. I may think you're equally nuts, but I have a lot more respect for them for that reason.

Word.

 

[Seawytch]

Not the same.

You want progressive taxes, I don't. If taxes were flat, there would be no tax break for marriage. You want the death tax, I don't. If there were no death tax for anyone, there would be no death tax break for marriage.

I want a break from YOUR taxes. YOU want a break from YOUR taxes. In no way is that the same. What you are doing and I'm not there is a word for. H-Y-P-O-C-R-I-S-Y.

Pay your taxes, or remove them for everyone. Don't just exempt yourself. Hypocrite.

I love the legally married guy calling me a hypocrite. Too funny.

What you're missing is that regardless of our tax system, my legal marriage should be treated exactly like your legal marriage.

As I pointed out, marriage doesn't get me out of anything I support. I oppose progressive taxes, I oppose the death tax, I don't think government should give any benefit to married people, so "my" hypocrisy is a delusion in your mind you just use to rationalize your position.

You on the other hand support those things. But not for you, that is clear hypocrisy.

And you're also a hypocrite because you say you have a loving give and take relationship with your partner, then you say I should ignore my partner and inform her I'm doing it my way.

Hypocrisy is your life, it doesn't even register to you.

Since I never said you should ignore her wishes, your "point" is moot. I already conceded that you're a "reluctant hypocrite".

The bottom line is that my legal marriage should be treated equally under the law. If you disagree, explain why you think that should be the case.

 

[Seawytch]

I highlighted in red my point, which you did not address so you could find it easily. She wants those taxes, not me. Why should she then be exempt from paying them?

Because, like you, I'm legally married. As long as you're exempt I am. Good luck getting it changed, but in the mean time, I'll get the same breaks you do.

American Christians give billions a year to their church that they aren't required to give. American liberals take billions in deductions from their taxes that they don't have to take.

You're uncommitted, insincere and flagrantly hypocritical. At least Christians are committed enough to their own cause to spend their own money. I may think you're equally nuts, but I have a lot more respect for them for that reason.

Word.

What? Married people get tax breaks do they not? Why shouldn't my legal marriage get the same breaks yours does? Because you don't take them?

Are all married people "hypocrites" for taking tax breaks?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Even Southern Baptists now admit it is not a choice, that it is same sex attraction.
They still state it is a sin to engage in homosexual sex and they can believe what they want to on that but they fully acknowledge it is not a choice.
Such a lame claim. Someone chooses their sexual orientation.
Only a dumbass claims that folks choose to be persecuted.
No shortage of them here.

I don't give a **** if you point out that the Pope thinks it isn't a choice, all that matters is what the evidence says. Post some type of scientific study that proves that people are "born that way."

Done.
JSTOR: The Quarterly Review of Biology
I already did this by the way but you seem determined to actually ignore real scientific papers in preference to demanding that you are right.

Try again. Here is a full scientific paper on how epi-marks are the most likely cause of homosexuality and how they cause this (as well as a few concrete and testable predictions made by the model that would disprove the theory should the predictions be incorrect).

Now, I have presented scientific data backing my ideas up on this subject. I have done so a few times. It is YOUR turn now to address that data.

Actually, if I were to believe the epigeneticists, it actually would prove that people are not born that way, they become homosexual through a long process that programs them as they are exposed to different proteins as they grow. That might prove it isn't a choice, but I don't think they know what they are talking about yet.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Your words:

"if I ignore the scientific evidence that people are not born gay"

Provide your evidence.

Yes, there is evidence that people are not born gay.

https://www.google.com/search?q=twi...rg.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-beta

There is not, however, evidence that sexual orientation is a choice. Unlike some people, I understand the difference between evidence and belief.

But you don’t seem to understand what that evidence shows. It does NOT show that you are not born gay – it only shows that gay is not solely based on genetics. There is a rather massive difference.

Feel free to provide some actual evidence that gene expression causes people to behave differently as adults. Keep in mind that, if you do, you will undermine the basic tenet of the judicial system that people are capable of making choices in the process.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Choice means you have options of the many other types of sexual orientation.
Choice means one day you sat down and contemplated all of your options to choose from.
Choice is weighing each option and your experiences with all of those options before you make your choice.
Now I am sure maybe there are a few folks here that contemplated and experimented with the same sex as they had not made their choice then.
So those of you that are male that chose to be straight here after contemplating all your other choices tell us how long you thought about how good a penis might be before you made your choice to like vaginas.
It may have happened that way with some of you guys here that had to make a choice to decide what your sexual orientation is but not me guys.
I never had to make a choice, not in a million years but we believe you if that is how it happened with you.
But again, how long did you contemplate cock and what was the deciding factor that made you choose to be straight?

Tell you what, prove it. Don't tell me you didn't chose, prove it. It shouldn't be all that hard for a genius like you.

If it is, feel free to prove I didn't choose.

Tell us how you chose your sexual orientation.
I have been attracted to women and followed that attraction every second of my life.
Now tell us how you chose your sexual orientation and how you weighed in the pros and cons of all your choices before you made your choice.
You claim YOU choose and that EVERYONE chooses so YOU have to prove your claims.
I never chose. YOU did.

It was the same way you did.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Gay folk are attracted to the same sex and other folks just can not stand that and have to claim, no, that can not be, they chose to be attracted to the same sex.
Only a complete dumbass believes that.
They did not choose but gay folks did.
Laughable and absurd and they know it is false yet that is all they are left with.
Ignorance.

You seem to have a bigger problem with it than I do, perhaps that explains why you want the government to tell you how to behave.