my solution to the gay marriage argument

[elwoodblues]

[ QUOTE ]
1. I consider this deadweight loss if you will. Too expensive and/or time consuming to determine this. Also, this is something is constantly subject to change.


[/ QUOTE ]

It would actually be very easy to do (hell, you claim dependents on your tax forms.) If you have dependent children and are "married" you get the benefit. Apply it equally to gay and straight married couples. How is that difficult to determine?

[ QUOTE ]
2. The "adult children" were "children children" at some point werent they? As such, I have no real issue with continuance of the benefits.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think extending it only to those with dependent children would be more appropriate, but it's largely irrelevant.

[ QUOTE ]
3. I'm willing to compromise on this point. If a gay couple adopts a child I'd be willing to extend marriage benefits to them. Of course it raises the "chicken or the egg" question but Id be willing to work towards a solution. Not a huge fan to be honest, but given the benefits of getting kids out of foster homes to parents that want them outweighs their place on my contiuum of desireable family structures.

[/ QUOTE ]


So you would support the following law:
Any two individuals are entitled to marry. State granted marriage benefits are only given to those with children (natural or adopted.) All employment associated marriage benefits can be determined by the employer insofar as they do not distinguish between same-sex and traditional marriages (they can distinguish between child/childless marriages.)

[vulturesrow]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
No I wouldn't because there is very little data (other than anecdotal) to support the assertion that bi-racial children have a hard time in society. And race has 0 effect on the simple ability to have a children. OTOH, we have tons of data that document that positive effect of having a heterosexual family structure.

[/ QUOTE ]

Shouldn't you be comparing "no family structure" to "any family structure" if the topic is marriage and your stated goal is welfare of the child? The data on hetero vs [censored] families is debatable, but the effects on a child of having a stable family structure is pretty obvious.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thats actually not my stated goal, but see my response to Elwood vis a vis the extension of benefits to gay adoptees.

[Inso0]

[ QUOTE ]
God. You're so Rush-Limbaugh lite. First off- gays marrying is not increasing my taxes. Second, YOU are the one who has the government telling people who can and cannot marry.

What a intellectually dishonest, rhetoric spouting hypocrite you are.

[/ QUOTE ]

I, nor the government care who you marry. That's between you and your priest/partner. Just don't come asking for government handouts from a system designed for heterosexual family structures.

[kurto]

[ QUOTE ]
The modern liberal substitute for intellectual argument, labeling. Just trot out bigot or homophobe or .... and you win! No need to think or engage.

I cede to your superior technique.

[/ QUOTE ]

lol. Cool. I win.

btw- this is ironic because this 'liberal' (and we all know that you aren't thinking... anyone who is a liberal in just wrong... they don't have the 'values this country is founded on like us good conservatives do'.... I referenced studies earlier to make my case... and the good 'thinking conservatives' arbitrarily dismissed them because they contradicted the OPINIONS of the good value-holding conservatives.

I'm glad you declared victory for yourself. We know that was going to be your feelings regardless of the evidence presented.

carry on good American!

[kurto]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Its rather arbitrary of you to assume only heterosexuals can insure the success of the next generation.

[/ QUOTE ]

I lol'd -- A+++++++++++++++ excellent poster, would read again.

Apparently, this guy has perfected asexual reproduction.

[/ QUOTE ]

Imagine being so foolish to believe that the only factor in the success of future generations is reproduction? Its hard to imagine. Apparently, if you can give birth, that's all a generation needs to survive and thrive.

Fascinating.

[Kaj]

[ QUOTE ]
I, nor the government care who you marry. ... Just don't come asking for government handouts from a system designed for heterosexual family structures.

[/ QUOTE ]

So again you defend the status quo after pretending to support the abolition of these heterosexual-marriage-based tax breaks.

How many times are you going to go around this circle?

Edit: And as pointed out below, legal rights of married couples extend well beyond just tax issues.

[kurto]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It is doing just that by giving special tax credits to some but not others. Which is what this entire thread has been about. Are you even reading anything here?

[/ QUOTE ]

Have you read all my posts? I said back on page one that we should stop bickering about who gets the handouts, but instead change government so people can afford to run their lives/families the way they see fit without needing tax relief to afford to raise said family.

In the meantime, don't "solve" the problem with more handouts! That accomplishes nothing.

[/ QUOTE ]

Most of the benefits of legalized marriage are NOT handouts. Second- you have not been arguing about removing benefits to married people, you have simply argued that gays should not be entitled to similar benefits.

I don't think I've seen a person change his position more often in a thread.

[Inso0]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I, nor the government care who you marry. ... Just don't come asking for government handouts from a system designed for heterosexual family structures.

[/ QUOTE ]

So again you defend the status quo after pretending to support the abolition of these tax breaks.

How many times are you going to go around this circle?

[/ QUOTE ]

Go away.

I've already responded to this.

[Barcalounger]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think I've seen a person change his position more often in a thread.

[/ QUOTE ]

Then continue to deny ever changing their position.

[Kaj]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I, nor the government care who you marry. ... Just don't come asking for government handouts from a system designed for heterosexual family structures.

[/ QUOTE ]

So again you defend the status quo after pretending to support the abolition of these tax breaks.

How many times are you going to go around this circle?

[/ QUOTE ]

Go away.

I've already responded to this.

[/ QUOTE ]

ANSWER THE [censored] QUESTIONS! YOUR RESPONSE TO THESE QUESTIONS ARE TO TALK OUT BOTH SIDES OF YOUR MOUTH!

[ QUOTE ]

(1) Is the current law regarding marriage benefits fair: Yes No

(2) If no, should the law be changed: Yes No


[/ QUOTE ]