Post #377,343
7/1/13 9:32:42 PM
|
![New](/static/images/lrpd.gif)
I'll answer. Again.
No state funded artificial insemination should be tolerated unless and until there is universal healthcare available for everyone. You want to experiment with kids being raised in same-sex households, I'm not opposed. But it is an experiment. Counsel on both sides of the issues before court conceded that the jury was still out on the impact of that. But, I'm not really opposed to that. But the fact remains that *someone else* had those kids. And maybe, in some cases, if the state had done a better job of supporting households with children, they wouldn't be available to adopt in the first place.
I guess where I ultimately fall on this is that given the recent court rulings, all "marriage benefits" should be erased and the savings should be forwarded to households with children, homosexual households, heterosexual households, whatever. The USSC decisions have made "marriage" meaningless to society.
|
Post #377,354
7/1/13 11:18:39 PM
|
![New](/static/images/lrpd.gif)
what savings
I have a 21yo and a 27yo inhabiting my house at the moment, I feed them, they steal beer money and demand taxi service everywhere and I can't deduct a dime for them as dependants.
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 #377,399
7/2/13 9:52:52 PM
|
![New](/static/images/lrpd.gif)
I'm on your side.
Windsor isn't. She's a multi-millionaire who doesn't want to contribute her fair share to the common good.
|
Post #377,362
7/2/13 5:57:34 AM
|
![New](/static/images/lrpd.gif)
That sounds convoluted and far-fetched.
Sure, real genuine universal health-care would be a great thing, and is an important goal for a society that wants to see itself as truly civilised.
But conflating that with tax breaks for families and using it as an argument against treating all kinds of families somewhat fairly seems wildly irrelevant.
So much so that I can't help thinking it's just an over-intellectualisation of what is basically homophobia that you don't dare admit to openly; perhaps not even to yourself.
--
Christian R. Conrad
Same old username (as above), but now on iki.fi
(Yeah, yeah, it redirects to the same old GMail... But just in case I ever want to change.)
|
Post #377,367
7/2/13 8:53:21 AM
|
![New](/static/images/lrpd.gif)
no, he is pissed because he cant steal dead peoples money
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 #377,397
7/2/13 9:39:01 PM
|
![New](/static/images/lrpd.gif)
I'm a homophobe because I want ...
healthcare guaranteed for existing children before I want to allow medical science to create new kids for the monied class. And you say I'm stretching?
And these vaunted "tax breaks"? Jesus, the first 5 million is tax exempt already ferchrissakes. And if your estate is worth more than 5 million in my country, you've done something unethical (at the very least) to amass that wealth. Or do you think they all "earned it"?
|
Post #377,440
7/3/13 4:40:44 AM
|
![New](/static/images/lrpd.gif)
Back-pedaling much?
Who's talking inheritance tax here? Only you; not me, anyway. You've been saying (if I'm not misremembering?) that you're against all tax breaks and other preferential treatment for married couples. And then you got onto universal health-care, apparently arguing the lack of this as some kind of support for your resistance to marriage preferentialism. It's not I who am introducing and connecting wildly disparate things; it's you.
--
Christian R. Conrad
Same old username (as above), but now on iki.fi
(Yeah, yeah, it redirects to the same old GMail... But just in case I ever want to change.)
|
Post #377,454
7/3/13 1:27:09 PM
|
![New](/static/images/lrpd.gif)
If you change premises, you have to change conclusions.
|