Why should other taxpayers have to subsidize gay mating?

[kaz]

Answer the question, how is the Declaration of Independence a source of rights in our country?

And if it is, how are we not a theocracy since it says our rights are endowed by our creator?

You have to answer my question before you ask yours. I will answer yours as soon as you do

I already answered your question. We are not a theocracy. Our rights come from G-d, not the DoI. That we recognize that does not establish us as a theocracy. Really ... you should know all this. You shouldn't need me to educate you.

Now then ... your answer to my question is ... ?

You didn't answer my question, what bearing does the Declaration of Independence have on laws in our country?

Other than being a potential point of reference in legal cases, not a whole lot.

Now then .... my question....?

That doesn't answer the question. So then why do you keep saying people have the right to gay marriage based on the Declaration of Independence if the DOI doesn't ave "a whole lot" of bearing on our laws? That makes no sense.

And I did answer your question to bripat and you responded to it

Asked and answered. ..... many times over. Again, you simply don't possess the intellect to understand. That's ok.

You think it's intellect that allows you to say that the Declaration of Independence is why government has to grant gay marriage while you say the Declaration of Independence has little bearing on our laws?

Hmm...I don't think "intellect" is the right word for that...

 

[Faun]

Yes, the pursuit of happiness is an inalienable right. Happiness itself, however, is not. Neither a marriage license nor a driver's license is mandated by that right.

I agree, I was asking a more narrow question since he's making a legal argument we have that right. I'm asking where in the law that is a right since he keeps stating it's a legal right. Though he doesn't grasp that government is restricted from infringing on that right and he thinks government has to provide it.

I think the Constitution in legal terms puts it better, the right to life, liberty and property. Pursuit of happiness is more abstract, perfect for a Declaration, not so much for a Constitution, and requiring government to follow the due process of law to infringe on our life, liberty or property protects that right

You remain clueless. I am not saying the government has to provide a right ... I'm saying they can't deny anyone their rights unless there's just cause.

Of course you are, when you say government has to provide validation and tax breaks under the pursuit of happiness, you are clearly saying it's government's responsibility to provide you with your rights. You have the right to be left alone, you do not have the right to demand anything, including from the government

I see your idiocy persists. Regardless ... seeking to prevent the government from blocking rights is not asking them to provide rights. It's not seeking validation nor is it seeking monetary gains. It's seeking equal protection guaranteed by the Constitution.

Seriously, do you need a few thousand more posts to understand that??

What a bunch of meaningless spin. You are saying government has to provide paper and tax breaks, that is clearly demanding something from government, it is not stopping government from "blocking rights"

Nope, I'm not saying that at all. Once again, you trip over your own ignorance. I'm not saying the government has to "provide paper," certainly, they do not. I'm not saying the government has to provide "tax breaks."

What I am saying is that whatever laws are in place for marriage apply to gay people just as much as they apply to straight people.

There is no end to your ignorance. There really isn't. And this is evidence. Nearly 3300 posts and you still don't get it.

Like I said before ... you never will. You're just not smart enough. Meanwhile, 2/3rds of Americans get it ... 2/3rds of the states get it. As soon as the USSC rules on the relevant case, gays will finally have the same rights as straights regarding marriage.

All idiots like you can do is cry about it since you still won't get it then. Don't worry, I'm saving another box of crybaby tissues for you when that happens.

 

[Faun]

I already answered your question. We are not a theocracy. Our rights come from G-d, not the DoI. That we recognize that does not establish us as a theocracy. Really ... you should know all this. You shouldn't need me to educate you.

Now then ... your answer to my question is ... ?

You didn't answer my question, what bearing does the Declaration of Independence have on laws in our country?

Other than being a potential point of reference in legal cases, not a whole lot.

Now then .... my question....?

That doesn't answer the question. So then why do you keep saying people have the right to gay marriage based on the Declaration of Independence if the DOI doesn't ave "a whole lot" of bearing on our laws? That makes no sense.

And I did answer your question to bripat and you responded to it

Asked and answered. ..... many times over. Again, you simply don't possess the intellect to understand. That's ok.

You think it's intellect that allows you to say that the Declaration of Independence is why government has to grant gay marriage while you say the Declaration of Independence has little bearing on our laws?

Hmm...I don't think "intellect" is the right word for that...

I didn't say the DoI is why. This is yet another instance where your deformed brain improperly translated my words into the nonsense you think I said. I even said our rights don't come from the DoI.

You remain a ******* rightard.

 

[Faun]

Of course it made no sense -- I repeated back your own words, in your twisted world, marrying no one is getting married. It's refreshing to see that makes no sense to you too.

You repeated my words, but you mangled them and completely changed the meaning to gibberish

Here, have a tissue...

Sorry I made you cry, guy. Go play with your dolls and come back when you can calm down

Those tissues are for you. But again, your pre-K intellect of, I'm rubber, you're glue.... speaks for itself.

Actually I'm making the point of how stupid it is to tell other posters how they feel. A point you grasp other than when you are the one doing it, showing how effective my point is.

And I told you to play with your dolls until you calm down, go back and don't come back until you're done crying, Nancy

Great ... back to, I know you are but what am I."

 

[NYcarbineer]

After 3000 posts, maybe the short answer is the best answer.

Why do you have to subsidize 'gay mating'?

Because we say so.

When you get the votes to say so, then you can do so.

 

[RKMBrown]

As for marrying no one... there is no law against naming yourself no one, but it's been done before... my name is no man...

The point is that if someone wants to marry no one, they are marrying who they want and they should be able to get marriage perks. Since you are saying government has no say over who you marry. Skylar loves the sound of his own voice, why should he not get marriage perks for that? Why do you get shit from government Skylar and his own voice can't get when you have a "contract" for marriage?

Calling government marriage a "contract" is pretty preposterous, BTW. Government marriage is a government program. It's not defined by the participants and they can't change it, but government can change it without their consent. It's a bastardization of the word "contract." And again why does a "contract" entitle them to anything from government? It's a government program, nothing more

Uhmm... your logic is flawed. Just as liberty is not the liberty to take liberty away. Marriage is not a contract between a person and himself. Again unless you have something to tell everyone, most people don't have two identities for themselves in which they can demand a marriage between them-self.

I suggest you look up the definition of "between" cause you seem to be confused.

Again, as for your weird fascination with limiting tax breaks that gay people may or may not get. Dude, get over it. GAYS ALREADY GET ALL THE TAX BREAKS THAT EVERYONE ELSE GETS. Gay marriage issue is not about tax breaks. If you want to change the tax rates to the same for everyone... go for it. Has nothing to do with being gay and everything to do with how the tax breaks are written in the tax code.

Again there is no such thing as government marriage. Marriage is between people. Government is a concept not a person. Again you seem to be very confused about the use of English.

Marriages are contracts. Look it up. NVM you lack the ability. Here's the link:
Marriage Wex Legal Dictionary Encyclopedia LII Legal Information Institute
and here's the cite:
Marriage Definition
The legal union of a couple as spouses. The basic elements of a marriage are: (1) the parties' legal ability to marry each other, (2) mutual consent of the parties, and (3) a marriage contract as required by law.

 

[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?

I don't think it's any of YOUR GOD DAMN BUSINESS WHAT I DO.

My God you liberal automaton, you don't grasp a question, do you? Either that or you do, this is two in a row bripat blew holed in your argument and your response was duh, dar, you don't get it.

If you're right, why do you have to, let's go with "play" dumb? You should encourage questions

Incorrect. You fail to understand my answer... because you are an authoritarian that can't grasp liberty.

You didn't answer it. And because I think gays should go to the legislature and not the courts I'm an "authoritarian?" Do you actually believe your own crap?

Yes, that you think we need force through legislation to have or take away rights in this country makes you and authoritarian. Liberty is not crap. But your view of it is.

 

[kaz]

You didn't answer my question, what bearing does the Declaration of Independence have on laws in our country?

Other than being a potential point of reference in legal cases, not a whole lot.

Now then .... my question....?

That doesn't answer the question. So then why do you keep saying people have the right to gay marriage based on the Declaration of Independence if the DOI doesn't ave "a whole lot" of bearing on our laws? That makes no sense.

And I did answer your question to bripat and you responded to it

Asked and answered. ..... many times over. Again, you simply don't possess the intellect to understand. That's ok.

You think it's intellect that allows you to say that the Declaration of Independence is why government has to grant gay marriage while you say the Declaration of Independence has little bearing on our laws?

Hmm...I don't think "intellect" is the right word for that...

I didn't say the DoI is why. This is yet another instance where your deformed brain improperly translated my words into the nonsense you think I said. I even said our rights don't come from the DoI.

You remain a ******* rightard.

The right to pursuit of happiness is in the Declaration of Independence. I keep pointing that out and you keep repeating it

 

[kaz]

You repeated my words, but you mangled them and completely changed the meaning to gibberish

Here, have a tissue...

Sorry I made you cry, guy. Go play with your dolls and come back when you can calm down

Those tissues are for you. But again, your pre-K intellect of, I'm rubber, you're glue.... speaks for itself.

Actually I'm making the point of how stupid it is to tell other posters how they feel. A point you grasp other than when you are the one doing it, showing how effective my point is.

And I told you to play with your dolls until you calm down, go back and don't come back until you're done crying, Nancy

Great ... back to, I know you are but what am I."

I like when I piss you off, you make even less sense than you normally do

 

[Faun]

Other than being a potential point of reference in legal cases, not a whole lot.

Now then .... my question....?

That doesn't answer the question. So then why do you keep saying people have the right to gay marriage based on the Declaration of Independence if the DOI doesn't ave "a whole lot" of bearing on our laws? That makes no sense.

And I did answer your question to bripat and you responded to it

Asked and answered. ..... many times over. Again, you simply don't possess the intellect to understand. That's ok.

You think it's intellect that allows you to say that the Declaration of Independence is why government has to grant gay marriage while you say the Declaration of Independence has little bearing on our laws?

Hmm...I don't think "intellect" is the right word for that...

I didn't say the DoI is why. This is yet another instance where your deformed brain improperly translated my words into the nonsense you think I said. I even said our rights don't come from the DoI.

You remain a ******* rightard.

The right to pursuit of happiness is in the Declaration of Independence. I keep pointing that out and you keep repeating it

Moron, I never said the right to pursue happiness is not mentioned in the DoI. What I said is the right to pursue happiness comes from G-d, not the DoI.

.... g'head ... this is where you express confusion again and ask if that makes us a theocracy because you don't know the answer to that question.

 

[Faun]

Here, have a tissue...

Sorry I made you cry, guy. Go play with your dolls and come back when you can calm down

Those tissues are for you. But again, your pre-K intellect of, I'm rubber, you're glue.... speaks for itself.

Actually I'm making the point of how stupid it is to tell other posters how they feel. A point you grasp other than when you are the one doing it, showing how effective my point is.

And I told you to play with your dolls until you calm down, go back and don't come back until you're done crying, Nancy

Great ... back to, I know you are but what am I."

I like when I piss you off, you make even less sense than you normally do

Whassamatter ... ? You run out of tissues already?

 

[bripat9643]

Sorry I made you cry, guy. Go play with your dolls and come back when you can calm down

Those tissues are for you. But again, your pre-K intellect of, I'm rubber, you're glue.... speaks for itself.

Actually I'm making the point of how stupid it is to tell other posters how they feel. A point you grasp other than when you are the one doing it, showing how effective my point is.

And I told you to play with your dolls until you calm down, go back and don't come back until you're done crying, Nancy

Great ... back to, I know you are but what am I."

I like when I piss you off, you make even less sense than you normally do

Whassamatter ... ? You run out of tissues already?

He's probably just tired or trying to pound sense into a certifiable moron.

 

[Faun]

Those tissues are for you. But again, your pre-K intellect of, I'm rubber, you're glue.... speaks for itself.

Actually I'm making the point of how stupid it is to tell other posters how they feel. A point you grasp other than when you are the one doing it, showing how effective my point is.

And I told you to play with your dolls until you calm down, go back and don't come back until you're done crying, Nancy

Great ... back to, I know you are but what am I."

I like when I piss you off, you make even less sense than you normally do

Whassamatter ... ? You run out of tissues already?

He's probably just tired or trying to pound sense into a certifiable moron.

Pretty bold ironic statement given his OP is a monumental failure built on the flimsy foundation of his worthless strawman.

 

[amrchaos]

You know, if the gay couple would adopt a kid or two, then that could help.

Wait, some conservatives do not want a "two left shoe" couple adopting.

 

[kaz]

As for marrying no one... there is no law against naming yourself no one, but it's been done before... my name is no man...

The point is that if someone wants to marry no one, they are marrying who they want and they should be able to get marriage perks. Since you are saying government has no say over who you marry. Skylar loves the sound of his own voice, why should he not get marriage perks for that? Why do you get shit from government Skylar and his own voice can't get when you have a "contract" for marriage?

Calling government marriage a "contract" is pretty preposterous, BTW. Government marriage is a government program. It's not defined by the participants and they can't change it, but government can change it without their consent. It's a bastardization of the word "contract." And again why does a "contract" entitle them to anything from government? It's a government program, nothing more

Uhmm... your logic is flawed. Just as liberty is not the liberty to take liberty away. Marriage is not a contract between a person and himself. Again unless you have something to tell everyone, most people don't have two identities for themselves in which they can demand a marriage between them-self.

I suggest you look up the definition of "between" cause you seem to be confused.

Again, as for your weird fascination with limiting tax breaks that gay people may or may not get. Dude, get over it. GAYS ALREADY GET ALL THE TAX BREAKS THAT EVERYONE ELSE GETS. Gay marriage issue is not about tax breaks. If you want to change the tax rates to the same for everyone... go for it. Has nothing to do with being gay and everything to do with how the tax breaks are written in the tax code.

Again there is no such thing as government marriage. Marriage is between people. Government is a concept not a person. Again you seem to be very confused about the use of English.

Marriages are contracts. Look it up. NVM you lack the ability. Here's the link:
Marriage Wex Legal Dictionary Encyclopedia LII Legal Information Institute
and here's the cite:
Marriage Definition
The legal union of a couple as spouses. The basic elements of a marriage are: (1) the parties' legal ability to marry each other, (2) mutual consent of the parties, and (3) a marriage contract as required by law.

To call government marriage a "contract" is a complete bastardization of the word "contract." A contract is a quid pro quo agreement between two parties. Government marriage is a government program:

- Contracts are negotiated between the people involved, government marriage is defined by government, not even a party as you keep saying a marriage so called "contract" is between the two parties.
- Contracts do not come with outside perks, they are a quid pro quo between the parties. OK, if you two enter into this government program, er, "contract," then government will give you tax perks, and exemption from the death tax, put requirements on employers and insurance companies for you, ...

No other contract works remotely like that, and marriage, despite your liberal bigotry, has gone on for most of the evolution of man without government involvement. Is that a mind **** to your, but government has to give it to them, left wing brain or what?

So why should individual people be denied access to government programs just because they are asses who can't get married or just don't want to? Why should government ever treat any of it's citizens differently? It shouldn't

 

[kaz]

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

I don't think it's any of YOUR GOD DAMN BUSINESS WHAT I DO.

My God you liberal automaton, you don't grasp a question, do you? Either that or you do, this is two in a row bripat blew holed in your argument and your response was duh, dar, you don't get it.

If you're right, why do you have to, let's go with "play" dumb? You should encourage questions

Incorrect. You fail to understand my answer... because you are an authoritarian that can't grasp liberty.

You didn't answer it. And because I think gays should go to the legislature and not the courts I'm an "authoritarian?" Do you actually believe your own crap?

Yes, that you think we need force through legislation to have or take away rights in this country makes you and authoritarian. Liberty is not crap. But your view of it is.

Positive rights is an oxymoron

 

[kaz]

The right to pursuit of happiness is in the Declaration of Independence. I keep pointing that out and you keep repeating it

Moron, I never said the right to pursue happiness is not mentioned in the DoI. What I said is the right to pursue happiness comes from G-d, not the DoI.

.... g'head ... this is where you express confusion again and ask if that makes us a theocracy because you don't know the answer to that question.

- So we get the right to pursue happiness from God

- But we are not a theocracy

Um...I'll just stop there and let your own statement hang you

 

[kaz]

Sorry I made you cry, guy. Go play with your dolls and come back when you can calm down

Those tissues are for you. But again, your pre-K intellect of, I'm rubber, you're glue.... speaks for itself.

Actually I'm making the point of how stupid it is to tell other posters how they feel. A point you grasp other than when you are the one doing it, showing how effective my point is.

And I told you to play with your dolls until you calm down, go back and don't come back until you're done crying, Nancy

Great ... back to, I know you are but what am I."

I like when I piss you off, you make even less sense than you normally do

Whassamatter ... ? You run out of tissues already?

Jeez, calm down. It's just a message board, no need to get so upset. Maybe you need RKM's stick removal instructions. Grab, pull, remove. Stop getting so mad, dude

 

[kaz]

Actually I'm making the point of how stupid it is to tell other posters how they feel. A point you grasp other than when you are the one doing it, showing how effective my point is.

And I told you to play with your dolls until you calm down, go back and don't come back until you're done crying, Nancy

Great ... back to, I know you are but what am I."

I like when I piss you off, you make even less sense than you normally do

Whassamatter ... ? You run out of tissues already?

He's probably just tired or trying to pound sense into a certifiable moron.

Pretty bold ironic statement given his OP is a monumental failure built on the flimsy foundation of his worthless strawman.

Wow, a liberal automaton thinks my thread is a "monumental failure." Wow, that hurts. OK, it doesn't, but I tried, I really did.

BTW, you don't know what a strawman is, it made no sense if you read my OP. Who's view did I misrepresent? You are an idiot, you're on Google dumb ass, just type in "definition {word you don't know}" and it'll be defined for you. Then do the same for the words in the definition you don't know until you're clear on it all

 

[RKMBrown]

As for marrying no one... there is no law against naming yourself no one, but it's been done before... my name is no man...

The point is that if someone wants to marry no one, they are marrying who they want and they should be able to get marriage perks. Since you are saying government has no say over who you marry. Skylar loves the sound of his own voice, why should he not get marriage perks for that? Why do you get shit from government Skylar and his own voice can't get when you have a "contract" for marriage?

Calling government marriage a "contract" is pretty preposterous, BTW. Government marriage is a government program. It's not defined by the participants and they can't change it, but government can change it without their consent. It's a bastardization of the word "contract." And again why does a "contract" entitle them to anything from government? It's a government program, nothing more

Uhmm... your logic is flawed. Just as liberty is not the liberty to take liberty away. Marriage is not a contract between a person and himself. Again unless you have something to tell everyone, most people don't have two identities for themselves in which they can demand a marriage between them-self.

I suggest you look up the definition of "between" cause you seem to be confused.

Again, as for your weird fascination with limiting tax breaks that gay people may or may not get. Dude, get over it. GAYS ALREADY GET ALL THE TAX BREAKS THAT EVERYONE ELSE GETS. Gay marriage issue is not about tax breaks. If you want to change the tax rates to the same for everyone... go for it. Has nothing to do with being gay and everything to do with how the tax breaks are written in the tax code.

Again there is no such thing as government marriage. Marriage is between people. Government is a concept not a person. Again you seem to be very confused about the use of English.

Marriages are contracts. Look it up. NVM you lack the ability. Here's the link:
Marriage Wex Legal Dictionary Encyclopedia LII Legal Information Institute
and here's the cite:
Marriage Definition
The legal union of a couple as spouses. The basic elements of a marriage are: (1) the parties' legal ability to marry each other, (2) mutual consent of the parties, and (3) a marriage contract as required by law.

To call government marriage a "contract" is a complete bastardization of the word "contract." A contract is a quid pro quo agreement between two parties. Government marriage is a government program:

- Contracts are negotiated between the people involved, government marriage is defined by government, not even a party as you keep saying a marriage so called "contract" is between the two parties.
- Contracts do not come with outside perks, they are a quid pro quo between the parties. OK, if you two enter into this government program, er, "contract," then government will give you tax perks, and exemption from the death tax, put requirements on employers and insurance companies for you, ...

No other contract works remotely like that, and marriage, despite your liberal bigotry, has gone on for most of the evolution of man without government involvement. Is that a mind **** to your, but government has to give it to them, left wing brain or what?

So why should individual people be denied access to government programs just because they are asses who can't get married or just don't want to? Why should government ever treat any of it's citizens differently? It shouldn't

There is no such thing as government marriage. Again, you have gone off the deep end.

I provided the legal definition of marriage in the united states of america. As stated, one of the basic elements of marriage other than legal ability to marry each other and consent of both parties, is the "marriage contract" required by law. Said contract is normally done through the signing and recording of the marriage contract. The process typically goes getting your marriage license, getting married, and an approved official recording the agreement of the contract. Yes, marriage is a contract, currently it's a contract between two consenting adults in all of the states.

These contracts come with some level of negotiation. For example, pre-nuptuals, custody agreements etc.. As with other types of contracts, government can be used in proceedings wrt. differences of opinion about the marriage contract. You may have heard about things like divorces that pertain to the marriage contract. You may have heard about things like divorce papers that you sign for dissolving the contract.

Again, as for the tax perks that is an IRS thing regarding check boxes on a form for selecting which tax rate table applies to your combined income. Good bad or indifferent, the assumption in tradition is that married folk combine their income because they share the assets via the marriage contract and as such should be treated differently in some respects if they desire to do so. The other tax breaks that apply to the "shared" assets and liabilities also make such tax issues complex. For example, if you treat the married couple separately, who gets the tax break for the taxes paid to the states? Who gets the tax break for sending the kids to school? What about AMT taxes do they not apply if you split the income of the married couple? What about education incentives, which parent gets that? What about dependents, which kid are they dependent too? Thus... married couples are treated as a taxed family... not as individuals.

Thus, your bitching about marriage perks, is really just you bitching about the "combining" of income and deductions for federal tax purposes.