now I'm confused

IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO

1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User

Welcome to IWETHEY!

Post #377,333

by boxley

7/1/13 8:54:48 PM

now I'm confused

what is this contribute nothing bidness? A married couple who spews out kids, lives on taxpayer supported assistance because they are sometimes working when they aren't drinking and smack their kids around contribute more than a single mom who works to support herself and goes to school at the same time? Just because they have a gummint license to co-habitate?

Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 58 years. meep

Post #377,340

by mmoffitt

7/1/13 9:14:23 PM

No.

See my reply post to you above. We should *NOT* base any benefits upon marital status. We should *HELP* the people who give us kids without regard to marital status. Read my reply above.

Survey on DOMA. - (Another Scott) - (114) - June 27, 2013, 07:49:05 AM EDT

Done. -NT - (mmoffitt) - June 27, 2013, 09:33:53 AM EDT

Done. -NT - (hnick) - June 27, 2013, 10:03:41 AM EDT

Also done. -NT - (Andrew Grygus) - June 27, 2013, 11:40:40 AM EDT

Done also. -NT - (a6l6e6x) - June 27, 2013, 12:09:21 PM EDT

Seriously done! -NT - (folkert) - June 27, 2013, 02:37:54 PM EDT

Check - (drook) - (106) - June 27, 2013, 02:46:20 PM EDT

Affects the tax base. - (mmoffitt) - (11) - June 27, 2013, 03:43:12 PM EDT

Bzzzzt, thank you for playing - (drook) - (9) - June 27, 2013, 03:57:58 PM EDT

I think he means the actual case at hand. - (Another Scott) - (7) - June 27, 2013, 04:42:29 PM EDT

That's *her* standing - (drook) - (6) - June 27, 2013, 04:57:19 PM EDT

I think the argument is... - (Another Scott) - (5) - June 27, 2013, 06:40:56 PM EDT

Even if true ... - (drook) - June 27, 2013, 06:50:15 PM EDT

That's as may be... - (malraux) - (3) - June 27, 2013, 06:57:58 PM EDT

Now you're getting there. But, ... - (mmoffitt) - (2) - June 28, 2013, 08:47:03 AM EDT

why pay a penalty for not being single? -NT - (boxley) - (1) - June 28, 2013, 10:17:22 AM EDT

There's a negative economic impact in cohabitation. - (mmoffitt) - June 28, 2013, 12:34:23 PM EDT

I was unclear. - (mmoffitt) - June 28, 2013, 08:50:39 AM EDT

costly to the taxpayer? It's not your money - (boxley) - June 27, 2013, 05:57:18 PM EDT

But it *will* affect you! - (pwhysall) - (6) - June 28, 2013, 03:06:29 AM EDT

Are you SURE you don't live here? - (hnick) - (5) - June 28, 2013, 06:24:16 AM EDT

Even up in the north... - (folkert) - (4) - June 28, 2013, 09:21:50 AM EDT

Huh, wha? I've never been to the Netherlands! -NT - (CRConrad) - (3) - June 28, 2013, 07:04:07 PM EDT

Ummm... - (folkert) - (2) - June 28, 2013, 08:13:54 PM EDT

I've never Reformed any Churchies either! -NT - (CRConrad) - (1) - June 28, 2013, 09:40:57 PM EDT

Jussa so's yews noes... - (folkert) - June 29, 2013, 02:15:07 AM EDT

WOW. - (mmoffitt) - (86) - June 28, 2013, 04:41:30 PM EDT

Um... Justice? - (hnick) - (85) - June 28, 2013, 04:49:35 PM EDT

Nonsense. Did they have kids? - (mmoffitt) - (84) - June 28, 2013, 04:59:30 PM EDT

Really? - (Another Scott) - (2) - June 28, 2013, 05:12:19 PM EDT

Maybe in the short term. - (mmoffitt) - (1) - July 1, 2013, 06:01:47 PM EDT

The number you want is "new household formation". - (Another Scott) - July 1, 2013, 07:26:08 PM EDT

so you are one of them - (boxley) - June 28, 2013, 05:13:24 PM EDT

Re: Nonsense. Did they have kids? - (hnick) - (58) - June 28, 2013, 06:13:14 PM EDT

Sans kids, what are the societal benefits of marriage? - (mmoffitt) - (57) - July 1, 2013, 06:23:54 PM EDT

I remember arguing with Ben why atheists want to marry - (boxley) - (1) - July 1, 2013, 07:15:48 PM EDT

Man, I am *NOT* making my point about marriage. - (mmoffitt) - July 1, 2013, 09:12:48 PM EDT

Re: Sans kids, what are the societal benefits of marriage? - (Another Scott) - (54) - July 1, 2013, 07:38:37 PM EDT

So what? - (mmoffitt) - (53) - July 1, 2013, 09:23:03 PM EDT

Re: So what? - (Another Scott) - (52) - July 1, 2013, 09:34:21 PM EDT

:0) - (mmoffitt) - (51) - July 1, 2013, 09:44:47 PM EDT

That's rough. - (Another Scott) - (50) - July 1, 2013, 10:40:01 PM EDT

I don't think your marriage is a sham marriage. - (mmoffitt) - (49) - July 2, 2013, 06:37:02 PM EDT

How about mine? - (crazy) - (1) - July 2, 2013, 08:14:52 PM EDT

No societal benefit != no benefit. - (mmoffitt) - July 2, 2013, 10:03:07 PM EDT

I wasn't pointing at you specifically. - (Another Scott) - (46) - July 2, 2013, 08:56:31 PM EDT

No. Come on, Scott, have I really been that unclear? - (mmoffitt) - (45) - July 2, 2013, 09:30:51 PM EDT

There's a difference between "expected" and "the purpose" - (drook) - (3) - July 2, 2013, 09:37:48 PM EDT

Thank you. - (mmoffitt) - (2) - July 2, 2013, 09:48:12 PM EDT

I think it went off the rails here. - (Another Scott) - (1) - July 2, 2013, 10:07:45 PM EDT

Yep, that was subjective. - (mmoffitt) - July 2, 2013, 10:10:26 PM EDT

We're talking past each other. - (Another Scott) - (40) - July 2, 2013, 09:54:29 PM EDT

I think that's slightly disingenuous. - (mmoffitt) - (39) - July 2, 2013, 10:08:40 PM EDT

See above. I don't know how to say more... -NT - (Another Scott) - (27) - July 2, 2013, 10:10:15 PM EDT

Dude, Seriously? - (mmoffitt) - (26) - July 2, 2013, 10:11:38 PM EDT

Expectations change. - (Another Scott) - (25) - July 2, 2013, 10:34:23 PM EDT

An equal protection claim assumes the result. - (mmoffitt) - (24) - July 2, 2013, 10:56:56 PM EDT

you are confused - (boxley) - (1) - July 2, 2013, 11:00:32 PM EDT

Yeah, I didn't get a call. Stupid b*stards. :0) -NT - (mmoffitt) - July 2, 2013, 11:02:29 PM EDT

BZZT - sorry, elementary logic lacking. - (CRConrad) - (21) - July 3, 2013, 05:37:10 AM EDT

on A3) dont forget to steal all their stuff as well. -NT - (boxley) - July 3, 2013, 08:35:59 AM EDT

First, I never said "reproduction was a requirement". - (mmoffitt) - (19) - July 3, 2013, 01:21:10 PM EDT

On your addendum. - (Another Scott) - July 3, 2013, 03:04:01 PM EDT

Yes you did. But never mind that; let's talk people in stead - (CRConrad) - (17) - July 3, 2013, 03:15:18 PM EDT

My last bit. A little clarification. - (mmoffitt) - (16) - July 6, 2013, 11:36:52 AM EDT

Wake up. - (Another Scott) - (9) - July 6, 2013, 12:07:00 PM EDT

Racial discrimination is a different issue entirely. -NT - (mmoffitt) - (7) - July 6, 2013, 02:19:48 PM EDT

Equal protection is Equal protection. QED. -NT - (Another Scott) - (6) - July 6, 2013, 02:22:57 PM EDT

Can we discriminate against polygamists? - (mmoffitt) - (5) - July 6, 2013, 02:54:28 PM EDT

Is polygamist marriage legal in the US? - (Another Scott) - (2) - July 6, 2013, 03:10:21 PM EDT

How about Amendment 10? - (mmoffitt) - (1) - July 6, 2013, 05:13:02 PM EDT

was legal in utah before statehood - (boxley) - July 6, 2013, 06:31:41 PM EDT

uh, no. Just wont allow them to get stamped by the gummint -NT - (boxley) - (1) - July 6, 2013, 05:01:37 PM EDT

Concur. The state no longer has an interest in marriage. -NT - (mmoffitt) - July 6, 2013, 05:14:31 PM EDT

Re: Wake up. ... Interesting that they cited Korematsu - (Ashton) - July 7, 2013, 05:08:00 AM EDT

A distinction without a difference. - (CRConrad) - (4) - July 6, 2013, 06:34:26 PM EDT

And there it is. - (mmoffitt) - (3) - July 7, 2013, 01:06:17 PM EDT

Not assume, *declare* - (drook) - (2) - July 7, 2013, 01:33:44 PM EDT

Oh, he won't answer this one - (crazy) - July 7, 2013, 03:59:28 PM EDT

Where and when was this declaration made? - (mmoffitt) - July 8, 2013, 01:25:35 PM EDT

Sorry, you still lost about six levels ago. - (CRConrad) - July 6, 2013, 07:21:49 PM EDT

state involvement in marriage was about division of property - (boxley) - (10) - July 2, 2013, 10:50:48 PM EDT

Among DESCENDANTS, right? - (mmoffitt) - (2) - July 2, 2013, 10:58:10 PM EDT

absolutely, now with dna you dont need contracts to - (boxley) - (1) - July 2, 2013, 11:02:21 PM EDT

I'm with you. - (mmoffitt) - July 2, 2013, 11:03:39 PM EDT

<sigh> - (Another Scott) - (6) - July 2, 2013, 11:10:31 PM EDT

why, I was right that time as well :-) -NT - (boxley) - (1) - July 3, 2013, 08:33:35 AM EDT

Heh. No. :-) -NT - (Another Scott) - July 3, 2013, 08:55:09 AM EDT

How'd I miss that thread? ;0) -NT - (mmoffitt) - (3) - July 3, 2013, 01:14:14 PM EDT

Just lucky I guess. - (Another Scott) - (2) - July 3, 2013, 02:49:15 PM EDT

The best part is... - (mmoffitt) - (1) - July 6, 2013, 11:39:29 AM EDT

Indeed! -NT - (Another Scott) - July 6, 2013, 12:07:28 PM EDT

Things we have: "adoption", "artificial insemination"... - (malraux) - (20) - June 28, 2013, 06:41:46 PM EDT

Adoption and Artificial insemination rely on others. - (mmoffitt) - (19) - July 1, 2013, 06:25:23 PM EDT

"Zero chance" is BS - (malraux) - (18) - July 1, 2013, 06:35:22 PM EDT

Drop it, it's not about sex - (drook) - (9) - July 1, 2013, 07:09:21 PM EDT

He's only talking about the sex. -NT - (CRConrad) - (8) - July 1, 2013, 07:54:28 PM EDT

No, I'm not. Everyone else is. - (mmoffitt) - (7) - July 1, 2013, 08:50:17 PM EDT

now I'm confused - (boxley) - (1) - July 1, 2013, 08:54:48 PM EDT

No. - (mmoffitt) - July 1, 2013, 09:14:23 PM EDT

Yes you are, of course. Straight hetero making-babies sex. - (CRConrad) - (4) - July 2, 2013, 06:09:33 AM EDT

Um, No. - (mmoffitt) - (3) - July 2, 2013, 10:19:03 PM EDT

thats one convert :-) -NT - (boxley) - July 2, 2013, 10:31:26 PM EDT

Succinct, sure -- but above all, WRONG. - (CRConrad) - (1) - July 3, 2013, 01:27:28 AM EDT

I'm aware of the shady company I'm keeping. - (mmoffitt) - July 3, 2013, 01:29:11 PM EDT

I'll answer. Again. - (mmoffitt) - (7) - July 1, 2013, 09:32:42 PM EDT

what savings - (boxley) - (1) - July 1, 2013, 11:18:39 PM EDT

I'm on your side. - (mmoffitt) - July 2, 2013, 09:52:52 PM EDT

That sounds convoluted and far-fetched. - (CRConrad) - (4) - July 2, 2013, 05:57:34 AM EDT

no, he is pissed because he cant steal dead peoples money -NT - (boxley) - July 2, 2013, 08:53:21 AM EDT

I'm a homophobe because I want ... - (mmoffitt) - (2) - July 2, 2013, 09:39:01 PM EDT

Back-pedaling much? - (CRConrad) - (1) - July 3, 2013, 04:40:44 AM EDT

If you change premises, you have to change conclusions. -NT - (mmoffitt) - July 3, 2013, 01:27:09 PM EDT

Done ... to a crisp. - (Ashton) - (1) - June 27, 2013, 03:47:24 PM EDT

Methinks this thread (also) is done to a crisp. - (Ashton) - July 4, 2013, 12:51:22 AM EDT

iwethey.org

Do not ask for whom the bellicose tolls.
145 ms