For those against gay marriage.

[leninrocks244]

http://modesto.craigslist.org/rnr/902966144.html

[Megamind]

I agree...what are you voting on?

[AzureShadow]

I feel the exact same way. Discriminative morons need to do us all a favor and shut the fuck up.

[leninrocks244]

I agree...what are you voting on?

It's something my friend from California posted on her blog. She's protesting against a law called "Proposition 8", which would ban gay marriage in the state of California.

[Imperial]

As a voter of the state of California, I am very proud to say that I will be voting in opposition to the ban on Tuesday.

Opposition opponents have tried to make this about everything but gay marriage. Teaching it in classrooms, activist judges etc. Well, there have been times in America's history where it has been the duty of the Court's to strike down unjust laws, and that happened with California's Supreme Court ruling that gay marriage cannot be banned by legislation. So now we've got a Constitutional Initiative to kill it. You don't choose to be gay, but I do choose to treat people equally under the law.

/begin conservative hit machine

[Megamind]

I think we should ban straight marriage...marriage has outlived it's usefulness which the number of devorses clearly show...it's a remnant from the past and pretty much a useless concept...

[leninrocks244]

As a voter of the state of California, I am very proud to say that I will be voting in opposition to the ban on Tuesday.

Opposition opponents have tried to make this about everything but gay marriage. Teaching it in classrooms, activist judges etc. Well, there have been times in America's history where it has been the duty of the Court's to strike down unjust laws, and that happened with California's Supreme Court ruling that gay marriage cannot be banned by legislation. So now we've got a Constitutional Initiative to kill it. You don't choose to be gay, but I do choose to treat people equally under the law.

/begin conservative hit machine

Awesome.

[Lincongrad]

As a california resident I have had to restrain myself from kicking over Yes on 8 signs much of the time. A major source of the Yes on 8 campaigns' funds are the Mormon church, who are strongly encouraging their members to donate to the Yes on 8 campaign. Which is really straining my friendship with some of the mormons I know.

EDIT: Sadly, I'm not old enough to vote. But I'm working on getting all the 18 year olds I know to vote no.

[leninrocks244]

The funniest argument against gay marriage is that they're trying to "protect marriage" even though they won't stop people from getting a divorce and those crazy 55 hour celebrity marriages.

[Lincongrad]

Yeah, seriously. if they want to protect marriage maybe they should lower the divorce rate somehow.

SNL said it best. "And I believe marriage should be a sacred institution between two unwilling teenagers." -Tina Fey (as Palin)

[Imperial]

Thank you Catholic Church...

MAJOR FUNDING PROVIDED BY KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS

[Megamind]

Why are you ignoring my marriage is a useless concept argument?!

[Villalba]

I have nothing against homosexuals, and i voted against that ridiculous preposition.

[leninrocks244]

I have nothing against homosexuals, and i voted against that ridiculous preposition.

You can vote? Seriously?

[Lmcfalcon12]

Heh. Someone asked me at work last week: How can you vote for Obama, he's pro choice, pro gay marriage...? I laughed to myself, cause that's everything I'm for. Discrimination in anyway is wrong. I don't know if this is a gay marriage debate persay, but I will say, if you're not gay, then you really shouldn't give a shit either way. It doesn't really affect you.

[Megamind]

Heh. Someone asked me at work last week: How can you vote for Obama, he's pro choice, pro gay marriage...? I laughed to myself, cause that's everything I'm for. Discrimination in anyway is wrong. I don't know if this is a gay marriage debate persay, but I will say, if you're not gay, then you really shouldn't give a shit either way. It doesn't really affect you.

Listen to this man...he has tha brainz!

[leninrocks244]

Heh. Someone asked me at work last week: How can you vote for Obama, he's pro choice, pro gay marriage...? I laughed to myself, cause that's everything I'm for. Discrimination in anyway is wrong. I don't know if this is a gay marriage debate persay, but I will say, if you're not gay, then you really shouldn't give a shit either way. It doesn't really affect you.

Seriously. I believe that if gays want to get married and be as miserable as straight people, why shouldn't they get married?

[tom the pit leader]

I can't vote but on the ban, I'm against it.
And to the argument that a majority of people are anti gay marriage, all I have to say is, a majority of Southerners were anti desegeragtion too, and that wasn't leagal either.
Lennins right, I can't think of a worse punishment than marrige, at least from the majority of marriges I've seen.

[leninrocks244]

I can't vote but on the ban, I'm against it.
And to the argument that a majority of people are anti gay marriage, all I have to say is, a majority of Southerners were anti desegeragtion too, and that wasn't leagal either.
Lennins right, I can't think of a worse punishment than marrige, at least from the majority of marriges I've seen.

And the irony is that I'm engaged XD.

[Imperial]

I think Lewis Black sums it up best:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o-id4GKsaQk

[tom the pit leader]

And the irony is that I'm engaged XD.

I'm sorry to hear that :D

[leninrocks244]

I think Lewis Black sums it up best:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o-id4GKsaQk

I rofl'd, but I'm sure some people on here would love to disagree with you.

[leninrocks244]

I'm sorry to hear that :D

And to be even more of a hypocrite, I actually love it :D

[Woody]

Good lord, What In The Fuck Is Going On In This Thread.

[Lincongrad]

Love and flowers, man.

[Melidan]

Good lord, What In The Fuck Is Going On In This Thread.

Thank you.

[tom the pit leader]

It's not nice for people like Lewis Black to joke like that, that last story he said has acctually happend to me, and it destoryed my family.

[Lincongrad]

It's not nice for people like Lewis Black to joke like that, that last story he said has acctually happend to me, and it destoryed my family.

You think that was bad. One time a gay guy anally raped my kitten.

[Villalba]

You think that was bad. One time a gay guy anally raped my kitten.

And people wonder where AIDS came from.

[Villalba]

You can vote? Seriously?

Yes i can, wtf is your problem?

[Ayrrie]

Lenin's old enough to be engaged?

Oh my dear and fluffy lord.

I also agree with Woody and Melidan.

[The Corporal]

I'll be the brave conservative and present a non-religious opposition to gay marriage: as everyone who is married or knows married people knows, married couples don't have to pay as much in taxes as single people. If all of a sudden 15 million homosexuals get married and jointly file taxes, what do you think is going to happen to the tax revenue? This is not to say I'm strictly against gay marriage, it's more that I'm against tax breaks for married people (though tax breaks for having children is more than cool). However, I don't see any legislation to that effect ever happening, so we have to stop the bleeding somehow. As some may note, common law marriages are enough for countless hippies and über-redneck the-government-is-in-collusion-with-space-aliens-and-the-jews-to-take-away-my-five-seventeen-year-old-wives type people. Why not for the gay community?

* The Corporal dons his flamesuit. :)

[tom the pit leader]

I'll be the brave conservative and present a non-religious opposition to gay marriage: as everyone who is married or knows married people knows, married couples don't have to pay as much in taxes as single people. If all of a sudden 15 million homosexuals get married and jointly file taxes, what do you think is going to happen to the tax revenue? This is not to say I'm strictly against gay marriage, it's more that I'm against tax breaks for married people (though tax breaks for having children is more than cool). However, I don't see any legislation to that effect ever happening, so we have to stop the bleeding somehow. As some may note, common law marriages are enough for countless hippies and über-redneck the-government-is-in-collusion-with-space-aliens-and-the-jews-to-take-away-my-five-seventeen-year-old-wives type people. Why not for the gay community?

* The Corporal dons his flamesuit. :)

I think because all of those people, including the the-government-is-in-collusion-with-space-aliens-and-the-jews-to-take-away-my-five-seventeen-year-old-wives people get to be married, and gays don't.

The tax argument was interesting and well done, so hats off for a new argument brought to the table.

And for the record, I am one of the the-government-is-in-collusion-with-space-aliens-and-the-jews-to-take-away-my-five-seventeen-year-old-wives.

[Woody]

You are welcome Melidan. I will gladly be the first to say that this thread makes me sick.

[tom the pit leader]

I'm going to go out on a limb and ask why.

[Great Lakes Union]

I can't wait for the Conservafags to raid this thread.

How ironic that in a thread where you argue against anti-gay discrimination you use a term like "Conservafags."

[Iron Wolf]

Saw a thread similar to this on ODN's forums, and here's my same take on the issue:

From a routine done by Whoopi Goldberg a couple years ago: "If you're concerned about gay marriage, don't marry a gay."

<-- proud hippie conservative. ;)

[bigdaddychacha]

And the irony is that I'm engaged XD.WUT?!? :oh2:

You are welcome Melidan. I will gladly be the first to say that this thread makes me sick.You can disagree with the sentiments expressed, but I fail to see how you can possibly be disgusted...nobodie's even been sodomized yet, Woody! :D

[leninrocks244]

It's not nice for people like Lewis Black to joke like that, that last story he said has acctually happend to me, and it destoryed my family.

rofl

[leninrocks244]

Yes i can, wtf is your problem?

Nothing, you just gave me the impression that you're 12. Seriously, and I'm not trying to be an asshole.

[leninrocks244]

How ironic that in a thread where you argue against anti-gay discrimination you use a term like "Conservafags."

What am I supposed to call them? Conservatives? Pfft.

[leninrocks244]

WUT?!? :oh2:

You can disagree with the sentiments expressed, but I fail to see how you can possibly be disgusted...nobodie's even been sodomized yet, Woody! :D

Yeah, but it's more like a promise compared to an engagement.

[leninrocks244]

Lenin's old enough to be engaged?

Oh my dear and fluffy lord.

I also agree with Woody and Melidan.

There's no laws against engagement that I'm aware of.

[leninrocks244]

Good lord, What In The Fuck Is Going On In This Thread.

Standing up for people's rights, man.

[leninrocks244]

I'll be the brave conservative and present a non-religious opposition to gay marriage: as everyone who is married or knows married people knows, married couples don't have to pay as much in taxes as single people. If all of a sudden 15 million homosexuals get married and jointly file taxes, what do you think is going to happen to the tax revenue? This is not to say I'm strictly against gay marriage, it's more that I'm against tax breaks for married people (though tax breaks for having children is more than cool). However, I don't see any legislation to that effect ever happening, so we have to stop the bleeding somehow. As some may note, common law marriages are enough for countless hippies and über-redneck the-government-is-in-collusion-with-space-aliens-and-the-jews-to-take-away-my-five-seventeen-year-old-wives type people. Why not for the gay community?

* The Corporal dons his flamesuit. :)

Then it's an initiative to go out and get hitched :D. But anyways, it's sad that you think that it's ok to suppress a certain group of people's rights just to save a few bucks. GO AND GET MARRIED THEN!!! :P

[Woody]

I find your signature offensive. To my religion, and to my political views. Delete please.

[leninrocks244]

I find your signature offensive. To my religion, and to my political views. Delete please.

I find it offensive that you find my signature offensive, for it is a clear expression of my beliefs.

[tom the pit leader]

I find your signature offensive. To my religion, and to my political views. Delete please.

Woody, I am all for tollerance and not making people mad, and I like you as much as I know you, but please resist the urge to destory the one good idea we had to clean up the fourms. This isn't a perosnal attack, I'm just saying I know how this fight ends.

[Villalba]

Damn Lenin stop spamming, and put all your shit in one post. Do like everyone else, is annoying no wonder this thread went up to 5 pages.

[Woody]

Honestly, I tend to ignore every last liberal poster I see in any forum. However, I find this effort to clean up the real world section of these forums absurd. So I make a post that gets somebody butthurt. Your gonna delete it? Give me a break. Thats worse than me going out telling all the liberals to STFU because i'm angry at how they said McCain is "inconsistent" or something along those lines.

[tom the pit leader]

Honestly, I tend to ignore every last liberal poster I see in any forum. However, I find this effort to clean up the real world section of these forums absurd. So I make a post that gets somebody butthurt. Your gonna delete it? Give me a break. Thats worse than me going out telling all the liberals to STFU because i'm angry at how they said McCain is "inconsistent" or something along those lines.

Ok, all I was making sure is that you wern't going to abuse the week of cilivilty and blast lennin, though sometimes we all want to. Just saying don't waste it on this.

[Hubb]

You are welcome Melidan. I will gladly be the first to say that this thread makes me sick.

I miss you. Come back, biyatch. :awesome:

[Dark Force]

My opinion: Government and Marriage - Government GTFO! Marriage is a religious institution, separation of church and state. Government shouldn't be allowed to define marriage period. Religiously, it is defined as between a man and a woman. If you want to invent your own religion that says otherwise, be my guest, but the government can not define it period: either for or against gay marriage.

[leninrocks244]

Honestly, I tend to ignore every last liberal poster I see in any forum. However, I find this effort to clean up the real world section of these forums absurd. So I make a post that gets somebody butthurt. Your gonna delete it? Give me a break. Thats worse than me going out telling all the liberals to STFU because i'm angry at how they said McCain is "inconsistent" or something along those lines.

How hypocritical, especially after you ordered me to delete my signature because it made you butthurt.

[leninrocks244]

Damn Lenin stop spamming, and put all your shit in one post. Do like everyone else, is annoying no wonder this thread went up to 5 pages.

Scene: A cafe. One table is occupied by a group of Vikings with horned helmets on. A man and his wife enter.

Man (Eric Idle): You sit here, dear.
Wife (Graham Chapman in drag): All right.
Man (to Waitress): Morning!
Waitress (Terry Jones, in drag as a bit of a rat-bag): Morning!
Man: Well, what've you got?
Waitress: Well, there's egg and bacon; egg sausage and bacon; egg and spam; egg bacon and spam; egg bacon sausage and spam; spam bacon sausage and spam; spam egg spam spam bacon and spam; spam sausage spam spam bacon spam tomato and spam;
Vikings (starting to chant): Spam spam spam spam...
Waitress: ...spam spam spam egg and spam; spam spam spam spam spam spam baked beans spam spam spam...
Vikings (singing): Spam! Lovely spam! Lovely spam!
Waitress: ...or Lobster Thermidor a Crevette with a mornay
sauce served in a Provencale manner with shallots and aubergines
garnished with truffle pate, brandy and with a fried egg on top and spam.
Wife: Have you got anything without spam?
Waitress: Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
Wife: I don't want ANY spam!
Man: Why can't she have egg bacon spam and sausage?
Wife: THAT'S got spam in it!
Man: Hasn't got as much spam in it as spam egg sausage and spam, has it?
Vikings: Spam spam spam spam (crescendo through next few lines)
Wife: Could you do the egg bacon spam and sausage without the spam then?
Waitress: Eewwww!
Wife: What do you mean 'Eewwww'? I don't like spam!
Vikings: Lovely spam! Wonderful spam!
Waitress: Shut up!
Vikings: Lovely spam! Wonderful spam!
Waitress: Shut up! (Vikings stop) Bloody Vikings! You can't
have egg bacon spam and sausage without the spam.
Wife (shrieks): I don't like spam!
Man: Sshh, dear, don't cause a fuss. I'll have your spam. I love it. I'm having spam spam spam spam spam spam spam baked beans spam spam spam and spam!
Vikings (singing): Spam spam spam spam. Lovely spam! Wonderful spam!
Waitress: Shut up!! Baked beans are off.
Man: Well could I have her spam instead of the baked beans then?
Waitress: You mean spam spam spam spam spam spam... (but it is too late and the Vikings drown her words)
Vikings (singing elaborately): Spam spam spam spam. Lovely spam! Wonderful spam! Spam spa-a-a-a-a-am spam spa-a-a-a-a-am spam. Lovely spam! Lovely spam! Lovely spam! Lovely spam! Lovely spam! Spam spam spam spam!

It's necessary.

[leninrocks244]

Ok, all I was making sure is that you wern't going to abuse the week of cilivilty and blast lennin, though sometimes we all want to. Just saying don't waste it on this.

It's cuz I'm black, isn't it?

[Woody]

1. I wasn't planning on blasting Lenin.

2. Actually, I didn't get butthurt. It's called sarcasm.

[leninrocks244]

1. I wasn't planning on blasting Lenin.

2. Actually, I didn't get butthurt. It's called sarcasm.

Oh thank God. I was this close to clowning you.

[Woody]

clowning me? Lol, what are you black?

[bigdaddychacha]

clowning me? Lol, what are you black?Would it be a problem if he was?

[Dark Force]

Why does race always have to be an issue? Can't people move on?

[FreeMason]

No they can't. Stupid people are stupid. Race will always be an issue so long as people have a need to feel like they're better than someone else.

[Villalba]

No they can't. Stupid people are stupid. Race will always be an issue so long as people have a need to feel like they're better than someone else.

^Yup.

[bigdaddychacha]

My opinion: Government and Marriage - Government GTFO! Marriage is a religious institution, separation of church and state. Government shouldn't be allowed to define marriage period. Religiously, it is defined as between a man and a woman. If you want to invent your own religion that says otherwise, be my guest, but the government can not define it period: either for or against gay marriage.Marriage is not a religious institution. Plenty of societies that are nonreligious have marriages and last time I checked Atheists can get married. Also, what about interfaith marriages? Most religions won't perform them, but the state has no qualms about it.
Another problem with defining marriage in the terms of religion as you would like to do is that we get a lot of religious nuts out in the southwest or somewhere who want to marry 14 year old girls because their religion sanctions it. Or they want to have 3-5 wives because their religion sanctions it. Or, they want to have 3-5 jailbait wives, which is A-okay with their god! In my opinion, as in the opinion of any sane person, I think it is important that the government can define those arrangements as existing outside of marriage, and the law! Gay marriage does less damage than any of those examples; if the government chooses to recognize it, you won't find me getting butthurt! (pun intentional!) :eusa_dance:

[FreeMason]

Then people can't use the religious issues to attack gay marriage as would be allowed by the state. The state can't touch marriage by the church, but they can sure as hell allow civil unions and the like, and without the religious support most of the argument goes out the window.

[James Davis]

The final (secular) protest against gay marriage is its tendency (in other countries) to reduce the proportion of traditional marriages (no it doesn't turn everyone gay). Related scientific studies have shown that children are better off when raised by a man and a woman, as opposed to a single parent or two of the same gender. I am fully aware that I have to document this claim well on these boards, but I'm not up to it tonight. Just know that its out there, and I'll try to get to it tomorrow. :)

[FreeMason]

"Better off" is very vague. I know you'll document later but when you do, please explain what is meant by "better off".

[AzureShadow]

"Better off" is very vague. I know you'll document later but when you do, please explain what is meant by "better off".

Yeah, I'd like to see this as well. Seems kinda weird. O_o

[Lmcfalcon12]

In a quick skim, I see no one played the Bible card. This lady at work tells me gay marriage is wrong because the Bible says it is. God forbid a 300 page book of fiction tell me what to believe. You cannot prove any of the Bible stories happened (just thought I'd throw that argument in before I got head off).

[The Corporal]

In a quick skim, I see no one played the Bible card. This lady at work tells me gay marriage is wrong because the Bible says it is. God forbid a 300 page book of fiction tell me what to believe. You cannot prove any of the Bible stories happened (just thought I'd throw that argument in before I got head off).
Even though I'm not one to usually defend a religion, a lot of things in the Bible have been confirmed through other sources and archaeological digs. Figured you should know. :)

[Hubb]

In a quick skim, I see no one played the Bible card. This lady at work tells me gay marriage is wrong because the Bible says it is. God forbid a 300 page book of fiction tell me what to believe. You cannot prove any of the Bible stories happened (just thought I'd throw that argument in to start a flame war).

Quote fixed.

:angry::hum_::angry:

You can't prove they didn't happen, either. That's why it's called Faith.

[Lmcfalcon12]

Quote fixed.

:angry::hum_::angry:

You can't prove they didn't happen, either. That's why it's called Faith.

Fine fine. I see your point. It was not meant to start a flame war.

[AzureShadow]

The Bible is historical fiction. AKA, a lot of stuff that it mentions in it is actually real, but the circumstances (I.E. walking on water) are fiction.

Much like Scientology, a religion was formed around it. And people take it seriously.

And yes, people are entitled to their opinions, religions, thoughts, etc.. But when those things start infringing on other people's rights, that's something unforgivable and unacceptable.

[Hubb]

The Bible is historical fiction. AKA, a lot of stuff that it mentions in it is actually real, but the circumstances (I.E. walking on water) are fiction.

How do you know? Were you there? Were you in the boat at the time?

Much like Scientology, a religion was formed around it. And people take it seriously.

See, that pisses me off. You're comparing Scientology, which was founded by a pederast sailing around the world on his boat, to Christianity? I don't recall Overlord Xenu in the Bible, either.

Christianity was founded on the beliefs that Jesus Christ was the son of God. That is the central tenet, regardless of Christian denomination. For you to simply group those two together like they are actually similar is a serious over-generalization and a bit insulting.

And yes, people are entitled to their opinions, religions, thoughts, etc.. But when those things start infringing on other people's rights, that's something unforgivable and unacceptable.

Oh, I get it. The religious right is the only ideology in the country guilty of this, right? Those who are attempting to limit the type and amount of guns I can have in my home are infringing upon my rights. Those who attempt to redistribute the wealth by taking more taxes from me and giving the money to those who believe they are entitled to it infringes upon my rights. If you don't like it, petition your Congressman to amend the Constitution.

[AzureShadow]

How do you know? Were you there? Were you in the boat at the time?



See, that pisses me off. You're comparing Scientology, which was founded by a pederast sailing around the world on his boat, to Christianity? I don't recall Overlord Xenu in the Bible, either.

Christianity was founded on the beliefs that Jesus Christ was the son of God. That is the central tenet, regardless of Christian denomination. For you to simply group those two together like they are actually similar is a serious over-generalization and a bit insulting.



Oh, I get it. The religious right is the only ideology in the country guilty of this, right? Those who are attempting to limit the type and amount of guns I can have in my home are infringing upon my rights. Those who attempt to redistribute the wealth by taking more taxes from me and giving the money to those who believe they are entitled to it infringes upon my rights. If you don't like it, petition your Congressman to amend the Constitution.

I'm anti-gun-control. The entire premise of gun control is directly said in the constitution to be wrong.

And I'm a fan raising taxes on the rich because we have an astronomical debt that needs to be paid, and because we have a huge amount of people who are suffering because of the recent economic collapse. Money has to come from somewhere, and the people who are making it out the ass certainly have some to spare. Greed was NEVER said to be a right, and I certainly see a lot of it from people whining about getting increased taxes.

A rich punk kid getting his third Corvette isn't as important as a thousand people getting fed for a month.

[Villalba]

Lol okay...this is about gay marriage, not bibbles, and economic problems.

[Hubb]

Money has to come from somewhere, and the people who are making it out the ass certainly have some to spare.


Where does that stop, though? It shouldn't be my place,or your place to decide who pays more. It's not fair that someone who works hard and creates wealth for his/her family has to pay more in taxes for the people who are uneducated and looking for handouts from the government.

[tom the pit leader]

"Better off" is very vague. I know you'll document later but when you do, please explain what is meant by "better off".

indeed. The last person who played that card argued that even though there was almost zero evidence either way on 2 same sex parents, it didn't matter because it would be wrong to experiment with real lives. Failing that, he had no evidence.


I will be anxtious to see this evidence.

[Assarax]

No one knows whether or not the events in the Bible actually happened. We know that Jesus most likely existed, but we're not sure if the "miracles" performed in them were just events that were embellished, or events that today would have a perfectly good scientific explanation. For example, when Jesus awakened the man from the dead, it could very well have been that the man was in a coma, and his heart rate had slowed so much that it was impossible to feel (back in Jesus's day there were no heart monitoring devices), and it would have been assumed that the man was dead, and he may have just happened to have awakened from his coma with Jesus present. Who knows?

The problem with the bible is that it is a story, something not to be taken literally. Every bible story has a meaning and a moral to it, some lesson on how to live your life as a decent, moral human being. But when you take the stories at their literal, or face value, and ignore the meaning simply to further radical ideas, that is when the Bible becomes a less-than-credible source, and you look like a bible-thumping moron.

That's my 2 cents on the bible, and I agree with Villalba, this is about gay marriage not religion or the bible. Sorry for derailing this thread further.

[Dark Force]

I'm anti-gun-control. The entire premise of gun control is directly said in the constitution to be wrong.
Well, I see we now agree on one issue :P

And I'm a fan raising taxes on the rich because we have an astronomical debt that needs to be paid, and because we have a huge amount of people who are suffering because of the recent economic collapse. Money has to come from somewhere, and the people who are making it out the ass certainly have some to spare. Greed was NEVER said to be a right, and I certainly see a lot of it from people whining about getting increased taxes.

A rich punk kid getting his third Corvette isn't as important as a thousand people getting fed for a month.

Sorry to further derail this topic.

The wealthy 5% of America already pays for 95% of the income tax brought in by the government. To me it is wrong to penalize someone for succeeding in life. If you earn the money, you should keep it. If you don't work, you don't eat.

If you were a waiter and did a really great job at my table, and I thank you for it and say I'll tip you $50 because you did so well, how would you feel if I left only a few dollars, and said I thought that the money you earned should go to the waiter who was hiding in the back having a smoke on the clock? Chances are, you'd be pretty pissed.

You want to cut the national debt? Cut Spending. Less foreign aid, ask Iraq to help pay for their protection, and reform welfare and cut it by 40%. There is no reason there should be so many people abusing the system. If people don't want to actually seek out employment, then cut them. Weed out those that do work, but fix the numbers so they still can collect. Don't get me wrong, welfare is a good idea, but it has been corrupted and become a bloated money swallowing organism.

[AzureShadow]

Well, I see we now agree on one issue :P



Sorry to further derail this topic.

The wealthy 5% of America already pays for 95% of the income tax brought in by the government. To me it is wrong to penalize someone for succeeding in life. If you earn the money, you should keep it. If you don't work, you don't eat.

If you were a waiter and did a really great job at my table, and I thank you for it and say I'll tip you $50 because you did so well, how would you feel if I left only a few dollars, and said I thought that the money you earned should go to the waiter who was hiding in the back having a smoke on the clock? Chances are, you'd be pretty pissed.

You want to cut the national debt? Cut Spending. Less foreign aid, ask Iraq to help pay for their protection, and reform welfare and cut it by 40%. There is no reason there should be so many people abusing the system. If people don't want to actually seek out employment, then cut them. Weed out those that do work, but fix the numbers so they still can collect. Don't get me wrong, welfare is a good idea, but it has been corrupted and become a bloated money swallowing organism.

Of course. I'm not saying welfare is going in the right direction right now. What it needs is more accountability. If someone is TRYING to make a living for themselves, but is struggling severely, then they should be helped. There's definitely a way to reduce the number of leechers in the system.

And the war... dammit, don't even get me started on how uselessly spent that money is...

[The Corporal]

I'm anti-gun-control. The entire premise of gun control is directly said in the constitution to be wrong.

And I'm a fan raising taxes on the rich because we have an astronomical debt that needs to be paid, and because we have a huge amount of people who are suffering because of the recent economic collapse. Money has to come from somewhere, and the people who are making it out the ass certainly have some to spare. Greed was NEVER said to be a right, and I certainly see a lot of it from people whining about getting increased taxes.

A rich punk kid getting his third Corvette isn't as important as a thousand people getting fed for a month.

Agreed with the bolded part, but the rich punk kid isn't going to feel the effects of a radical wealth-redistribution. Small business owners and the upper-middle class are the people who are going to be hit with the increased taxes. The rich punk kid will still play with his first two Corvettes, a thousand more people will have cable TV, and Fred the Independent Trucking Company Owner will be forced out of business.

[AzureShadow]

Agreed with the bolded part, but the rich punk kid isn't going to feel the effects of a radical wealth-redistribution. Small business owners and the upper-middle class are the people who are going to be hit with the increased taxes. The rich punk kid will still play with his first two Corvettes, a thousand more people will have cable TV, and Fred the Independent Trucking Company Owner will be forced out of business.

That's not true at all. If the company makes over 250k a year, it will get a moderately sized tax increase. That's not gonna run the company out of business...

[tom the pit leader]

Well, not to nit pick your example, but any trucking firm is toast in the next decade if the train lobby gets its head in the game. No road vehical will ever match a train, especialy mag-lev bullet trains, in speed, load capcity, effciney, or "green" off-set. One good push for a mag lev in America and the truck industry is done for.

I'm for government run industury to get rid of debt, even though this has nothing to do with the OP, because

Auto insurance can be run with better coverage and less overhead if only the state is running it with an added tax. Same with health insurance.
We can get people off the streets and welfare if they have jobs, and also put them to work building things we need, such as clean power plants run by the state. That way, people can get the same amount of power at the same price, and the remaining reduced profit goes to get rid of national debt.
Also, now that these people have jobs, they can be taxed, and stimulate the economy.
No need to worry about enviornmental standards because the EPA will be right along side the construction of most new factories.


Also, to help the economy and keep jobs in the US, simple put a massive terrif on any company that outsources jobs to a lower paying contry.

Also, institue an idea from Germany from the 1930's, called being work shy. If you don't have a job, and don't take the job the government offers or arn't in the application process for a job, you get zero aid from anyone.

[Vanik Hardil]

No one knows whether or not the events in the Bible actually happened. We know that Jesus most likely existed, but we're not sure if the "miracles" performed in them were just events that were embellished, or events that today would have a perfectly good scientific explanation. For example, when Jesus awakened the man from the dead, it could very well have been that the man was in a coma, and his heart rate had slowed so much that it was impossible to feel (back in Jesus's day there were no heart monitoring devices), and it would have been assumed that the man was dead, and he may have just happened to have awakened from his coma with Jesus present. Who knows?

The problem with the bible is that it is a story, something not to be taken literally. Every bible story has a meaning and a moral to it, some lesson on how to live your life as a decent, moral human being. But when you take the stories at their literal, or face value, and ignore the meaning simply to further radical ideas, that is when the Bible becomes a less-than-credible source, and you look like a bible-thumping moron.

That's my 2 cents on the bible, and I agree with Villalba, this is about gay marriage not religion or the bible. Sorry for derailing this thread further.

Although i am a christian and i believe in Jesus and all that, the bible is in all actuality unreliable, i have a Leather-bound IMPACT bible, which contains the Old and New Testaments, which has recollections from many different people from Matthew; Mark; John; Peter; James; Etc..; Etc.. and each recollection has different versions of each story, like one says jesus touches the blind and deaf mans eyes and ears and the man became well, while another says jesus spit on the guys eyes and gave the man (what we would call) a wet-willy and the man became well (examples from Matthew and Mark)

and said example of the walking on water bit, Matthew said about the walking on water, but it wasnt in Mark (the only two books ive read so far) so im wondering, if it really happened, why wouldent a WHOLE group of followers remember jesus walking on water instead of only a select few?

I'm anti-gun-control. The entire premise of gun control is directly said in the constitution to be wrong.

And I'm a fan raising taxes on the rich because we have an astronomical debt that needs to be paid, and because we have a huge amount of people who are suffering because of the recent economic collapse. Money has to come from somewhere, and the people who are making it out the ass certainly have some to spare. Greed was NEVER said to be a right, and I certainly see a lot of it from people whining about getting increased taxes.

A rich punk kid getting his third Corvette isn't as important as a thousand people getting fed for a month.

it is my belief that everyone should have to pay the same % on taxes, for example;

If family A makes $100,000 a year and they pay 25% in taxes they will be paying $25,000

If family B makes $20,000 a year and they pay 25% in taxes they will be paying $5,000

thus making it fair, a small family surviving on $20k a year would be paying pretty much the same as a family earning 5x the amount they make.

In some way im hoping this makes sense to you guys..

NOW back on subject, i have no problems with Gay people, i have several friends who are Gay, it doesent bother me, and i dont think it should bother others, for example; this guy who was my friend while at school a gay guy started flirting with him and my friend took the lock off of his locker and beat him down with it, i immediately became ex-friends with him for that. i found his behavior very disgusting.

[tom the pit leader]

Although i am a christian and i believe in Jesus and all that, the bible is in all actuality unreliable, i have a Leather-bound IMPACT bible, which contains the Old and New Testaments, which has recollections from many different people from Matthew; Mark; John; Peter; James; Etc..; Etc.. and each recollection has different versions of each story, like one says jesus touches the blind and deaf mans eyes and ears and the man became well, while another says jesus spit on the guys eyes and gave the man (what we would call) a wet-willy and the man became well (examples from Matthew and Mark)

and said example of the walking on water bit, Matthew said about the walking on water, but it wasnt in Mark (the only two books ive read so far) so im wondering, if it really happened, why wouldent a WHOLE group of followers remember jesus walking on water instead of only a select few?



it is my belief that everyone should have to pay the same % on taxes, for example;

If family A makes $100,000 a year and they pay 25% in taxes they will be paying $25,000

If family B makes $20,000 a year and they pay 25% in taxes they will be paying $5,000

thus making it fair, a small family surviving on $20k a year would be paying pretty much the same as a family earning 5x the amount they make.

In some way im hoping this makes sense to you guys..

NOW back on subject, i have no problems with Gay people, i have several friends who are Gay, it doesent bother me, and i dont think it should bother others, for example; this guy who was my friend while at school a gay guy started flirting with him and my friend took the lock off of his locker and beat him down with it, i immediately became ex-friends with him for that. i found his behavior very disgusting.


I as well have had 2 of my best friends come out and now are going with each other. After an ajustment period, most everyone was ok with it.

And no, a nongraduated income tax is not fair, because yes 5000 is 5x less than 25000, but try living off of 15000 a year and tell me how well that goes for you. Barring major illness or loss of a job, it is fairly easy to live off of 65000 a year. But with 15000, if you get sick once, or have to take time off once, you can be irreplaby set back.

On the other end, the number moves from time to time, but after about 250 million dollars, you can't spend much more on yourself a year. Therefore, they arn't losing anything by paying massivly more in taxes a year. Grant, if they do good works with the money, they get some tax break, as well they should. That's why rich people pay more even by percent of income than poor.

[Vanik Hardil]

i see where you are coming from, my % and how much they made were very fake since i dont know who pays/earns what, i would suppose someone making 5x my living should pay a bit more, but in the words of "Everyone is made equal" then shouldent everyone PAY equal? and be TREATED equal?

as for the friends coming out, i know, same way with a few of my friends (except the part about them getting together) some of my friends told me when they became my friend that they were Gay, but others held it in until they felt they could trust me and know that they knew me well enough that i could handle it without freaking out lol.

[The Corporal]

That's not true at all. If the company makes over 250k a year, it will get a moderately sized tax increase. That's not gonna run the company out of business...
A lot of small businesses are running on thin profit margins, especially with the economy the way it is. Any bump in their expenses (coupled with banks not as easily lending their money) is likely to tank a small business.

Well, not to nit pick your example, but any trucking firm is toast in the next decade if the train lobby gets its head in the game. No road vehical will ever match a train, especialy mag-lev bullet trains, in speed, load capcity, effciney, or "green" off-set. One good push for a mag lev in America and the truck industry is done for.
Oh, absolutely. I was thinking of a small business that would operate in the $250k range. I would like to see more research money go towards high-temperature (ideally between 100 and 120 degrees Fahrenheit, so as to cover most of the nation) superconductors to make mag-lev trains a practicable reality.

I'm for government run industury to get rid of debt, even though this has nothing to do with the OP, because

Auto insurance can be run with better coverage and less overhead if only the state is running it with an added tax. Same with health insurance.
We can get people off the streets and welfare if they have jobs, and also put them to work building things we need, such as clean power plants run by the state. That way, people can get the same amount of power at the same price, and the remaining reduced profit goes to get rid of national debt.
Also, now that these people have jobs, they can be taxed, and stimulate the economy.
No need to worry about enviornmental standards because the EPA will be right along side the construction of most new factories.
This is a nice sentiment, but think of the horribly inefficient government bureaucracy needed to manage such a program? Also, just because the EPA has lackeys at every construction site doesn't mean that implementing the 'greenest' building methods wouldn't cost more.

Also, to help the economy and keep jobs in the US, simple put a massive terrif on any company that outsources jobs to a lower paying contry.

Also, institue an idea from Germany from the 1930's, called being work shy. If you don't have a job, and don't take the job the government offers or arn't in the application process for a job, you get zero aid from anyone.
I like these ideas, to a point. I would like to see more manufacturing and heavy industry brought back to this country, even if it costs a little more. We need to end the era of "Made in China." I'm also for providing temporary jobs through the government - fixing roads, cleaning graffiti, picking up trash, building things. Offer a minimum-wage salary to anyone who wants to work, a little more for people with skills in construction and whatnot. If you are physically unable to do manual labor, you can do clerical work - answer phones, fill out boring paperwork. It's better than just sending a check to people.

I as well have had 2 of my best friends come out and now are going with each other. After an ajustment period, most everyone was ok with it.

And no, a nongraduated income tax is not fair, because yes 5000 is 5x less than 25000, but try living off of 15000 a year and tell me how well that goes for you. Barring major illness or loss of a job, it is fairly easy to live off of 65000 a year. But with 15000, if you get sick once, or have to take time off once, you can be irreplaby set back.

On the other end, the number moves from time to time, but after about 250 million dollars, you can't spend much more on yourself a year. Therefore, they arn't losing anything by paying massivly more in taxes a year. Grant, if they do good works with the money, they get some tax break, as well they should. That's why rich people pay more even by percent of income than poor.
I'll admit, I hate seeing CEOs who take home tens of millions of dollars a year. They can afford it. But a flat tax is the fairest option available. If you're only making $20k a year, my guess is that you're working part time to begin with. Maybe you're going to school, maybe something else. Do you see college students dropping off by the thousands just because they have little income? Nope. Getting the flu or breaking an arm is just as much of a problem for someone making $20k a year as it is someone making $80k a year. However, for the people on the high end of the income scale, more taxes means more chance of taking their assets elsewhere. If you were making $500,000 a year and Uncle Sam takes $200,000 of that but the Cayman Islands only take $40,000, where are you going to keep your money?

[AzureShadow]

However, for the people on the high end of the income scale, more taxes means more chance of taking their assets elsewhere. If you were making $500,000 a year and Uncle Sam takes $200,000 of that but the Cayman Islands only take $40,000, where are you going to keep your money?

That's why we can impose a massive tax on outsourced jobs, to make it more profitable to have them in the states.

[tom the pit leader]

I'll admit, I hate seeing CEOs who take home tens of millions of dollars a year. They can afford it. But a flat tax is the fairest option available. If you're only making $20k a year, my guess is that you're working part time to begin with. Maybe you're going to school, maybe something else. Do you see college students dropping off by the thousands just because they have little income? Nope. Getting the flu or breaking an arm is just as much of a problem for someone making $20k a year as it is someone making $80k a year. However, for the people on the high end of the income scale, more taxes means more chance of taking their assets elsewhere. If you were making $500,000 a year and Uncle Sam takes $200,000 of that but the Cayman Islands only take $40,000, where are you going to keep your money?

Well there are different types of people only earning 20k a year. Yes, some of them are students who have loans, but also will be able to pay them off with their job they will get with their degree. However, there are lots of people like single parents raising a kid who only make 20 a year to start with, and you can't rasie a family on 20k a year, much less 15. And getting sick is less of a setback the higher up you go on the scale, because most jobs making more than minimum wage have benifits and sick time. Also, people not living paycheck to paycheck can set money aside in investments, so that
they can better absorbe finacal setbacks.

And on the taking money elseware, I don't see why we don't just tax that money, even though we don't have a treaty with the cayman islands. What are they going to do if we simply say, "we are taxing this money, that belongs to our citizens, fork it over."? Declare war? Most of the tax evsive contries have less power than one Nimitz class aircraft carrier or Iowa class battleship. I fail to see why we let these govenments be bought by our own citizens and then have the rich evade our laws.

[The Corporal]

That's why we can impose a massive tax on outsourced jobs, to make it more profitable to have them in the states.
I'm not sure what this has to do with wealthy individuals stashing their earnings in tax-sheltering foreign banks...am I missing something?

Well there are different types of people only earning 20k a year. Yes, some of them are students who have loans, but also will be able to pay them off with their job they will get with their degree. However, there are lots of people like single parents raising a kid who only make 20 a year to start with, and you can't rasie a family on 20k a year, much less 15. And getting sick is less of a setback the higher up you go on the scale, because most jobs making more than minimum wage have benifits and sick time. Also, people not living paycheck to paycheck can set money aside in investments, so that
they can better absorbe finacal setbacks.
Any full-time position, even at Wal-Mart, has health benefits and sick time. Many have day-care options. Thusly, the take-home pay is dominated by how much is taken out in taxes and not by healthcare-related expenses. Granted, raising a family on $20k isn't easy, but that is why we have charities and food drives. One of the neatest charitable events I've heard of is the Toys For Ta-tas program here in Madison - you bring in an new, unwrapped toy worth at least $5 and you don't need to pay the cover charge on local gentlemen's clubs. Isn't giving great?

And on the taking money elseware, I don't see why we don't just tax that money, even though we don't have a treaty with the cayman islands. What are they going to do if we simply say, "we are taxing this money, that belongs to our citizens, fork it over."? Declare war? Most of the tax evsive contries have less power than one Nimitz class aircraft carrier or Iowa class battleship. I fail to see why we let these govenments be bought by our own citizens and then have the rich evade our laws.
The Cayman Islands are a British overseas territory. The banks there (as well as in places like (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_havens#Examples) Switzerland) are not in cahoots with foreign governments. It's just that they don't have income taxes or other taxes...

[tom the pit leader]

No, I ment the tax evasion countries were in cahoots with rich people, who like that there are no taxes.

[The Corporal]

No, I ment the tax evasion countries were in cahoots with rich people, who like that there are no taxes.

Tru dat.