Why should other taxpayers have to subsidize gay mating?

[kaz]

In the cases where it was passed by the legislature or popular referendum, yes. The cases where it was imposed by the courts, no. I've said that all along, it's not anything new

Rights aren't up for a popular vote, so sad for you. And in this case what the voters voted for was unconstitutional, like banning Islam, which I'm sure you would approve of eh?

We know, you like Mob Rule, as long as they are on your side, which the mob on this issue no longer is...

Um..I like mob rule, not you? A libertarian likes mob rule, not the socialist. Who writes your material? You should fire them, they suck and they are massively stupid.

And a libertarian would vote to ban Islam. You're retarded, bitch

Libertarian, is that what you believe yourself to be? Boy that must really, you stupid faggots never win anything beyond think like that moron Ayn Rand contest.

You love to say that, then when I ask you what policies I have that aren't libertarian, I hear crickets. You got anything but empty bluster this time or is it your usual fare?

You never asked me but why would I give a fuck? Libertarians are ignorant selfish children whose opinions don't matter a damn.

You still got nothing, huh? Your head is as empty as your dick?

 

[Faun]

I don't know why this needs to be answered more than once .... but .... married gay couples are entitled to the same tax benefits as married straight couples, married black couples, married Jewish couples, etc...

Again, the 14th Amendment guarantees equal protection under the law.

 

[kaz]

I don't know why this needs to be answered more than once .... but .... married gay couples are entitled to the same tax benefits as married straight couples, married black couples, married Jewish couples, etc...

So what about Republicans, can they spend money when it's the right thing to do? Like when they want to reduce just a little the growth in government spending and the terrorist Obama Bin Laden straps a bomb to his chest and shuts down the government to stop them? Do the Republicans get to do the right thing too even if it costs money? Or do just the Democrats get that right?

 

[kaz]

Again, the 14th Amendment guarantees equal protection under the law.

Being black changed who you could marry for every black. Being gay changed who you could marry for zero gays. The laws were applied equally

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Again, the 14th Amendment guarantees equal protection under the law.

Being black changed who you could marry for every black. Being gay changed who you could marry for zero gays. The laws were applied equally

Why you bother with that I have no idea, since the courts have already tossed it.

 

[Faun]

I don't know why this needs to be answered more than once .... but .... married gay couples are entitled to the same tax benefits as married straight couples, married black couples, married Jewish couples, etc...

So what about Republicans, can they spend money when it's the right thing to do? Like when they want to reduce just a little the growth in government spending and the terrorist Obama Bin Laden straps a bomb to his chest and shuts down the government to stop them? Do the Republicans get to do the right thing too even if it costs money? Or do just the Democrats get that right?

What about Republicans? In terms of my last post, even Republican couples who marry are entitled to the same tax benefits as gay couples, straight couples, black couples, Jewish couples, etc...

 

[Faun]

Again, the 14th Amendment guarantees equal protection under the law.

Being black changed who you could marry for every black. Being gay changed who you could marry for zero gays. The laws were applied equally

Not true. Being gay changes who you can marry for everyone.

 

[kaz]

Again, the 14th Amendment guarantees equal protection under the law.

Being black changed who you could marry for every black. Being gay changed who you could marry for zero gays. The laws were applied equally

Why you bother with that I have no idea, since the courts have already tossed it.

So if the SCOTUS rules against you on the gay thing now, you'll say the same thing, right?

Here's a question you keep hiding from, you keep saying I'm not libertarian. For example...

 

[kaz]

I don't know why this needs to be answered more than once .... but .... married gay couples are entitled to the same tax benefits as married straight couples, married black couples, married Jewish couples, etc...

So what about Republicans, can they spend money when it's the right thing to do? Like when they want to reduce just a little the growth in government spending and the terrorist Obama Bin Laden straps a bomb to his chest and shuts down the government to stop them? Do the Republicans get to do the right thing too even if it costs money? Or do just the Democrats get that right?

What about Republicans? In terms of my last post, even Republican couples who marry are entitled to the same tax benefits as gay couples, straight couples, black couples, Jewish couples, etc...

That's a clown post, bro. Like I'm telling you... Was that a lame attempt at a joke or are you just stupid?

 

[kaz]

Again, the 14th Amendment guarantees equal protection under the law.

Being black changed who you could marry for every black. Being gay changed who you could marry for zero gays. The laws were applied equally

Not true. Being gay changes who you can marry for everyone.

Really? Name one

 

[RKMBrown]

What bothers me is a person claiming to be a libertarian ... turning around and saying "I'm against two people getting married." It's none of your BUSINESS IF TWO CONSENTING ADULTS WANT TO GET MARRIED YOU POS.

So it bothers you that someone calling themselves a "libertarian" would be against government validation of their relationship and access to unequal treatment under the law



Um ... OK?

How is government involvement in contracts between consenting adults unequal treatment under the law? WTF are you talking about?

Asked and answered a hundred times. Government marriage was between a man and a woman. Gays and straights had equal access to that. Gays want something else, and they want it decreed by courts violating the Constitution and legislating from the bench.

Now in your liberal mind you hear that means gays can't have gay marriage. No, it just means they have to do what everyone else does, convince the legislature, which the people have the power to do by electing the representatives they want

No such thing as government marriage. There are only marriages between two consenting adults, that's it.

Governments merely provide a license to those two consenting adults. The license merely records the contract that the two consenting adults enter. The government is not an a part of the contract... it merely records the contract. No one is getting a "government marriage" there is no such thing.

As for your full of shit comment that Gays and straights had equal access marriage... OMFG ass hole. No, gays did not have access to marry a consenting adult of their choice, they were only allowed to marry a consenting adult of another sexual orientation that they did not want to marry. Given that half the country is male, the other half female, government was restricting them from marrying HALF THE COUNTRY. More particularly they were being restricted from marrying anyone IN THE HALF THAT THEY WANTED TO CHOOSE FROM.

As for your total bullshit that gays want some violation to the constitution or legislation from the bench... omfg YOU ARE DUMB. They want the opposite, they want the laws banning them from being married to be thrown out. IOW they want unconstitutional laws thrown out. Which btw is the purpose of the SCOTUS. They don't need to "re-define" marriage to throw out unconstitutional laws. That is a bullshit strawman.

As for your second strawman that I'm a liberal. No, ya DUMB ASS LIAR I'm conservative, I'm more conservative than you are. Your problem is you think liberty is your liberty to put your JACK BOOT ON GAYS.

You insult me by telling a libertarian that I'm a conservative than insult me again by telling me I'm not really conservative you are...



When you make up your mind, let me know.

As for your post, wow. You're a conservative who thinks that government not giving validation and tax breaks to gays for mating is putting a "JACK BOOT ON GAYS." Sure, a conservative thinks people have to be given whatever they tell government to give them. Sure sounds like quacking, liberal

No. You insult mankind, including yourself, every time you open your mouth.

I'm a conservative libertarian. That does not mean I'm a bigoted homophobe such as yourself. Only some conservatives are bigoted homophobes such as yourself. Just because you are a bigot does not mean everyone else is.

Tax breaks for marriage is completely "irrelevant" to the issue of gay marriage. That is just another one of your stupid strawmen. Tax breaks for marriage are there for anyone that decides to get married, who is not having their rights infringed through laws that disallow them to become married.

Your jack boot on gays is you taking your boot and metaphorically stomping it on the neck of all gays continually with nearly every one of your posts. You deserve to be summarily slapped.

My point is that we have to fight government to stop it from taking away our rights. You somehow think that means force government into giving us our rights. ROFL... you're the opposite of a libertarian. You are an authoritarian. No different than RW claiming to be a republican while pissing on everything conservatives believe in. You piss on liberty at every chance in the name of authority.

 

[Seawytch]

Again, the 14th Amendment guarantees equal protection under the law.

Being black changed who you could marry for every black. Being gay changed who you could marry for zero gays. The laws were applied equally

Not true. Being gay changes who you can marry for everyone.

Really? Name one

Kaz, you can marry a woman and in some states I can't. That's gender discrimination, plain and simple.

 

[Faun]

I don't know why this needs to be answered more than once .... but .... married gay couples are entitled to the same tax benefits as married straight couples, married black couples, married Jewish couples, etc...

So what about Republicans, can they spend money when it's the right thing to do? Like when they want to reduce just a little the growth in government spending and the terrorist Obama Bin Laden straps a bomb to his chest and shuts down the government to stop them? Do the Republicans get to do the right thing too even if it costs money? Or do just the Democrats get that right?

What about Republicans? In terms of my last post, even Republican couples who marry are entitled to the same tax benefits as gay couples, straight couples, black couples, Jewish couples, etc...

That's a clown post, bro. Like I'm telling you... Was that a lame attempt at a joke or are you just stupid?

No, it's a fact .... married Republican couples really are entitled to the same tax breaks as all other married couples. Do you doubt that?

 

[Faun]

Again, the 14th Amendment guarantees equal protection under the law.

Being black changed who you could marry for every black. Being gay changed who you could marry for zero gays. The laws were applied equally

Not true. Being gay changes who you can marry for everyone.

Really? Name one

RKMBrown

 

[bripat9643]

Again, the 14th Amendment guarantees equal protection under the law.

Being black changed who you could marry for every black. Being gay changed who you could marry for zero gays. The laws were applied equally

Not true. Being gay changes who you can marry for everyone.

Really? Name one

Kaz, you can marry a woman and in some states I can't. That's gender discrimination, plain and simple.

The courts have ruled that gender discrimination is perfectly constitutional. In fact, it's legally mandated. Just consider Title XI which forces universities to create women's sports teams.

Do you think men should be allowed to play on the women's basketball team?

 

[Seawytch]

Again, the 14th Amendment guarantees equal protection under the law.

Being black changed who you could marry for every black. Being gay changed who you could marry for zero gays. The laws were applied equally

Not true. Being gay changes who you can marry for everyone.

Really? Name one

Kaz, you can marry a woman and in some states I can't. That's gender discrimination, plain and simple.

The courts have ruled that gender discrimination is perfectly constitutional. In fact, it's legally mandated. Just consider Title XI which forces universities to create women's sports teams.

Do you think men should be allowed to play on the women's basketball team?

Not all gender discrimination is legal. This won't be.

And a post operative transsexual woman should be able to, yes.

 

[RKMBrown]

Again, the 14th Amendment guarantees equal protection under the law.

Being black changed who you could marry for every black. Being gay changed who you could marry for zero gays. The laws were applied equally

Not true. Being gay changes who you can marry for everyone.

Really? Name one

RKMBrown

True... Not that I want to marry a guy, since I'm not gay, but I don't appreciate being told I can't even if I wanted to. I don't like being told I can't do something when no one is gonna get hurt by my action.

 

[RKMBrown]

Again, the 14th Amendment guarantees equal protection under the law.

Being black changed who you could marry for every black. Being gay changed who you could marry for zero gays. The laws were applied equally

Not true. Being gay changes who you can marry for everyone.

Really? Name one

Kaz, you can marry a woman and in some states I can't. That's gender discrimination, plain and simple.

The courts have ruled that gender discrimination is perfectly constitutional. In fact, it's legally mandated. Just consider Title XI which forces universities to create women's sports teams.

Do you think men should be allowed to play on the women's basketball team?

You maybe.

 

[bripat9643]

Being black changed who you could marry for every black. Being gay changed who you could marry for zero gays. The laws were applied equally

Not true. Being gay changes who you can marry for everyone.

Really? Name one

Kaz, you can marry a woman and in some states I can't. That's gender discrimination, plain and simple.

The courts have ruled that gender discrimination is perfectly constitutional. In fact, it's legally mandated. Just consider Title XI which forces universities to create women's sports teams.

Do you think men should be allowed to play on the women's basketball team?

Not all gender discrimination is legal. This won't be.

And a post operative transsexual woman should be able to, yes.

In other words, gender discrimination is legal. Thanks for admitting that your theory of jurisprudence is wrong.

 

[bripat9643]

Again, the 14th Amendment guarantees equal protection under the law.

Being black changed who you could marry for every black. Being gay changed who you could marry for zero gays. The laws were applied equally

Not true. Being gay changes who you can marry for everyone.

Really? Name one

RKMBrown

True... Not that I want to marry a guy, since I'm not gay, but I don't appreciate being told I can't even if I wanted to. I don't like being told I can't do something when no one is gonna get hurt by my action.

How do you feel about being told that you can't snort Cocaine?