Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Vermont Legislature Legalizes Gay MarriageFollow

#352 Apr 17 2009 at 5:52 AM Rating: Excellent
*****
10,601 posts
Quote:
And know what? I went back and read the last big thread we had on this issue. You didn't give a reason then either. Insisting that you have over and over doesn't count.
Oh come on, you usually do better then that. Why don't you go back to your old shtick of horribly misinterpreting everything, rather then ignoring it and then insisting it isn't there. It's slightly more palatable.

And stop it with the "why not roomates then?" idiocy. They're not intended permanent relationships, so obviously wouldn't fit the role at all. I understand you love to use absurd unrealistic situations more then a stripper uses a pole, but seriously find a new one.

Summary of argument since you seem to be missing it.

We're saying stable households that will support each other are valuable to society. This is for a number of reasons such as remaining functional when one person has a crisis, so continuing to be stable and contributing to society, reducing population spread by combining into a single residence, and others that have been mentioned, although I know you're going to insist that they haven't. You're insisting that stable households do not contribute anything to society, and that they're not worth giving incentives for. The first point is absurd and laughable. Your second point is fine, this is a matter of opinion, and it would make sense that small government people wouldn't want to fund that. My only point is that using the current system, the incentives for marriage are really not about providing a stable place for kids, even if they once were, and so you need to either strip the benefits out of the system, or give them to gay marriage as well. There are a number of rights and responsibilities that are integrated into marriage that I feel are important, that have nothing to do with tax breaks etc, and that would be why I think that marriage needs to be accessible for gay relationships.
____________________________
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
#353 Apr 17 2009 at 6:26 AM Rating: Excellent
Nexa
*****
12,065 posts
Ex-McCain aide to call for gay marriage support

Quote:
"It cannot be argued that marriage between people of the same sex is un American or threatens the rights of others," he says in the speech. "On the contrary, it seems to me that denying two consenting adults of the same sex the right to form a lawful union that is protected and respected by the state denies them two of the most basic natural rights affirmed in the preamble of our Declaration of Independence — liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

"That, I believe, gives the argument of same sex marriage proponents its moral force," Schmidt will say.


:)

Nexa
____________________________
“It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothes. But a half-wit remains a half-wit, and the emperor remains an emperor.”
― Neil Gaiman, The Sandman, Vol. 9: The Kindly Ones
#354REDACTED, Posted: Apr 17 2009 at 7:33 AM, Rating: Unrated, (Expand Post) Jophed,
#355 Apr 17 2009 at 7:35 AM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,360 posts
Of course they can adopt, except in some bumfUCk backwater areas like Arkansas.

____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#356 Apr 17 2009 at 7:36 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
13,007 posts
There's a lesbian couple right down the street from me with a little boy they adopted.
#357 Apr 17 2009 at 7:43 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
AshOnMyTomatoes wrote:
There's a lesbian couple right down the street from me with a little boy they adopted.
Too bad that boy isn't a "Naturally occuring result" of their union or else we might be inclined to make sure his parents have the full range of benefits to support one another and keep the fmaily stable.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#358 Apr 17 2009 at 7:47 AM Rating: Excellent
****
9,395 posts
Quote:
Exactly how does having the govn recognize homosexual marriage benefit society?


Increased amount of happiness among the populace comes to mind.


Quote:
If anything it's a huge detriment to society burdening the tax payers with added taxes


Exactly how much mroe would you end up paying? A couple bucks? Seriously, it won't impact you very much. Besides, as they do tend to help the people(when they're not being pocketed by crooked politicians or being used to fight a war), taxes are your friends.

Quote:
Homosexuals can't create children.


No they can't, we've established this through the use of science and common sense.

Quote:
H*ll they can't even adopt them


Show me a law on the books that applies to your entire country. I'm pretty sure that there are a lot of places where gays can adopt.

Quote:
All you would be doing by forcing the majority to recognize their marriage is place an added tax on those of us who actually pay taxes.


I think everyone here pays their taxes Varrus. And I don't think they care about such a tiny amount being taken for this.

____________________________
10k before the site's inevitable death or bust

The World Is Not A Cold Dead Place.
Alan Watts wrote:
I am omnipotent insofar as I am the Universe, but I am not an omnipotent in the role of Alan Watts, only cunning


Eske wrote:
I've always read Driftwood as the straight man in varus' double act. It helps if you read all of his posts in the voice of Droopy Dog.
#359REDACTED, Posted: Apr 17 2009 at 7:55 AM, Rating: Unrated, (Expand Post) Jophed,
#360 Apr 17 2009 at 7:57 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
13,007 posts
hangtennow wrote:
Quote:
Too bad that boy isn't a "Naturally occuring result" of their union or else we might be inclined to make sure his parents have the full range of benefits to support one another and keep the fmaily stable.
lmao. If people can adopt a child they should be able to afford to care for that child without raising my taxes to do it. wtf is wrong with you people.

If a man and woman have a child and the man bails does he still have to pay for that child?
So how bout we discontinue tax benefits to straight families with children as well?
Quote:
Quote:
Increased amount of happiness among the populace comes to mind.
or more likely an increased hostility towards govn intrusion into peoples lifes by raising their taxes to support a lifestyle most americans believe is immoral to begin with.
Quote:
Exactly how much mroe would you end up paying?
Does it matter?
FUck your taxes.

Edited, Apr 17th 2009 10:59am by AshOnMyTomatoes
#361 Apr 17 2009 at 7:58 AM Rating: Excellent
*****
12,049 posts
Varrus, page 8 wrote:
Homosexuals can't create children. H*ll they can't even adopt them. All you would be doing by forcing the majority to recognize their marriage is place an added tax on those of us who actually pay taxes.


LockeColeMA wrote:
Varrus, page 5 wrote:


Homosexuals can't have children. Once you aknowledge this point we can move on. H*ll they can't even adopt them.


Yes they can, as has already been pointed out. Hell, even in my post (in a part you conveniently skipped over) I mentioned that it doesn't matter where the kids come from; it matters that the parents are responsible for them. And yes, homosexuals can adopt. Maybe not in your state? No idea. The world doesn't revolve around TN.


Look! It was wrong 3 pages ago, and it's still wrong now. Where are you getting this idea from? Please link the national law that homosexual couples cannot adopt. Or the universal one. Saying they absolutely cannot is just plain wrong.

Edited, Apr 17th 2009 11:59am by LockeColeMA
#362 Apr 17 2009 at 7:59 AM Rating: Excellent
****
9,395 posts
Dammit Varrus, why the **** are you crying over a couple of ******* cents?

Ok, lets say the government cuts all taxes down as you far right pubbies seem to want them to, and as a result, has less money to throw at some things.

Who's paying for education then?

What about healthcare?

Or scientific research?

Military operations & research?

Do you see where I'm going with this?
____________________________
10k before the site's inevitable death or bust

The World Is Not A Cold Dead Place.
Alan Watts wrote:
I am omnipotent insofar as I am the Universe, but I am not an omnipotent in the role of Alan Watts, only cunning


Eske wrote:
I've always read Driftwood as the straight man in varus' double act. It helps if you read all of his posts in the voice of Droopy Dog.
#363 Apr 17 2009 at 8:01 AM Rating: Excellent
Nexa
*****
12,065 posts
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_adoption

I glanced at it and it seems correct/up to date from what I know.

Nexa
____________________________
“It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothes. But a half-wit remains a half-wit, and the emperor remains an emperor.”
― Neil Gaiman, The Sandman, Vol. 9: The Kindly Ones
#364 Apr 17 2009 at 8:01 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
13,007 posts
Grandfather Driftwood wrote:
Dammit Varrus, why the @#%^ are you crying over a couple of @#%^ing cents?

Ok, lets say the government cuts all taxes down as you far right pubbies seem to want them to, and as a result, has less money to throw at some things.
Hell, let's assume for the moment that gay marriage didn't cost the taxpayer a dime (which it really doesn't, as far as I'm concerned). What would your objection be then?
#365 Apr 17 2009 at 8:01 AM Rating: Good
*****
12,049 posts
hangtennow wrote:
Jophed,

Quote:
Too bad that boy isn't a "Naturally occuring result" of their union or else we might be inclined to make sure his parents have the full range of benefits to support one another and keep the fmaily stable.


lmao. If people can adopt a child they should be able to afford to care for that child without raising my taxes to do it. wtf is wrong with you people.


Huh. Now, who is paying for orphans that the government pays for? Oh, right, the government, with our taxes. So even if people adopt AND get a benefit for doing so (which is NOT what we're saying here, but let's play with your ridiculous strawman), you still pay less in taxes.
#366 Apr 17 2009 at 8:03 AM Rating: Decent
****
9,395 posts
Quote:
Hell, let's assume for the moment that gay marriage didn't cost the taxpayer a dime (which it really doesn't, as far as I'm concerned). What would your objection be then?


He'd then start objecting for religious reasons or start talking about polls that he refuses to name or link to.
____________________________
10k before the site's inevitable death or bust

The World Is Not A Cold Dead Place.
Alan Watts wrote:
I am omnipotent insofar as I am the Universe, but I am not an omnipotent in the role of Alan Watts, only cunning


Eske wrote:
I've always read Driftwood as the straight man in varus' double act. It helps if you read all of his posts in the voice of Droopy Dog.
#367REDACTED, Posted: Apr 17 2009 at 8:07 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Ash,
#368 Apr 17 2009 at 8:17 AM Rating: Decent
****
9,395 posts
Quote:
I agree. In a truly equitable society someone who chooses to have children shouuld also assume the cost of raising those children without burdening their neighbor.


I'll gladly pay my taxes knowing that some of it goes to making sure that children have food on the table, a good education, and good healthcare.

Quote:
Start taxing everyone equally, FAIR TAX PLAN, then let the states determine whether or not certain behaviour is acceptable in the eyes of the people of that state.


Are we talking about paying the same percentage of tax or the same amount in dollars?
____________________________
10k before the site's inevitable death or bust

The World Is Not A Cold Dead Place.
Alan Watts wrote:
I am omnipotent insofar as I am the Universe, but I am not an omnipotent in the role of Alan Watts, only cunning


Eske wrote:
I've always read Driftwood as the straight man in varus' double act. It helps if you read all of his posts in the voice of Droopy Dog.
#369 Apr 17 2009 at 8:20 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
hangtennow wrote:
If a man and woman have a child and the man bails does he still have to pay for that child?
Yes. Likewise if the woman bails.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#370 Apr 17 2009 at 8:20 AM Rating: Excellent
How do you know we didn't pay any taxes? Are you spying on our 1040s?

(I even started a thread over in the OOT griping about the fact that I owed an extra $45 on top of what was already taken out of my paycheck. But then, my county has the best damn roads in the state of Georgia, so I know that my local taxes at least are going where they're supposed to.)
#371 Apr 17 2009 at 8:28 AM Rating: Decent
****
9,395 posts
Quote:
If a man and woman have a child and the man bails does he still have to pay for that child?


/facepalm

It's called child support, Varrus...


____________________________
10k before the site's inevitable death or bust

The World Is Not A Cold Dead Place.
Alan Watts wrote:
I am omnipotent insofar as I am the Universe, but I am not an omnipotent in the role of Alan Watts, only cunning


Eske wrote:
I've always read Driftwood as the straight man in varus' double act. It helps if you read all of his posts in the voice of Droopy Dog.
#372 Apr 17 2009 at 8:53 AM Rating: Excellent
*****
15,952 posts
Grandfather Driftwood wrote:
Quote:
Hell, let's assume for the moment that gay marriage didn't cost the taxpayer a dime (which it really doesn't, as far as I'm concerned). What would your objection be then?


He'd then start objecting for religious reasons or start talking about polls that he refuses to name or link to.

Varrus earlier in the thread:
Quote:
I don't mind if they get married in their church. What I mind is them forcing me, we the people, to openly recognize a behaviour my religion tells me is immoral.
I can't find it now, but he also had a run of posts explaining that homosexuality wasn't an innate orientation, it was a deviant illness produced in a person by bad experiences happening to them in childhood, exactly like the orientation of pedophilia.

I've done this all over at length in other threads, probably with gbaji, with long, reasoned posts on morality, and extensive side-serves of the science of neurochemistry. At this point I INSIST on my right to use lolcats on Varrus.

Screenshot

Screenshot


Edited, Apr 17th 2009 12:55pm by Aripyanfar
#373 Apr 17 2009 at 11:44 AM Rating: Default
Cat,

Quote:
How do you know we didn't pay any taxes?


Aren't you the one who bragged about living off 20k annually?


Aripya,

Quote:
but he also had a run of posts explaining that homosexuality wasn't an innate orientation, it was a deviant illness produced in a person by bad experiences happening to them in childhood, exactly like the orientation of pedophilia.


Close...Homosexuality is a deviant lifestyle choice, not as bad as pedophilia but in the same ball park. Someone is not born a homosexual; it's a learned behaviour based on that persons life experiences.

You should also note that i've also said this should be a states right issue not a federal one.

#374 Apr 17 2009 at 11:45 AM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
*****
13,007 posts
You know what's a million times easier? Just call varrus a jackass and stop talking to him.
#375REDACTED, Posted: Apr 17 2009 at 11:49 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Ash,
#376 Apr 17 2009 at 12:00 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
*****
13,007 posts
hangtennow wrote:
Ash,

I really feel bad for you if you're over 13.
I feel really bad for every human being you've ever interacted with.
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 220 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (220)