Subscribe to Breaking NewsWithers: Gay marriage leads to socialism
What’s the deal with these Republican “intellectuals”? One tried to peddle the idea that all pornography is gay. Now there is a representative from Iowa (a good day to the Hamers) who thinks pushing for gay marriage is really a desire to transform the country into a socialist haven.
Iowa’s Rep. Steve King is no fan of same sex marriage. No biggie there. Free country, first amendment, blah, blah. All that good stuff. However, it would be nice if he had the decency to come up with reasons that are not loony.
“If there’s a push for a socialist society where the foundations of individual rights and liberties are undermined and everybody is thrown together living collectively off one pot of resources earned by everyone, this is one of the goals they have to go to, same sex marriage, because it has to plow through marriage in order to get to their goal. They want public affirmation, they want access to public funds and resources.”
A few things. This exposition is nonsensical. How King gets from couples having rights to “one pot of resources” is a wee bit murky. And the socialism charge seems to be the only thing Republicans throw out about topics they don’t like.
Like your standard hysteric though. King seems unable to read numbers. While Iowans are presently divided over whether to vote for or against a ban on same sex marriage, an overwhelming majority, 92 percent, note that gay couples jumping the broom has not impacted their lives. More than likely King would say they are just a bunch of socialist hacks.
James, please, stop saying it is freedom of speach, 1st ammendment. We as a community, like the ADF have to speak out against hate speach. When someone says we are inferior and can’t marry the answer is not “that is your right to your opinion”. The answer needs to be “I know that is your opinion but in this country we do not accept bigotry. As a representative of all your constituents, you can’t call blacks 2nd class, you can’t say smokers do not deserve rights and you can’t say it about us and maintain the moral high ground”.
I know, you are correct, it can be seen as a free speach issue and clearly he has the right to say it but we have to always whenever referring to such speach denounce it as bigotry.
I never accept pro-life. People try to say they are and I tell them they are anti-choice. THEY HATE IT because it shows how wrong they are.
Similar if someone says they do not support marriage equality I tell them that they are a bigot or are peddling bigoted beliefs implanted in them. Nobody wants to be a bigot (publicly). Your post is now published, on record, as saying its ok to disagree. We need to draw a line. You can’t use the “N” word in polite society, lets not let them call us 2nd class!
JonnyBoy: get your assetts into a trust. Get your partner’s name on all your deeds and accounts as joint owner.
I’m no tax attorney but what I’ve been told if you own the assett before death it is yours after your partner’s death too so there is no probate nor taxation.
Assetts that you own solely would need to be transferred and subject to the disgusting death tax.
If I’m wrong someone I’m sure will correct me. We’ve done this at our attorney’s suggestion.
When oh when can I vote for a conservative that will end the death tax, limit government, respect states rights and not be a bigot??????
On a side note Tom DeLay IS NOT a closet case. Sequins, high heels be damned, that straight boy has no rythm!!!!!
That’s all the Republicans and Conservatives can do is call their opponents names and to demean them. Their arguments are always against something (usually a group of people), are ludicrous at best and they still cannot offer a viable option to the argument (meaning one that a substantial group of humans can agree with). They seem to believe it is only their way or no way.
Demonizing the opponent is a tactic used by politicians and preachers. Perhaps they are learning from each other? Now if they could just learn all of the other really good stuff that they are supposed to do for their fellow man (Matthew 25:31 – 46). Their actions indicate they don’t remember or are overlooking that completely! Talk about picking and choosing what to believe (a claim they often use against non-christians).
May Goddess Bless Those Who Learn and Grow!
Blessed Be,
Rev. Draigh Lunara
I believe that the Representative is getting the argument backward. Conservatives would like to take OUR money and add it to the pot for socialist mechanisms. When I die, currently, the assets I transfer to my partner will be impacted with a high rate of taxation in comparision to those assets automatically transferring for heterosexual married couples. The nay-sayers for gay/lesbian marriages are focused on gaining from MY hard work! Socialists!! COMMUNISTS!!!
On the other hand, perhaps we as a SOCIETY should not be fearful of socialist policies. Perhaps there is a greater purpose for policies that are both paid for and benefit everyone – perhaps better societal cohesion?
“they want access to public funds and resources.”
Well, of course i want access to public funds and resources. I’m an American, gay or not, I pay takes, I add to the “pot”, so why is it so hard to imagine that I should be allowed to benefit from a system that I am required to pay in to?
I’d rather the tax money go to people that need it, than those that just sit around, not contributing.
What a ridiculous, conservative hack! Does he forget that we, the LGBTQ Community, are just as american, if not more so, as he is?