"Patrick Lee Humphrey" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szkk6t2pao8.fsf@fnord.io.com...

"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:

"Patrick Lee Humphrey" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szk3bzq7l56.fsf@fnord.io.com...

"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:

Lost tax dollars.

*What* lost tax dollars? If homosexuals are allowed to marry, why would
they pay a different tax rate than those of us straight people who marry
and wind up paying a greater tax (i.e., the marriage penalty)?

The marriage tax-penalty was eliminated. If single gays are allowed to
marry they will pay less tax which means lost tax revenues.

What? Single homosexuals marrying -- who couldn't now -- won't affect the
tax by any significant amount.

Why are you so stupid?

Why are you not schooled in human behavior and human motivation?

The effect will be very signifcant if same-sex marriages are legalized and
it will not be a pretty sight.

It will be so bad because people will know that so and so who got her new
BMW is only a bisexual concubine who is having her way piad with some of
their money and it will cause mroe anger amongst our people, more
dissatisfaction amongst our people and more unjust actions by our legal
system and our judiciary.

I do not want same-sex marriages authorized any.

It is a quick and dirty cast-off plan which seeks to relieve people of their
burdens which they created themselves and it does not require them to bear
their own cross while they expect others to bear it for them.

It will not be good for the USA.

I do not like it.

The people who benefit from it will be subject to more reproach and will
have less integrity as they are given the benefit of frivolously instituted
pleasure-oriented policies which are unfair.
You want integrity, earn it.
Do not expect me to pay for your lovers or your aboritons.

Where do you think the lost revenues will come from to make up for the
loss?
Are they going to lay off government workers to support gay marriages?
How do you think workers would feel about that?

You're still a drooling imbecile, Wentzky. Whatever happened to
governments being required to be fiscally responsible?

Is fiscal responsibility raising taxes to support themselves as they become
whores for the corporations?

Increased insurance fund costs via spousal coverage.

For a group that won't amount to more than 1% of the population at most?
Methinks thou doth protest a bit much.

So, why is the vote as high as it is in favor of the same-sex marriage
agenda?

Because of the ***** your Jeezoid lunatic friends spew, which frightens
people into voting as they demand.

A vote is a demand?

You know nothing of females who have rich corporate lovers who steal from
the general public now via the stock markets who, if they married, after
they possibly had a child by some corporate wimp who does not want to pay
for his own children, who would tie the knot because they are bisexual and
because their secret corporate wimpboy lover wants to slough hsi
responsibility off on the corporate revenue stream?

Keep your fantasies to yourself, or else document this with some credible
evidence. (Hint: your saying it's so isn't credible.)

Fantasy?
Look at what is happening.

What is wrong with marriage being defined as between one man and one
woman?

It denies homosexuals equal rights

Equal to what?
Homosexual marriage is not equal to heterosexual marriage.

-- but that can be corrected very easily.

Easily?
With all the opposition you see to homosexual marriage you think it is easy
to go against so many of our people?

All that's needed is a slightly altered definition: a union between two
consenting adults. That way, no one's left out.

But will the differences be treated fairly?

I do not like the lie they are trying to make to fund their pleasure party
which steals from straight men and straight women.

You're full of *****, *and* stupid, as usual -- if they're homosexual, why
would they be interested in marrying someone not of their preferred gender?
All you're doing by codifying the current situation is promoting lying --
since there *are* instances of homosexuals being married to opposite-sex
spouses, for no other reason than to appear "legitimate". I thought you
bible-bangers were against lying, eh? I guess it's okay if you imagine
your Jeeeezus says so, though.

Bad psychological teachings that say gay marriage is as good as
heterosexual marriage.

Why is teaching that bad, in your less than coherent opinion?

It is a social missile that could erupt into the worst society we have seen
here yet if it is allowed to go through.

Marrying the consenting adult you love is bad? You're seriously screwed up
in the head, boy.

The quick and dirty is not good enough.

You're in favor of continuing to send the message that homosexuals are
lesser beings and don't deserve equal rights. There are a few laws in
place that mandate otherwise.

I did not say they are lesser beings, but they sure areacting like it in
this area. Why should a man be entitled to the same rights as a female
spouse?

Why shouldn't he be? Two spouses == one marriage, each with equal rights.

You want to treat some men as women?

Why do you want to treat some men not as men?

When did you lose sight of the differences between men and women?

They are making themselves into lesser beings by their actions.
Why can't men support themselves as men instead of wanting the same
treatment that is afforded men and women who marry?

Why can't you get off your dead welfare-leech ***** and earn your own living?
No one's interested in your personal delusions, Wentzky.

Men want to be treated like women?

Lies that attempt to equate a same-sex couple to a heterosexual couple.
The two entities are not equal.

What's the significant difference?

Much.
Study up on male and female.

Idiot. A homosexual man will love another man -- so why can't he marry
said other man (with other's consent, of course)? You have nothing but
your rank bigotry to fall back on.

Why does he want to be treated like a woman?

Two consenting adults, regardless of gender, should have the right to
enter a marriage, regardless of your bigotry.

I am not bigoted. I am recognizing men as men and women as women.
Male and female.

You're one royally bigoted and stuipid *****, Wentzky. Live with
your defects. (You're parroting someone else's hatred without even
thinking about it, more than likely.)

I treat men as men and women as women.

You have the right to marry the woman you love (assuming she's not
your mother or close relative *and* she consents, of course) -- what
legitimate reason is there for denying homosexuals the same right?

There are many reasons. It is not a fair or good social policy.

...but denying equal rights because of bigotry is? You really need to get
off whatever drugs you're wired out on.

I am not bigoted.

Treating men as men and woman as women is not bigotry.

(Remember, Virginia used to prohibit interracial marriages, and SCOTUS
threw that out years ago.)

Irrelevant.

It's the same thing, moron.

Wrong. Race and gender are not the same thing.

Your Cracker State can't ban gay marriages just because they're a bunch of
bigoted rednecks.

You believe that?

They're going to have to provide a rational explanation of how same-sex
marriage harms society -- and you have yet to even explain exactly what
rights of _yours_ are being denied if they're allowed. I'm married, and
guess what? Same-sex marriage doesn't infringe on a single one of my
goddamned rights, or those of my wife.

I am providing rational explanations while you are providing irrational
thought and insults.

It makes those who are gay happy.

That is a reason to allow anything in the USA now?

I have yet to see the anti-gay side come up with a good reason to ban
gay marriage.

Why do you want to make gays happy and make straights unhappy?

Why would it make straights unhappy?

Why are you blind to the huge proportion of people who say NO!

Why are you blind to the fact that the people who vote don't necessarily
constitute a majority of *anything*?

You did not observe the voter turnout this time?

You want that many people to hate our government?

You don't decide that for anyone but your own ugly self, son. Don't
project your insanity on everyone else.

LOL!!!!!!!!

Your denial is what is unbecoming.

Not all of us heterosexuals are as scared of differences as you are.
(It doesn't bother this heterosexual a bit.)

Why do you bring the false innuendo of someone is afraid of gay marriage?

Someone who's not afraid of it wouldn't waste as much time as you do
ranting about it. (Wisdom can often include knowing when to keep quiet.
You obviously haven't mastered that.)

Nah. You do not know that someone can be against gay marriage and not fear
it?

And, why are the gays not silent?
LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The marriage tax-penalty was eliminated.
If single gays are allowed to marry they will pay less tax which means
lost
tax revenues.

What? Single homosexuals marrying -- who couldn't now -- won't affect

tax
by any significant amount.

Why are you so stupid?
Why are you not schooled in human behavior and human motivation?
The effect will be very signifcant if same-sex marriages are legalized and
it will not be a pretty sight.
It will be so bad because people will know that so and so who got her new
BMW is only a bisexual concubine who is having her way piad with some of
their money and it will cause mroe anger amongst our people, more

dissatisfaction amongst our people and more unjust actions by our legal
system and our judiciary.
I do not want same-sex marriages authorized any.
It is a quick and dirty cast-off plan which seeks to relieve people of

burdens which they created themselves and it does not require them to bear
their own cross while they expect others to bear it for them.
It will not be good for the USA.
I do not like it.
The people who benefit from it will be subject to more reproach and will
have less integrity as they are given the benefit of frivolously

pleasure-oriented policies which are unfair.
You want integrity, earn it.
Do not expect me to pay for your lovers or your aboritons.

I did not say they are lesser beings, but they sure areacting like it in
this area.
Why should a man be entitled to the same rights as a female spouse?

Why shouldn't he be? Two spouses == one marriage, each with equal

You want to treat some men as women?

Why do you want to treat some men not as men?

When did you lose sight of the differences between men and women?

They are making themselves into lesser beings by their actions.
Why can't men support themselves as men instead of wanting the same
treatment that is afforded men and women who marry?

Why can't you get off your dead welfare-leech ***** and earn your own
living?
No one's interested in your personal delusions, Wentzky.

Men want to be treated like women?

Lies that attempt to equate a same-sex couple to a heterosexual

The two entities are not equal.

What's the significant difference?

Much.
Study up on male and female.

Idiot. A homosexual man will love another man -- so why can't he marry
said
other man (with other's consent, of course)? You have nothing but your
rank
bigotry to fall back on.

Why does he want to be treated like a woman?

Two consenting adults, regardless of gender, should have the right to
enter a marriage, regardless of your bigotry.

I am not bigoted. I am recognizing men as men and women as women.
Male and female.

You're one royally bigoted and stuipid *****, Wentzky. Live

your defects. (You're parroting someone else's hatred without even
thinking
about it, more than likely.)

I treat men as men and women as women.

What? Single homosexuals marrying -- who couldn't now -- won't affect the
tax
by any significant amount.

Why are you so stupid?
Why are you not schooled in human behavior and human motivation?
The effect will be very signifcant if same-sex marriages are legalized and
it will not be a pretty sight.

It will be so bad because people will know that so and so who got her new
BMW is only a bisexual concubine who is having her way piad with some of
their money and it will cause mroe anger amongst our people, more
dissatisfaction amongst our people and more unjust actions by our legal
system and our judiciary.

I do not want same-sex marriages authorized any.
It is a quick and dirty cast-off plan which seeks to relieve people of their
burdens which they created themselves and it does not require them to bear
their own cross while they expect others to bear it for them.

It will not be good for the USA.

I do not like it.

The people who benefit from it will be subject to more reproach and will
have less integrity as they are given the benefit of frivolously instituted
pleasure-oriented policies which are unfair.

You want integrity, earn it.

Do not expect me to pay for your lovers or your aboritons.

"Some-Writer" <sappywriter@poetic.com> wrote in message
news:9pvjo0hodkrbr1lm0cugra9dtaeo8r8dun@4ax.com...

On Wed, 3 Nov 2004 20:36:25 -0500, "Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com>
wrote:

"Patrick Lee Humphrey" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szk3bzq7l56.fsf@fnord.io.com...

"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:

"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:6l3io01c6dq43c2m0715cio8o2i5mq4m11@4ax.com...

On Wed, 3 Nov 2004 11:30:29 -0500, "Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com>
wrote, akin to the neighing and braying of farmyard animals:

"David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com> wrote in message
news:031120040814300504%spam@aol.com...

In article <an7id.18277$cS6.12662@bignews6.bellsouth.net>, Johnny
<wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote:

"Some-Writer" <sappywriter@poetic.com> wrote in message
news:9gtho017bpobojmflq5r2tkqoq15i0b9m8@4ax.com...

On Wed, 3 Nov 2004 09:58:19 -0500, "Johnny"
<wxpprofessional@msn.com>
wrote:

"Some-Writer" <sappywriter@poetic.com> wrote in message
news:18sho0tghvghn05qv74fb2i8nddmhlah7p@4ax.com...

On 3 Nov 2004 06:50:36 -0800,

Eleven states had initiatives on the ballots declaring marriage
as
being a union between "a man and a woman". Eleven states
approved
these by landslide proportions. Gay marriage is dead in the
water,
as it should be.

Not in Massachusetts.

It...

Gay marriage isn't dead in the water -- it still exists in
Massachusetts.

The people of Massachussetts did not approve gay marriage.

Basically, gay marriage has no impact on those who are straight.

Why do lie?

Then I assume you'll be able to give a well-reasoned example of how a
gay couple marrying has an effect on straights?

Lost tax dollars.

*What* lost tax dollars? If homosexuals are allowed to marry, why would
they
pay a different tax rate than those of us straight people who marry and
wind
up paying a greater tax (i.e., the marriage penalty)?

The marriage tax-penalty was eliminated.
If single gays are allowed to marry they will pay less tax which means
lost
tax revenues.
Where do you think the lost revenues will come from to make up for the
loss?
Are they going to lay off government workers to support gay marriages?
How do you think workers would feel about that?

Increased insurance fund costs via spousal coverage.

For a group that won't amount to more than 1% of the population at most?
Methinks thou doth protest a bit much.

So, why is the vote as high as it is in favor of the same-sex marriage
agenda?
You know nothing of females who have rich corporate lovers who steal from
the general public now via the stock markets who, if they married, after
they possibly had a child by some corporate wimp who does not want to pay
for his own children, who would tie the knot because they are bisexual and
because their secret corporate wimpboy lover wants to slough hsi
responsibility off on the corporate revenue stream?

What is wrong with marriage being defined as between one man and one
woman?
I do not like the lie they are trying to make to fund their pleasure party
which steals from straight men and straight women.

Bad psychological teachings that say gay marriage is as good as
heterosexual
marriage.

Why is teaching that bad, in your less than coherent opinion?

It is a social missile that could erupt into the worst society we have
seen
here yet if it is allowed to go through.

Your'e in favor
of continuing to send the message that homosexuals are lesser beings and
don't
deserve equal rights. There are a few laws in place that mandate
otherwise.

I did not say they are lesser beings, but they sure areacting like it in
this area.
Why should a man be entitled to the same rights as a female spouse?
They are making themselves into lesser beings by their actions.
Why can't men support themselves as men instead of wanting the same
treatment that is afforded men and women who marry?

Lies that attempt to equate a same-sex couple to a heterosexual couple.
The two entities are not equal.

What's the significant difference?

Much.
Study up on male and female.

Two consenting adults, regardless of
gender, should have the right to enter a marriage, regardless of your
bigotry.

I am not bigoted. I am recognizing men as men and women as women.
Male and female.

You have the right to marry the woman you love (assuming she's not
your mother or close relative *and* she consents, of course) -- what
legitimate reason is there for denying homosexuals the same right?

There are many reasons.
It is not a fair or good social policy.

(Remember,
Virginia used to prohibit interracial marriages, and SCOTUS threw that
out
years ago.)

Irrelevant.

It makes those who are gay happy.

That is a reason to allow anything in the USA now?

I have yet to see the anti-gay side come up with a good reason to ban
gay marriage.

Why do you want to make gays happy and make straights unhappy?

Why would it make straights unhappy?

Why are you blind to the huge proportion of people who say NO!
You want that many people to hate our government?

Not all of us heterosexuals are as
scared of differences as you are. (It doesn't bother this heterosexual
a
bit.)

Why do you bring the false innuendo of someone is afraid of gay marriage?

False?

Yes.