Prop 8 Striked down in california, allowing gay marriage - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Morcam;23842051]I'm going to assume by the way you phrased that that you have no idea what I said in my earlier posts.[/QUOTE] Uh, you've scrapped the concept of we are all equal under the law, because you feel a straight couple can benefit society more. I'm going to deduce by the way you phrased that that you have no idea what I'm saying period.

[QUOTE=Morcam;23842051]I'm going to assume by the way you phrased that that you have no idea what I said in my earlier posts. [editline]03:27AM[/editline] You're in the same boat as Billiam. I already said repeatedly that child benefits would apply for both gay and straight parents with children, including if they adopted them. I was talking about incentives, not rewards.[/QUOTE] incentive - 4 dictionary results in·cen·tive   [in-sen-tiv] Show IPA –noun 1. something that incites or tends to incite to action or greater effort, as a reward offered for increased productivity. –adjective 2. inciting, as to action; stimulating; provocative. ------------ reward - 7 dictionary results re·ward   [ri-wawrd] Show IPA –noun 1. a sum of money offered for the detection or capture of a criminal, the recovery of lost or stolen property, etc. 2. something given or received in return or recompense for service, merit, hardship, etc. –verb (used with object) 3. to recompense or requite (a person or animal) for service, merit, achievement, etc. 4. to make return for or requite (service, merit, etc.); recompense. they are the same thing.

[QUOTE=Morcam;23842109]It's really mostly that I've stretched out all my points through multiple people. If you don't go back and read them all you'll really have no idea of the background to what I'm saying is. I'm not saying that you need to, at least you're not trying to tear my throat out.[/QUOTE] Welp. I've read all of them, and they're mostly bullshit.

Maybe this is the first step towards an actual federal recognition for gay marriage. People seem to forget that the major benefits of marriage come from the federal government, which still refuses to recognize us.

Morcam, what is the difference between two gay people getting married and two straight people getting married that they need a different thing that isn't called marriage?

fuck yeah! now my aunt can get married! she must be so happy :buddy:

[QUOTE=siberpredaht;23841905]How is that an argument? If there are churches willing to marry people - then we should allow them to.[/QUOTE] this has absolutely nothing to do with churches or religious marriage. why bring it up? [editline]03:37AM[/editline] also out of curiosity, why is polygamy illegal?

[QUOTE=Kybalt;23842137]incentive - 4 dictionary results in·cen·tive   [in-sen-tiv] Show IPA –noun 1. something that incites or tends to incite to action or greater effort, as a reward offered for increased productivity. –adjective 2. inciting, as to action; stimulating; provocative. ------------ reward - 7 dictionary results re·ward   [ri-wawrd] Show IPA –noun 1. a sum of money offered for the detection or capture of a criminal, the recovery of lost or stolen property, etc. 2. something given or received in return or recompense for service, merit, hardship, etc. –verb (used with object) 3. to recompense or requite (a person or animal) for service, merit, achievement, etc. 4. to make return for or requite (service, merit, etc.); recompense. they are the same thing.[/QUOTE] An incentive would be given before. - something that incites - stimulating A reward would be given afterwards. - something given or received in return - to recompense or requite (a person or animal)

[QUOTE=Morcam;23842182]An incentive would be given before. - something that incites - stimulating A reward would be given afterwards. - something given or received in return - to recompense or requite (a person or animal)[/QUOTE] a reward is an incentive but an incentive isn't a reward..?

[QUOTE=Kybalt;23842200]a reward is an incentive but an incentive isn't a reward..?[/QUOTE] I suppose if the incentive is something not being given to you as oppose to be given to you it isn't a reward.

[QUOTE=Kybalt;23842200]a reward is an incentive but an incentive isn't a reward..?[/QUOTE] Look up "incite" for a better definition of incentive. If I gave you 10,000$, that's an incentive to go buy something. If I gave you 10,000$ for buying a new car, that's a reward. You could consider an incentive to be a subgroup of a reward, although that isn't completely accurate. The stimulus checks were a fair example of an incentive.

[QUOTE=Morcam;23842242]Look up "incite" for a better definition of incentive. If I gave you 10,000$, that's an incentive to go buy something. If I gave you 10,000$ for buying a new car, that's a reward. You could consider an incentive to be a subgroup of a reward, although that isn't completely accurate.[/QUOTE] "If you have a child you get a tax break" seems more like both.

[QUOTE=Morcam;23842242]Look up "incite" for a better definition of incentive. If I gave you 10,000$, that's an incentive to go buy something. If I gave you 10,000$ for buying a new car, that's a reward. You could consider an incentive to be a subgroup of a reward, although that isn't completely accurate. The stimulus checks were a fair example of an incentive.[/QUOTE] Would you please stop disputing this one point and get on with the other points we've raised that mean a lot more than this.

[QUOTE=Billiam;23842266]"If you have a child you get a tax break" seems more like both.[/QUOTE] My point was that the straight couple would get a small tax break before having a child, and both straight and gay couples would have large incentives after a child. I assumed that giving birth to a child is a harder decision than adopting a child. I could be wrong, because gay couples could need such an incentive to adopt a child, but I don't think I'm inherently wrong just because it's an unequal break between straight and gay couples. Presumably you do.

[QUOTE=Morcam;23842300]My point was that the straight couple would get a small tax break before having a child, and both straight and gay couples would have large incentives after a child. I assumed that giving birth to a child is a harder decision than adopting a child. I could be wrong, because gay couples could need such an incentive to adopt a child, but I don't think I'm inherently wrong just because it's an unequal break between straight and gay couples. Presumably you do.[/QUOTE] i dont understand the problem here. both have incentives and rewards for adopting/having children. thats only a smallish part of marriage though.

[QUOTE=Kybalt;23842361]i dont understand the problem here. both have incentives and rewards for adopting/having children. thats only a smallish part of marriage though.[/QUOTE] My point was that the incentive for the straight couple is stronger, because they will give birth to children as opposed to adopting them. I don't view that as an intrusion on human rights, because tax breaks aren't a human right, as far as I'm concerned. I don't believe I ever said anything about giving gays less money after having adopted a child. I believe this is the way the system runs currently for civil unions, although I could be wrong. Obviously there are several people who hate me for that.

[QUOTE=Morcam;23842474]My point was that the incentive for the straight couple is stronger, because they will give birth to children as opposed to adopting them. I don't view that as an intrusion on human rights, because tax breaks aren't a human right, as far as I'm concerned. I don't believe I ever said anything about giving gays less money after having adopted a child. I believe this is the way the system runs currently for civil unions, although I could be wrong. Obviously there are several people who hate me for that.[/QUOTE] ...Your original point was that you wanted to deny marriage to gays.

[QUOTE=Morcam;23842474]My point was that the incentive for the straight couple is stronger, because they will give birth to children as opposed to adopting them. I don't view that as an intrusion on human rights, because tax breaks aren't a human right, as far as I'm concerned. I don't believe I ever said anything about giving gays less money after having adopted a child. I believe this is the way the system runs currently for civil unions, although I could be wrong. Obviously there are several people who hate me for that.[/QUOTE]Your logic does not stand up in court, or on facepunch. With all the children in the world that need homes, and all the money that the government spends to keep them alive, gays deserve a greater tax break because of how much they would end up helping the system in the long run.

Glad to hear that.

It's being sorted out! :fuckyou: Regarding the argument over the last couple of pages: Just do what we do in the UK - tax breaks to married couples/civil partnerships and then tax credits and an allowance to people who have kids (because you don't have to be married to have kids). Also gays can "give birth" - lesbians through artificial insemination, gay guys through surrogacy.

Can someone fill me in on why Morcam is against gay marriage? He's all over the place here.

[QUOTE=>VLN<;23832554]The people spoke on Prop 8, and then what happens to the fucking people's vote? It gets put down the shitter. Way to go. What a cunt of a judge.[/QUOTE] Hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey. You're a douchebag. That is all.

Morality: 1. Religion: 1,000,000,00+

As a lifelong resident of CA: [B]FUCK YES! FUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK YEEEEEEEEEESSSSSSS.[/B] That shit just could not fly. I hope this goes to the Supreme Court so they can rule the same way, thus prohibiting the banning of GLBT marriage [I]anywhere in the USA.[/I] This could be huge.

[QUOTE=Morcam;23842474]My point was that the incentive for the straight couple is stronger, because they will give birth to children as opposed to adopting them. I don't view that as an intrusion on human rights, because tax breaks aren't a human right, as far as I'm concerned. I don't believe I ever said anything about giving gays less money after having adopted a child. I believe this is the way the system runs currently for civil unions, although I could be wrong. Obviously there are several people who hate me for that.[/QUOTE] For some people the fact that you can have kids weakens their relationship. ITT: Divorces Nothing really makes an opposite-sex relationship superior to a same-sex relationship. Look at countries like Canada, Belgium, ect. They've had gay marriage for years now and it's healthy and their systems have only benefited from it really.

I don't see why people would even want prop 8 enacted. It's basically making it illegal for EVERY church to perform it, are they really so selfish that they don't even allow other churches to perform a same sex marriage just because they don't think it's right?

[QUOTE=Tetracycline;23845865]I don't see why people would even want prop 8 enacted. It's basically making it illegal for EVERY church to perform it, are they really so selfish that they don't even allow other churches to perform a same sex marriage just because they don't think it's right?[/QUOTE] Wern't you on the pro-8 side of this arguement?

Uh no [editline]11:27AM[/editline] Here I'll break it down since no one can read apparently [QUOTE=Tetracycline;23832337]Yes[/QUOTE] To the topic, I wasn't very clear on this but I don't see how anyone could line this up with "oh man this sucks i supported prop 8!" [QUOTE=Tetracycline;23832393]Is there anything that can be done against this?[/QUOTE] I asked an honest question so that I could go around being sure of this, knowing that it won't go to shit and be repealed or whatever [QUOTE=Tetracycline;23832452]I hope that can't happen, fuck that shit[/QUOTE] Yeah uh, response to being answered for the above question, I am totally unsure how anyone could see this as pro-prop8 at this point. [QUOTE=Tetracycline;23832472]Boycott California[/QUOTE] A joke because that's probably what WBC would do.

[QUOTE=Miskav;23843866]Hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey. You're a douchebag. That is all.[/QUOTE] I couldn't have said it better

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;23842504]...Your original point was that you wanted to deny marriage to gays.[/QUOTE] No, actually, it wasn't. [QUOTE=Morcam;23840853] However, many rights that come with civil unions, such as hospital visitation, are really quite straightforward, and I find it hard to believe that anyone could be against them.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Morcam;23840700]Regardless, I'm still amazed that people actually still argue about this. It all seems like an incredibly minor change to me that only retains its importance because it has the word "Marriage" in it.[/QUOTE] I'm talking about how people have turned the governmental sanction into some kind of emotional change here, and how they're idiots. My second post was arguing with a guy who was against gay marriage. How did you make that leap of logic? [editline]03:01PM[/editline] [QUOTE=ZekeTwo;23843634]Can someone fill me in on why Morcam is against gay marriage? He's all over the place here.[/QUOTE] It really just seems to me that people would rather jump to a negative conclusion rather than have a rational thought about what I'm saying on this topic.