Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Texas Gay Marriage Ban UnconstitutionalFollow

#127 Mar 06 2014 at 8:05 PM Rating: Excellent
*******
50,767 posts
gbaji wrote:
How is that faulty logic?
Sorry, I meant faulty opinion. My mistake.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#128gbaji, Posted: Mar 06 2014 at 8:10 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) I already answered this question. You're intentionally muddling the issue. One step at a time. Once we accept that marriage benefits exist to encourage people to marry, the next question is "why do we want people to marry?".
#129 Mar 06 2014 at 8:12 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
gbaji wrote:
How is that faulty logic?
Sorry, I meant faulty opinion. My mistake.


Ah... I see. So it's good logic, and you have no counter for it, but you still need to call it "faulty". Got it! Whatever makes you sleep better at night, I guess.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#130 Mar 06 2014 at 8:13 PM Rating: Excellent
*******
50,767 posts
gbaji wrote:
But, as I've said repeatedly,.
And it was as faulty an opinion the first time as it is now.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#131 Mar 06 2014 at 8:15 PM Rating: Good
*******
50,767 posts
gbaji wrote:
Got it.
More productive to show others where the holes in the wall are than to explain to the wall why those holes shouldn't be there.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#132 Mar 06 2014 at 8:17 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
gbaji wrote:
But, as I've said repeatedly,.
And it was as faulty an opinion the first time as it is now.


But we've now established that your definition of "faulty" is meaningless, so who cares what you think?

Oh. For example: Are you actually arguing that gay couples can accidentally get pregnant as a consequence of their own sexual activity? Cause that's about as "faulty" as it gets, right?

Edited, Mar 6th 2014 6:20pm by gbaji
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#133 Mar 06 2014 at 8:19 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
Ah... I see. So it's good logic, and you have no counter for it, but you still need to call it "faulty". Got it! Whatever makes you sleep better at night, I guess.

What makes me sleep better is knowing that SSM is coming along faster than anyone would have predicted.

That said, the point where you asked "But why would we give it them?" was so adorably naive and ignorant of politics that I realized the debate wasn't worth having.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#134 Mar 06 2014 at 8:21 PM Rating: Good
*******
50,767 posts
gbaji wrote:
But we've now established that your definition of "faulty" is meaningless, so who cares what you think?
More faulty opinions, but go on.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#135 Mar 06 2014 at 8:23 PM Rating: Good
*******
50,767 posts
gbaji wrote:
Oh. For example: Are you actually arguing that gay couples can accidentally get pregnant as a consequence of their own sexual activity?]
More faulty opinions to bury the old ones. Good job, I agree with me, too.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#136gbaji, Posted: Mar 06 2014 at 8:35 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Yup. Your head is so far into the identity politics mode that you're criticizing a legitimate question. Why give it to them? Why not give it to everyone? Do you not understand this? It's not about being for or against gay people, it's about having some kind of consistent and rational methodology for determining how we use the power and influence of our government beyond "demonize anyone who questions what we want to do".
#137 Mar 06 2014 at 8:37 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Oh. For example: Are you actually arguing that gay couples can accidentally get pregnant as a consequence of their own sexual activity?]
More faulty opinions to bury the old ones. Good job, I agree with me, too.


So no desire to actually address the subject at hand? Thought so.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#138 Mar 06 2014 at 8:39 PM Rating: Good
*******
50,767 posts
gbaji wrote:
And once you do that, you've more or less tossed logic and reason.
So, just like you?
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#139 Mar 06 2014 at 8:43 PM Rating: Excellent
*******
50,767 posts
gbaji wrote:
So no desire to actually address the subject at hand?
Already did. You ignored it.
gbaji wrote:
Thought so
Another faulty opinion.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#140 Mar 06 2014 at 8:56 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
So it's not about it being a smart thing to do, or a useful thing to do, but you're happy anyway? Why? Because it makes a great wedge issue?

I've said numerous times why I think it's a benefit and a good idea. If I thought it was just a great wedge issue, I wouldn't want it to come along since once it's solved there's no longer an issue.

Quote:
Yup. Your head is so far into the identity politics mode that you're criticizing a legitimate question.

Well, that's one theory. Another, more accurate one, would be that I'm just amused at how ignorant you are at how politics work in general. Not partisan politics or identity politics but just politics. How things get done. Your question by itself displays this so it makes me laugh and realize that the debate isn't really worth having because you don't even have the basic foundation yet to discuss it like an adult.

Quote:
But hey! You'll "win", right? Grats, I guess...

Many thanks. Very gracious of you Smiley: smile
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#141 Mar 06 2014 at 9:05 PM Rating: Excellent
GBATE!! Never saw it coming
Avatar
****
9,957 posts
gbaji wrote:
You honestly can't noodle out that the primary reason we might want to encourage soldiers and their SOs to marry instead of just shacking up might just have something to do with children? Really? O... M... G...!

Oh, I see. If I disagree with your assessment of why marriage laws are the way they are it's because I'm too stupid to figure it out.

Chug a bucket of syphilitic slugs, you cnut.

____________________________
remorajunbao wrote:
One day I'm going to fly to Canada and open the curtains in your office.

#142 Mar 06 2014 at 9:06 PM Rating: Decent
Avatar
****
7,564 posts
Oooo sneaking in a bad word Google is going to come after you.
____________________________
HEY GOOGLE. **** OFF YOU. **** YOUR ******** SEARCH ENGINE IN ITS ******* ****** BINARY ***. ALL DAY LONG.

#143 Mar 06 2014 at 10:00 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Friar Bijou wrote:
Oh, I see. If I disagree with your assessment of why marriage laws are the way they are it's because I'm too stupid to figure it out.

That's okay, apparently thinking SSM is a good idea is only to "demonize" the other side.

I'm guessing Gbaji climbed up on that cross to escape all the gays on the ground.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#144 Mar 06 2014 at 10:14 PM Rating: Excellent
GBATE!! Never saw it coming
Avatar
****
9,957 posts
Jophiel wrote:
I'm guessing Gbaji climbed up on that cross to escape all the gays on the ground.

...and risk a panty pic?
____________________________
remorajunbao wrote:
One day I'm going to fly to Canada and open the curtains in your office.

#145 Mar 07 2014 at 5:48 AM Rating: Excellent
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts
Um... You're really asking that question? You'd be hard pressed to find any social policy organization in the last half century who would argue otherwise.

Nope.
Most argue vehemently that the most important difference between those stuck in poverty and those who succeed is the opportunity for home ownership.

False. What a crazy ******** idea. "If only we could get these catastrophically poor people into a loan for an overvalued home that they can't afford, THEN we might get some where."

No one has thought this, ever.

Now some have gone too far with this and caused the whole housing bubble, but the basic idea is true.

The housing bubble HAD ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH POOR PEOPLE BUYING HOUSES. NOTHING

Let it sink it. It's a ludicrous "blame the poor people" fallacy that's never been even vaguely close to true. 93% of housing defaults tied to toxic mortgage securities were from homes that were not the owners primary residence.


If it's at all possible for someone to spend their housing dollars on buying a home rather than renting, that person's fortunes and the fortunes of his children and grandchildren will be affected for the better.


Nope.



How does that help society as a whole?


It doesn't. It helps banks.


Lower crime. More responsibility. People who own rather than rent are much less likely to engage in vandalism and a host of other forms of crime. They're much more likely to be gainfully employed. Most importantly, when we get to second generation effects, they are less subject to a "wage slave" state. Owning property means that housing costs are much lower for successive generations. Losing a job when you own a home outright is bad, but not nearly as bad as if you are renting (or still buying). You have many more options, and can afford to take a lower paying job in the meantime rather than be "stuck" in a "must earn X dollars or not work at all" situation.


The benefits across the board for greater home ownership within a society are pretty significant. While I'm not surprised that you'd oppose it (cause your ideology more or less requires people remain as poor as possible), I am surprised you'd be so blatant about your opposition. I kinda expected you to be a bit more coy about it.


The reason I'm so "blatant" about my opinion is that it's based on data, not a wild guess and what I saw on "Meet The Press" twenty years ago and sort of vaguely remember.

The Home Mortgage Interest Tax Deduction is pointless and basically a gift to the upper middle class. It should be eliminated and the dependent deduction increased for people below certain income thresholds.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#146 Mar 07 2014 at 7:12 AM Rating: Good
gbaji lost scholar?

I'm actually kind of sad about that.
#147 Mar 07 2014 at 7:40 AM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,360 posts
Weird, everyone keeps saying that but he still shows up the same as always on my screen. Must be cached, I guess.
____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#148 Mar 07 2014 at 7:46 AM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,474 posts
He's on the cusp, so he's bouncing back and forth.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#149 Mar 07 2014 at 7:47 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
I assume he's on the cusp and the sheer number of his posts make "the cusp" a fairly broad line.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#150 Mar 07 2014 at 7:47 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
I think that was the forum's quota of the word "cusp" for the day.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#151 Mar 07 2014 at 7:51 AM Rating: Excellent
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts

The statistical deltas for the outcomes of children based on whether their parents were married when the children were born is massive.


Nope, doesn't matter at all. Keep guessing though, you're bound to get one right eventually. I do love that your statement correlates directly to "may parents were married when my mom got pregnant but got divorced when I was a day old. Obviously this had huge benefits for me"

The ONLY way to attempt to make some sort of "children are better off with birth parents" argument is to ignore all other variables. Children are better off in financially secure homes being raised by people who love them and who will make efforts to be involved in child raising. Outcomes are worst for single parent families, poor families, families with disinterested parents, etc. More poor kids born to unmarried mothers go to jail because more poor kids go to jail. Wealth children born to single mothers do just fine. It's about security and safety. Infants don't give a **** about marriage. They're form secure attachments to 10 people dressed as minotaurs so long as they take breaks from maze haunting and spend time with the infant.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 169 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (169)